The Orange Mane -  a Denver Broncos Fan Community  

Go Back   The Orange Mane - a Denver Broncos Fan Community > Jibba Jabba > War, Religion and Politics Thread
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Chat Room Mark Forums Read



Poll: Should there be requirements to serve on congressional committees?
Be advised that this is a public poll: other users can see the choice(s) you selected.
Poll Options
Should there be requirements to serve on congressional committees?

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-05-2013, 09:00 PM   #26
Requiem
~~~
 
Requiem's Avatar
 
~ ~ ~

Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Earth Division
Posts: 22,307

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Gilgamesh
Default

Ah, Early Earth Creationists. Lol!
Requiem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2013, 09:06 PM   #27
houghtam
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,405
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pony Boy View Post
So what you are saying is that anyone who believes in the Bible should automatically be disqualified from serving in public office. I see where you are going with this but I think former president Carter would disagree.
Do you know the difference between serving in public office and holding a seat on a congressional committee? What is the difference?

Serious question. I'm not convinced you do.

But to reiterate, yes, I believe that if you have a literal interpretation of the Bible, you are not qualified to serve on the committee for science, space and technology.

Last edited by houghtam; 05-05-2013 at 09:18 PM..
houghtam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2013, 10:39 PM   #28
cutthemdown
A verbis ad verbera
 
cutthemdown's Avatar
 
Zimm to HOF

Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Long Beach
Posts: 35,592
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by houghtam View Post
Do you know the difference between serving in public office and holding a seat on a congressional committee? What is the difference?

Serious question. I'm not convinced you do.

But to reiterate, yes, I believe that if you have a literal interpretation of the Bible, you are not qualified to serve on the committee for science, space and technology.
In the Senate its Commerce, Science, Transportation. Are you saying we would have to change the committees or can religious people also not serve for transportation because they believe somehow, even though science says the earth is older, they believe in the bible?

The other is energy and natural resources. So if you think the oil youngers then others you are an idiot as to how it should be pumped or used? So you can't be on that one either.

See where I am going this is just an attack on religion not how smart someone is.
cutthemdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2013, 11:00 PM   #29
houghtam
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,405
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cutthemdown View Post
In the Senate its Commerce, Science, Transportation. Are you saying we would have to change the committees or can religious people also not serve for transportation because they believe somehow, even though science says the earth is older, they believe in the bible?

The other is energy and natural resources. So if you think the oil youngers then others you are an idiot as to how it should be pumped or used? So you can't be on that one either.

See where I am going this is just an attack on religion not how smart someone is.
This is not an attack on religion.

The committees are not written in the Constitution. How they are comprised should be revisited, as well, and can be altered easily. In fact, if you look into it, the names and scopes of most of the committees have changed several times over the years.

In looking at the different committees, there are several which (attempt to) encompass different topics that have very little to do with one another.

House Committees (with multiple platforms)

Education and the Workforce? Yeah okay I can see that...
Energy and Commerce? Hmmm, okay...we're getting a little more abstract in our relationships here...
Oversight and Government Reform? Sure!
Science, Space and Technology? Sounds good.
Transportation and Infrastructure? Checks out.

Senate Committees

Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry? I can see A and B, or B and C, or A and C, but not A, B and C. Too broad.
Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs? Banking and Housing okay...Urban Affairs and Housing okay...Maybe combine Banking and Housing with Finance, and Urban Affairs with....Jesus, WTF
Commerce, Science and Transportation? L0L WUT?
Energy and Natural Resources? Finally, some common sense in this MFer.
Health, Education, Labor and Pensions? Oops I spoke too soon.

The system needs to be changed. Congressional committees serve a very important purpose and should be positions reserved for people with expertise in that area. Furthermore, the committees themselves and their responsibilities need to be reevaluated. For the Senate, I understand there are only 100 members to go around, but I don't believe you would have to create any more committees than there currently are...just reorganize them so that they make sense, so we don't run into the problem where a New Earther who is perfectly qualified to be on the budget committee is on the Senate Budget, Indian Affairs, Science, Technology, Awesome 80's Movies and Bake Sale Committee.

Do you see what I'm saying?
houghtam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2013, 11:42 PM   #30
cutthemdown
A verbis ad verbera
 
cutthemdown's Avatar
 
Zimm to HOF

Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Long Beach
Posts: 35,592
Default

So if someone believes somehow the Earth is only 9000 yrs old. They agree science disagrees but then maybe say somehow its true i have faith.

Does that mean they should not have a say in what we do in outer space. Wasn't Neil Armstrong a huge christian? What if someone had a doctors in astro physics or some crazy thing but still said somehow I have faith that whats in the bible is true. Is that person now too stupid to help plan how to spend money in outer space? Do you see what i am saying.

i do see where you are coming from. But what do you do when a housewife gets elected by the people. Do you exclude her from all the important committees? Also you won't be able to stop at just religion vs science. Once a can of worms open it opens all the way.

You focus on religion vs science only.
cutthemdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2013, 11:54 PM   #31
houghtam
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,405
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cutthemdown View Post
So if someone believes somehow the Earth is only 9000 yrs old. They agree science disagrees but then maybe say somehow its true i have faith.

Does that mean they should not have a say in what we do in outer space. Wasn't Neil Armstrong a huge christian? What if someone had a doctors in astro physics or some crazy thing but still said somehow I have faith that whats in the bible is true. Is that person now too stupid to help plan how to spend money in outer space? Do you see what i am saying.

i do see where you are coming from. But what do you do when a housewife gets elected by the people. Do you exclude her from all the important committees? Also you won't be able to stop at just religion vs science. Once a can of worms open it opens all the way.

You focus on religion vs science only.
So far I have, because that's what sparked the debate in my mind.

Diane Feinstein is on the Judiciary Committee. She has a BA in History. Now, I don't know what her focus was in History. I don't know what sort of experience she has picked up (not related to her education) being on the Hill for so long, so it's possible she's qualified. But looking at her history, it looks like the closest link to judicial process she has is having a daughter who is a judge.

But what I am saying, believe it or not, *GASP* is that regardless of party, if you do not have the experience, you should not be allowed on the committee. The Constitution says a lot about who, what, when and how people can get elected to positions. It says little to nothing about congressional committees. There is no constitutional protection that I know of which requires congress to allow anyone who has been elected to serve on a committee.

Being elected as a congressional public servant gives you the opportunity to vote on bills and debate policy. It does not, nor should not guarantee you a seat on a committee. A housewife who gets elected (with little to no relevant education) has no business serving on a committee. Hell, I'm a house husband at the moment. I have no background in energy. I would not expect anyone to appoint me to the energy committee, nor should anyone else.

If the background does not fit, you must sit.
houghtam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2013, 01:01 AM   #32
cutthemdown
A verbis ad verbera
 
cutthemdown's Avatar
 
Zimm to HOF

Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Long Beach
Posts: 35,592
Default

who decides if the background fits houghtam? How would you manage that? They can't even agree on the presidents appointments.
cutthemdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2013, 01:07 AM   #33
cutthemdown
A verbis ad verbera
 
cutthemdown's Avatar
 
Zimm to HOF

Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Long Beach
Posts: 35,592
Default

People on Committee are like a jury where you know they don't know everything, but they are supposed to listen to expert testimoney and make rational decisions right?

I don't aree that just because i don't have a degree in science that I could not make a good decision on how to spend money in the space program. A rational man/woman of decent intelligence could listen to experts, then say I think the mars missions is the most important to the country etc etc. Committee members listen to experts more then they are the experts.

if thats the case then like i said before you need to kick out all the poli sci, history, liberal arts majors for engineers, scientists, doctors, former military, and on and on. What do we need history for? The what happened last decade committee? I'm not saying history not important just don't see that expertise good for anything but maybe stuff about foreign relations? war? Certainly not energy. But that doesn't mean fienstien not smart enough to get the people who know that stuff in front of the committee to hear the facts.
cutthemdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2013, 01:08 AM   #34
cutthemdown
A verbis ad verbera
 
cutthemdown's Avatar
 
Zimm to HOF

Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Long Beach
Posts: 35,592
Default

better would be just a wonderlic for politicians. Some history, some govt, some math, etc etc and see how they score. Unless the are above avg in IQ tell them you aren't smart enough for govt go work in a union somewhere.
cutthemdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2013, 01:53 AM   #35
elsid13
Lost In Space
 
elsid13's Avatar
 
Bóg, Honor, Ojczyzna

Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: DC
Posts: 19,570
Default

It's not possible for all elected official to be in-depth experts on all of the field they are assigned to in committee, because of the number of committees and most of their past experience as lawyers. There are very individual that any other background then legal in today's Congress. What you hope for is good professional staffers and willingness to have an open mind with ability to ask the right questions.
elsid13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2013, 06:29 AM   #36
Pony Boy
"Whoa Nellie"
 
Pony Boy's Avatar
 
Omaha !!!

Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,397

Adopt-a-Bronco:
mellon head
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by houghtam View Post
But to reiterate, yes, I believe that if you have a literal interpretation of the Bible, you are not qualified to serve on the committee for science, space and technology.
Now we are getting somewhere, you need to rename this thread.

"If you have a literal interpretation of the Bible, you are not qualified to serve on a congressional committee".


For the record the only time I'm inside a church is for Marrying & Burying.

Last edited by Pony Boy; 05-06-2013 at 06:33 AM..
Pony Boy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2013, 07:54 AM   #37
Pony Boy
"Whoa Nellie"
 
Pony Boy's Avatar
 
Omaha !!!

Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,397

Adopt-a-Bronco:
mellon head
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cutthemdown View Post
To be on the energy and natural resources board what qualifications would you desire Houghtam? To not have any feelings that say went against what a geologist would say? Just curious.
I would be willing to bet one of the qualifications would be a belief in global warming and certainly anyone with an "oil background" need not apply
Pony Boy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2013, 09:17 AM   #38
houghtam
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,405
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pony Boy View Post
For the record the only time I'm inside a church is for Marrying & Burying.
Sorry your command of the English language is so poor. I should have typed "If ONE has a literal interpretation of the Bible, ONE is not qualified to serve on the Science, Space and Tech Committee."

You know why?

Because the Bible isn't science.

Now, as far as cut's question about energy and natural resources, I don't see why you wouldn't want at least someone with a background in oil, coal or any of that stuff. As long as they're not taking money from those industries (which, who are we kidding, everyone takes money from everyone), you have valuable insight to provide.

I would say that yes, not believing global warming is occurring would automatically disqualify someone, because it IS occurring. If someone were to say that they didn't believe that humans were the only cause of it, however...while I disagree, that wouldn't be a disqualifier.

I like how you guys are asking questions trying to trap me into saying something you don't like, as if one person would be in charge of all of the qualifications of the committees. I would think that if they did this, they would have some sort of panel which decides on the qualifications based on common ground.

The unfortunate thing is that it will never happen in a million years, because you would have to get Congress to vote on it, and all of the congressman that just got appointed to the House Committees on the Flavors of Tang because they won re-election for their party would vote against it.
houghtam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2013, 09:49 AM   #39
B-Large
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cutthemdown View Post
People on Committee are like a jury where you know they don't know everything, but they are supposed to listen to expert testimoney and make rational decisions right?

I don't aree that just because i don't have a degree in science that I could not make a good decision on how to spend money in the space program. A rational man/woman of decent intelligence could listen to experts, then say I think the mars missions is the most important to the country etc etc. Committee members listen to experts more then they are the experts.

if thats the case then like i said before you need to kick out all the poli sci, history, liberal arts majors for engineers, scientists, doctors, former military, and on and on. What do we need history for? The what happened last decade committee? I'm not saying history not important just don't see that expertise good for anything but maybe stuff about foreign relations? war? Certainly not energy. But that doesn't mean fienstien not smart enough to get the people who know that stuff in front of the committee to hear the facts.
I think the diversity of backgrounds and opinions on the committees is a good thing, and it works both ways. You don't was a group of like thinking environmental scientists or envronmental lawyers on the Energy Commitee, just like you don't want all ex energy compnay CEO's there either. Our government, IMO, by design is slow, lumbering and it is difficult to push pure idealogical policies or agenda items through- and that is a good thing. We are a nation whoe elected people to public service as they promise to do whats best for thier consituents, that often means the historian end up ont he Finance committee.... its the nature of the beast.

As for the Rep that believe in Creationism, can they be on the science committee and be productive... sure, why not?... just because they believe in the Bible, does not neccesarily mean they don't recognize that the future of good jobs globally are in the sciences and support funding for those endeavors is essential. Even if they do, the dissent in our system is welcome.

I see what you getting at OP is getting at, and in a strictly practical world you have groups of expertise, but in Government and other oversight/representative bodies like Corp Board of Governance that is not the case.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2013, 10:50 AM   #40
Arkie
Atlanta GM
 
Arkie's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 9,937
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fedaykin View Post
Bad policy doesn't come from ignorance? Since when?
Don't be gullible. They claim ignorance if they admit it's bad policy. They never admit to any corruption though.
Arkie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2013, 02:17 PM   #41
Fedaykin
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,704

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arkie View Post
Don't be gullible. They claim ignorance if they admit it's bad policy. They never admit to any corruption though.
It's gullible to understand that ignorance can lead to bad decisions? What are you smoking?
Fedaykin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2013, 07:23 AM   #42
DenverBrit
Just hanging out.
 
DenverBrit's Avatar
 
Got a breath mint??

Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Denver
Posts: 11,979

Adopt-a-Bronco:
The Team
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cutthemdown View Post
But then they couldn't pass it to see whats in it Denverbrit. Think about it they passed the single biggest piece of legislation since the new deal without reading and understanding it. How can Obama be a success like that? That bill is doomed to be picked apart and fail at so many levels. I hear already the money for making insurance cover pre existing conditions is going to make people go broke at the exchanges. Obamacare exemptions will be the new back room deal in DC moving forward.
That was my point.

I don't care which party they belong to, they need to read the ****ing bill before signing off.
Both parties are guilty, their priority is to pander to lobbyists and their clients, not to those who elect them.
DenverBrit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2013, 07:25 AM   #43
DenverBrit
Just hanging out.
 
DenverBrit's Avatar
 
Got a breath mint??

Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Denver
Posts: 11,979

Adopt-a-Bronco:
The Team
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Requiem View Post
Yeah, that would be a start. Passing it off to staffers, who in legislative years are usually juniors or seniors in college getting internship credit who don't understand half that **** is a really poor idea.
They would have to start working on our behalf and not just their self interest.

So it's not going to happen or even attempted.
DenverBrit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2013, 07:27 AM   #44
DenverBrit
Just hanging out.
 
DenverBrit's Avatar
 
Got a breath mint??

Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Denver
Posts: 11,979

Adopt-a-Bronco:
The Team
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by houghtam View Post
The staffers and policy wonks are actually the ones writing the bills and know what's going on. The committee members are the ones with the least amount of knowledge on the issues.

But I agree with you, Brit, people should have to read the bill before signing it. The problem is that there is just so much crap that needs to be processed that the people who actually have to vote on the stuff have no idea what's in it. Even worse if they can't understand it, and even worse than that if they don't believe in it.
They really need to start with the tax code, we were better off with the tea tax.
DenverBrit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2013, 09:39 AM   #45
Requiem
~~~
 
Requiem's Avatar
 
~ ~ ~

Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Earth Division
Posts: 22,307

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Gilgamesh
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DenverBrit View Post
They would have to start working on our behalf and not just their self interest.

So it's not going to happen or even attempted.
Can US Citizen get refugee status other places?
Requiem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2013, 09:50 AM   #46
DenverBrit
Just hanging out.
 
DenverBrit's Avatar
 
Got a breath mint??

Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Denver
Posts: 11,979

Adopt-a-Bronco:
The Team
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Requiem View Post
Can US Citizen get refugee status other places?
Canada? They seem to be so understanding.
DenverBrit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2013, 10:15 AM   #47
Crushaholic
Armchair Poster
 
Crushaholic's Avatar
 

Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Topeka, KS
Posts: 22,366
Default

Committee assignments are often handed out as repayment of favors. Congressperson Y voted for an important bill, so Congressperson Y is assigned to a powerful committee (like Ways and Means). It would NICE if committee assignments coincided with the person's interest and expertise...
Crushaholic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2013, 10:44 AM   #48
Arkie
Atlanta GM
 
Arkie's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 9,937
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fedaykin View Post
It's gullible to understand that ignorance can lead to bad decisions? What are you smoking?
No, it's gullible to believe their failure to address the country's problems is due to their own ignorance. They make decisions based on what's best for their agenda not the country.
Arkie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2013, 12:12 PM   #49
cutthemdown
A verbis ad verbera
 
cutthemdown's Avatar
 
Zimm to HOF

Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Long Beach
Posts: 35,592
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crushaholic View Post
Committee assignments are often handed out as repayment of favors. Congressperson Y voted for an important bill, so Congressperson Y is assigned to a powerful committee (like Ways and Means). It would NICE if committee assignments coincided with the person's interest and expertise...
Nancy Pelosi could do what then? All she has is a poli sci degree big ****ing deal. Poli Sci degree is crap and only good for either trying to get into law school, being a grade school teacher, or going into politics.

I'm sure most of the repubs have crap degrees also. When I say crap i don't mean useless, i just mean nothing that makes you me want you on the House finance committee. Thats why we don't require them to have expertise to sit on a committee. If we did we would probably have a lot of empty seats on both sides.
cutthemdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2013, 12:26 PM   #50
Fedaykin
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,704

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arkie View Post
No, it's gullible to believe their failure to address the country's problems is due to their own ignorance. They make decisions based on what's best for their agenda not the country.
Those with agendas always find ignorance to be quite the useful tool. People who are ignorant are far more likely to go along with an agenda.

For example, Mitt Romney is certainly not ignorant, but he's skilled at leveraging the ignorance of his party members and constituents to go along with his tax agenda.
Fedaykin is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes



Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:39 AM.


Denver Broncos