Slashdot Mirror
Congressman Wants YouTube Video Covered Up
Hugh Pickens writes "Wisconsin Republicans claim that no one else can republish a video of United States Representative Sean Duffy (R-WI) complaining about how he is 'struggling' to get by on his $174,000 salary without their permission, even though they originally released the video on YouTube for the whole world to see. Now the GOP is trying to take legal action to stop anyone else from republishing the video. The tape caused a stir for Duffy, a first-term conservative best known for his past as a reality TV show star on MTV's The Real World after Democrats flagged the comments about his taxpayer-funded salary, which is nearly three times the median income in Wisconsin, and criticisms began to flow Duffy's way. Here's a one-minute clip, excerpted from roughly 45 minutes of video of the public Duffy townhall, that the Polk County GOP doesn't want anyone to see."
... champion of traditional American values like free speech and personal responsibility!
The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
It's OK if you use FOIA to threaten academics, but it's not OK if the GOP gets caught with their pants down?
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
the mostly lower middle class tea party types will understanding that declaring war on the poor and passing laws that reward the rich will actually damage this country far more than the social programs, high taxes, and labor unions they hate. let us hope this is not a third world country when they realize that
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
maybe the GOP should let the top 10% income pay even less taxes ?
Yes, I'm left. You have a problem with that?
There's currently a charitable food and clothing drive designed to assist our indigent struggling Republican Senator.
WON'T YOU PLEASE HELP!
http://upt.org/misc/SeanDuffyCharity.jpg
It's true no man is an island, but if you take a bunch of dead guys and tie 'em together, they make a good raft.
isn't video/audio of a public servant saying/doing something automagically made public domain?
Having 7 kids without the way to pay for them is living outside of your means.
Isn't that what the GOP hates so much? Why is it so righteous to have so many kids? It's not. It's as bad as the welfare mom that has a Cadillac.
Its relevant because he claims to be struggling. If congress folks were paid, say 70K a year it might be more understandable but at $174 which is much higher than the average family in America its hard not to see him as an ass, especially while his party is attempting to drive down the salary of folks who are getting by on a lot less money right now in order to save enough money to have tax cuts for people like themselves.
"In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson
He published something, allowed comments on it, didn't like the comments, and wants to take it down? No problem.
But even after taking down your file, others are allowed to use that captured content under fair use terms, like all news of a public servant making a public speech where the press was invited.
Is he going to all the newspapers that published a written account of his speech?
How about knocking on doors requesting to cut the article out of the delivered newspaper, only after he overhears people in the town square laughing at it?
Essentially, removing the proof of his idiocy doesn't change the truth, but the evidence sure is fun to look at.
And now with this action - we have just more story of the idiocy, making for the Streisand effect. Some people don't get it.
Who said it was OK what Charlie Rangel is doing, or what Geithner did or what Biden is doing? No one did. You can put away the straw man. This is about a two-bit political hack who is bitching about the fact that making three times the state average is not enough, yet thinks that others making much less still make too much.
Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
last i recall, a public figure classifies under celebrity status which protects any member of the public from being sued for publishing content about said public figure. the only way this can get you in trouble is if you publish it with the intent of actual malice. i believe the video was published just to reveal the truth. http://journalism.about.com/od/ethicsprofessionalism/a/libel.htm if i'm wrong, please let me know.
Government spending is "good" as long as it is for the people who deserve it. People who look like me. People who think like me. Real Americans like me.
Government spending is "bad" when it is for people who don't deserve it. People who don't look like me. People who don't think like me. The people who are ruining this country.
The Daily Show covered this. And they always do a great job.
A banker making $250,000 is barely above the poverty line. Cut them a break! Look at all the good they do for this country!
A teacher making $50,000 is living a lavish lifestyle on the public's dime. They're spending this country into bankruptcy. And they're doing it in only 9 months out of a year.
National politicians make much more than just their salary. Their influence, leverage, connections and media interest insures that they can all easily be multimillionaires. When you tally up all the opportunities they have, like books and public appearances, as well as private sector opportunities, I'm sure that most national politicians make more than their equivalently ranked counterparts in movies and sports.
Lets just drop that old saw right now. Taxing the top 10% does NOT discourage job creation..... taxes can encourage growth.
Taxes are based upon PROFIT. Give a wealthy man a choice between paying taxes or investing in his assets/employees/business, they will choose to create jobs.
By having low taxes on the top 10%, you encourage them to pocket as much money as they can....and use that money to buy up competition. You are then encouraging larger monopolistic businesses...which I feel are less efficient, worse for the economy, worse for the country, less rewarding to their staff, and then are "too big to fail".
On the contrary, tax the heck out record profits, and you encourage the top 10% to invest in their people/business/assets.....thereby helping the economy.
Am I missing something. Seems like common sense to me. I don't think the democrats understand economics either though....
If you want quality talent, and people more difficult to bribe/influence, you MUST pay them well.
Your proposal has 3 major problems:
1. How well? What's comparable to a president, senator, or representative? I mean, if we're going to pay the president the same as a CEO of a major corporation, we're going to be talking about $50 million a year. If we put senators and representatives at a bit lower on the pay scale, then $10 million wouldn't be unreasonable.
2. If you're going to spend that kind of money on politicians, you're going to need to pay for it somehow. Who are you going to tax, or what agency are you going to cut, in order to pay for it? You're talking about $50 billion here, which isn't exactly chump change.
3. There's no clear correlation between bribery and politician salary. For instance, it wouldn't be hard to argue that bribery in the US is more widespread than in the UK, even though MPs are paid less than Congressmen.
I am officially gone from
In the distinguished and comely congressperson's defense, no matter how much money you're making, all you really need to do to cripple yourself financially is buy a house. My wife and I make decent money and went ahead and purchased a small but expensive (well...it *was* expensive...) home in a quiet neighborhood with a tennis club we could walk to. We have extra income still, but we think of how much more of it we might have if our monthly bills for the house hadn't tripled compared to the last house we owned. But it's a choice, and we have no one to blame but ourselves. Same as this guy in the article.
Nope. Your premiums went up because the CxO's in your HMO all got bonuses.
College kids are usually the cheapest for medical insurance. They don't get sick that often. They're healthy.
Not to get in the way of everyone bashing a congressmen (everyone's favorite activity) but he talked about struggling because of a direct question from a constituent angry about his salary level which he didn't choose (it's standard for all congress), and when he JUST became a congressmen (he's gotten 1 check). So he's not really just off the cuff complaining here, he's trying to defuse the situation with the questioner explaining to them that it's not like he's living high on the hog off their money but is instead paying of student loans, driving a used minivan, and paying mortgages on the residences he has to maintain in both his home state and DC (incredibly expensive). He's basically just trying to empathize with the questioner to defuse the situation which he has no control over.
ayn rand writes out of concern for the poor downtrodden captains of industry. it sounds like a joke. nominally, this is an audience of 0.001% of the population with every perk in life you can imagine
but aspirationally, everyone is a future captain of industry inside their own minds. so they actually sympathize with the captains of industry, their "peers." while the real world captains of industry are paying off their elected representatives to betray middle class interests to fatten corporate coffers (less safety regulations, lower wages, less healthcare responsibility, etc.)
joe blow imagines himself a big man, inside his own head. waiting for the day he wins the lottery and joins his rightful place alongside other great men like himself. so of course he happily shafts policies that effects his next door neighbors, his city and town, the future of his children and their education, and even himself, his healthcare. so blinded is he
it's a neat psychological trick: everyone is a legend in their own minds. and it is why political philosophies written for the benefit of ultrarich fat cats robbing the middle class blind are seen as normal and appealing to people who otherwise suffer through every day hand to mouth, paycheck to paycheck, with nothing to show for the toil. sad and pathetic, in a way. and completely real, and common
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
There's something I love about the GOP. On one hand, they want to make it the "personal responsibility of everyone to $pay_for_whatever", on the other hand they don't want to pay wages that lets people do just that.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Well, I have to say the GOP may have a case here. Releasing it on You Tube 'for the whole world to see' does not mean giving up their rights under copyright. (Yes, there are fair use exceptions - but political attacks don't fall under fair use.)
Of course, you can criticize the party....once.
Welcome to the new conservative USSA, now with exciting new political correctness!
Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
I think the real issue is the Republican talking points. Honestly, I'm sure politicians, even the assholes, work hard... and I'll give that they might be worth $175k a year. The asshole nature of this man is that he wants to strip moderate or low paying workers of their rights and telling them "They need to give more" but is NEVER willing to suggest that people who are well off ($175k IS well off) should EVER have to give anything. When I was teaching in Minneapolis, I made $37k a year. I paid for rent in 2 apartments and utilities, bought classroom supplies and commuted 30 miles a day to work. I still had more than enough disposable income to put some away each month. Now assholes like this guy say "Oh but public employees need to give back"... you know what, that's fine, I'm willing to take a pay cut... but the mere NOTION that someone who makes hundreds of thousands, millions or BILLIONS of dollars should have to pay higher taxes is OUTRAGEOUS to republicans and tea party members.
Social services, public employees, working moms, day cares... fuck, you name it, republicans want to cut it... but a wealthy individual should pay 39% taxes instead of 36%... that's UNAMERICAN and it stifles economic development!! Guys like Duffy are the worst kind of asshole... ones with the power to BE an asshole. Democrats might be jerks... but they're not blatant assholes out to strip working people of everything they have left... incensed at the notion that wealthy people should pay more taxes. Mark Dayton, multimillionaire grandson of the founder of Daytons/Target and president of Minnesota advocated raising the top tax rate on wealthy earners such as himself. Republicans like Duffy (and Mike Lemieur, MN 12B - 320-632-3922 ) say No! We need to balance the budget by cutting programs for working families and stripping public employees of their rights... but they'll be DAMNED if you try to raise taxes on high income earners (Sean Duffey, making $175k wouldn't even meet the higher proposed tax bracket... but is STILL an asshole about it).
Fuck this lot of Republicans... THAT'S why people are upset about this. Take take take take... but be damned if themselves or the wealthy should ever have to sacrifice.
If you believe providing healthcare to a country's citizens to be facisim, I'm sure there is space available for you in Somalia (a libertarian paradise). You pay taxes for roads, schools, police and fire protection, regulation that protects YOU (DOT, EPA, etc). Healthcare is no different. We're the only first world country with a pathetic healthcare system, and it'd be cheaper to bitch about it than to go all tea party crazy like you're doing.
Also, having to maintain two houses is living outside your means. Congress members usually have to maintain their home in-state, and also find a place to live inside DC when Congress is in session.
Considering he was already making $150k before being elected, the bump to 175 isn't a whole lot. He's spending more than he needs to, certainly, with a 5-acre house and another vacation home.
Here's the take-away. He probably is struggling, but he also represents the typical American more than any other Congressman out there right now. Spending what he can afford in terms of monthly payments on debt, not paying cash. Adding a place to crash in D.C. probably made this an overall pay cut form him.
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/03/so-how-rich-is-sean-duffy-not-very-for-a-congressman.php
the single biggest thing people forget is that Senators and Representatives have to live in a very expensive city. $174k in Washington, with a family house and a D.C. pad is not a pile of money, although it is generous. I'd rather be generous than risk that every single one of them immediately turn to bribes to get by.
Yes it has helped GE tremendously. They paid 0 billion dollars in taxes on 14.2 billion dollars in profit last year and and has moved tens of thousands of jobs overseas since 2009. Lets lower the tax rate more!
When you can transfer high profit items like patents and software to subsidiaries overseas while keeping high cost items like legal departments and exec teams in the US you can game the tax system completely. You could raise the tax rate to 100% and you would still see many multinational companies making money.
Yet another example of how corporations get all the benifits of citizenship (actually more) but have the flexibility to avoid most if not all of the responsability.
I mean, teachers work 6 hour days for 180 days a year, right? For less than 4x a teacher's salary, the WI legislature is in session for almost 60 days (http://legis.wisconsin.gov/leginfo/session.htm) every single year. I don't know how he ever has a chance to spend time with his family.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
And that is probably half the problem right there. Perhaps instead all members of congress/senate/president should be forced to have -no- salary and live in taxpayer provided dorm housing w/ meals. With all upgrades to housing and/or meal plans must be voted on on the national level by the registered voting public -not- by the members of congress themselves.
Perhaps if it was a actual sacrifice to serve your country in that particular capacity again we might get some people who are half decent running.
Ahh so much for wishful thinking...
In my second paragraph above, it should read, "You could argue that if there had not been the Social Security trust fund (and yes, it's an actual trust fund with actual value) the federal deficit would be much much higher."
I apologize for the error. I get all worked up when I see this kind of Right-wing corporatist bullshit and it sometimes causes me to type too fast.
You are welcome on my lawn.
It's called rent. And for $1000/mo ($12k/yr) he can easily rent a studio apt in DC that he'll use less than 30 weeks a year (congress has about 22-24 weeks of recess each year). It may even be deductible as a business expense. So for that $25,000, he's got to shell out $12,000 in rent and $3k in utilities.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
My bad - he's a US rep - they are in session almost 30 weeks a year - that's closer to 150 days a year. Still, whatever you do, don't throw me into that briar patch.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
The guy isn't saying hes struggling on his 174k salary, the guy just started getting this level of pay, and if you watch the video hes saying hes only had one paycheck at this salary so far and hes still got alot of debt and what not from his education/family situation. He says once he gets more paychecks he'll probably be doing alot better.
Can we not do the same type of stupid out of context/deliberate misinterpretation slanderous crap that everyone with a brain is already really tired of?
People talking about hypocrisy and integrity about this story are just as bad as the people they are complaining about.
The American myth of upward mobility is nothing more than that, a myth. Pretending that you can rise into money with nothing but talent is simply not true. It is a story we tell children to help justify the rich's selfishness. The simple fact of the matter is that the number one correlation that exists for a person's wealth in America is their parent's wealth. If you want to be rich, you need a wealthy family, not hard work. But if it makes you feel better, keep believing that everyone that is poor smokes pot all day or does something else to limit themselves. It makes the bitter pill of our horrible class discrepancy go down a little easier. But it is a lie. plain and simple. America is actually ranked quite low globally in upward mobility, and as we let corporations and the rich run amok without regulation and taxes, the situation only gets worse.
It's not that hard really. Political leanings are best measured in at least 2 dimensions. On one axis we have authoritarian vs. libertarian (note small l) and on the other we have left vs. right. Thus it is entirely possible to have a far left libertarian (small l again). Left does not have to mean a one size fits all everyone gets exactly the same thing (unless you're a high ranking party member of course) Soviet monstrosity.
Then there's the Libertarian Party (note cap L) that is far right libertarian.
The definition of freedom varies a great deal. Someone leaning to the left might ask how can you feel free if you're perpetually a week away from starvation in a far right hell. The right of course ask how can you be free if the government tells you how (or if) you can conduct business in a far left hell.
Both Democrats and Republicans are crowded into the authoritarian right quadrant of the graph. In the U.S., the actual left is a political fringe. For all their blather about freedom, the Republicans tend to be fairly far up the authoritarian axis. That's why the fundies like them.