kansasblue
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-09-06 10:52 PM
Original message |
"Call them out....." BlogActive 'news' in Foley scandal. |
|
Edited on Mon Oct-09-06 10:58 PM by kansasblue
http://www.blogactive.com/http://www.blogactive.com/2006/10/call-them-out.html(perm link) Mr. Speaker, I have a point of information... Hey, Dennis, on Monday I'll be telling everyone about the high level closeted staffer in your office.
|
pitohui
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-09-06 10:53 PM
Response to Original message |
|
in fact it's almost tuesday
|
tkmorris
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-09-06 10:58 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
pitohui
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-09-06 11:15 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
JackBeck
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-09-06 10:56 PM
Response to Original message |
2. Is this what you're looking for? |
pinto
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-09-06 11:49 PM
Response to Original message |
5. Seems like this may be a misguided witch hunt of sorts. My points: |
|
If there's an issue with the staffers' pay scales, document it. Are they out of line with other comparable Federal positions? Are they unqualified in their positions, or was the hiring process flawed? That's well worth a look. Civil Service regs are pretty clear on the topics. A Civil Service complaint about inequitable pay scales for grade, lack of qualification and inappropriate hiring practices almost always get a response.
If there's an issue with staffers' actions in their positions that point to a cover-up of Mr. Hastert's actions or inaction in his office, forward that info to the ethics committee and let them follow up. In the current climate, they'd be fools to overlook a good lead. Or two.
If there's an issue with the staffers' sexuality and their role in the day-to-day workings of the House, which I think is the agenda here, blogactive may be somewhat off base in what they hope to achieve. Any Federal oversight committee, including House ethics, are prohibited by law to act solely on an employee's sexuality in making any recommendations or taking any action. It's called discrimination.
If there's an issue with the staffers' sexuality and their part in the politics of the Republican party, there may a better political way to address it than this. I wish blogactive would take a second look at their methods.
(aside) I believe Hastert won't last out the month in his position, and rightly so.
Thanks.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Fri Apr 26th 2024, 03:56 AM
Response to Original message |