Skip to comments.
LAWMAKERS INCLUDE SELVES IN PAY RAISE
AP
| 9-15-2004
| Unknown
Posted on 09/15/2004 9:28:13 AM PDT by lilylangtree
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-45 next last
6th straight pay raise? 6th straight pay raise? Unbelievable! Fire these turkeys!
To: lilylangtree
boosting the salaries of lawmakers, now $158,100, by about $4,000 in the new calendar year.... or about 2.5 %, which is more than the 1% inflation that they claim exists.
2
posted on
09/15/2004 9:32:45 AM PDT
by
coloradan
(Hence, etc.)
To: lilylangtree
Did the Senate vote on this as well?
3
posted on
09/15/2004 9:33:03 AM PDT
by
misterrob
To: lilylangtree
6th straight pay raise? 6th straight pay raise? Unbelievable! Fire these turkeys! So, you've decided to promote our culturally acceptable stupidity --- to complain about lawmakers pay without a shred of thought or consideration.
Well, thank you. Your post is both highly ethical and informative.
4
posted on
09/15/2004 9:34:06 AM PDT
by
TopQuark
To: lilylangtree
Uhhhh... let's see Bevis, These dudes spend 5 million to get elected for a job that pays $150,000 uhhhh that's cool!
5
posted on
09/15/2004 9:34:13 AM PDT
by
keysguy
(Trust the media as far as you can throw them)
To: misterrob
Dunno. The article just stated that the Senate has yet to take up the issue. However, I'm sure there were some behind-the-scenes heavy discussions between both groups.
6
posted on
09/15/2004 9:34:49 AM PDT
by
lilylangtree
(Veni, Vidi, Vici)
To: lilylangtree
First they claim that the rich are getting too many tax cuts. Then, they give the rich people pay raises. Damn hypocrites!
7
posted on
09/15/2004 9:36:17 AM PDT
by
Mini-14
To: lilylangtree
People here on FR are against term limits so they must like paying those turkeys for doing nothing. At least term limits would spread the gravy around to more turkeys.
8
posted on
09/15/2004 9:37:26 AM PDT
by
cynicom
(<p)
To: TopQuark
Self-righteousness is such a pain to respond in the a#s to respond to.
9
posted on
09/15/2004 9:38:00 AM PDT
by
lilylangtree
(Veni, Vidi, Vici)
To: TopQuark
This is a $2/hour raise...
Think about it in this context: Did you get a $2/hour raise this year?
10
posted on
09/15/2004 9:40:16 AM PDT
by
baltodog
("Anaerobic Putrification" is my favorite funeral term...)
To: keysguy
Well, Butthead, if you know anything about elections, you would know that officially maximum contribution to a candidate running for a House seat is $2,000 for primary and $2,000 for election. So if these jerkoffs spend $5 million to get elected, believe me the bulk of the money comes from PACS not from us little people.
11
posted on
09/15/2004 9:40:51 AM PDT
by
lilylangtree
(Veni, Vidi, Vici)
To: baltodog
12
posted on
09/15/2004 9:41:14 AM PDT
by
lilylangtree
(Veni, Vidi, Vici)
To: lilylangtree
6th straight pay raise? 6th straight pay raise? Unbelievable! Fire these turkeys!Careful, Republicans hold majorities in both houses.
13
posted on
09/15/2004 9:42:28 AM PDT
by
Protagoras
(Putting government in charge of morality is like putting pedophiles in charge of children.)
To: keysguy
Uhhhh... let's see Bevis, These dudes spend 5 million to get elected for a job that pays $150,000 uhhhh that's cool!
No, they pay $5 million to get in the "game". The game that lets an impeached president with no previous private sector work experience become a millionaire within months of leaving office by talking about himself.
14
posted on
09/15/2004 9:43:15 AM PDT
by
LetsRok
To: Protagoras
I'm a female conservative Pubby and I support the Pres. However, that doesn't mean that I can't object to the political shenanigans going on, especially 6th straight pay raises without a space in-between. That's ridiculous!
15
posted on
09/15/2004 9:44:32 AM PDT
by
lilylangtree
(Veni, Vidi, Vici)
To: TopQuark
Not sure what you're trying to say here. In what way was lilylangtree's post not "ethical"?How about countering lilylangtree's objection by explaining why you think six straight years of pay raises is a non-story?
Does the fact that Congress can simply vote to raise its salary not merit some scrutiny? I'd sure love to raise my own salary that way, and I'm sure I'd do so only from the purest motives and through completely objective analysis of my needs.
Actually, I misspoke in the previous paragraph. Congress doesn't even have to vote to get a pay raise. They must affirmatively vote to prevent an automatic pay raise.
To: keysguy
Uhhhh... let's see Bevis, These dudes spend 5 million to get elected for a job that pays $150,000 uhhhh that's cool!Uh, Butthead, let's see. They do this willingly and repeatedly, and something like 96% of people in office run for re-election ... you can be sure that there are benefits far, far beyond the salary, which is why it's worth it to them to spend $5 million running for office in the first place.
17
posted on
09/15/2004 9:46:54 AM PDT
by
coloradan
(Hence, etc.)
To: lilylangtree
Who would you rather have running the nation - a wage earner or a business consultant / corp executive?
I can tell you this that $150,000 in DC is not enough money to attract top talent.
18
posted on
09/15/2004 9:48:30 AM PDT
by
taxcontrol
(People are entitled to their opinion - no matter how wrong it is.)
To: lilylangtree
Uhhhh Bevis, can you buy beer, chicks and votes with Pac money, I love to play pac-man.
19
posted on
09/15/2004 9:49:03 AM PDT
by
keysguy
(Trust the media as far as you can throw them)
To: LetsRok
Yeah Bubba rocks, he comes to all our concerts and buys us beer, he gets lots of chicks, we dig Bubba.
20
posted on
09/15/2004 9:51:05 AM PDT
by
keysguy
(Trust the media as far as you can throw them)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-45 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson