You know, maybe a "5-day work week" isn't such a bad thing...the more time these idiot politicians spend AWAY from their children, the lower the chance that the kids turn into idiots themselves.

I think it bares pointing out that the outgoing congress was in session for the fewest number of days in 50 years. Fewer than the 1948 "Do Nothing Congress". They failed to perform their single most important job, agreeing on appropriations. Other than defense and homeland security, all appropriations bills are in a state of limbo, with emergency non-committal versions being continuously renewed, leaving mandated programs underfunded, and preventing any sort of transparency or oversight into federal spending.

So while there may be valid arguments against mandating a full 5 day work week, clearly something needs to be done to get these people to actually show up and perform their job.

I think you are falling for a failed premise that many progresive/socialists do in seeing government Service as a Job.

When your spending money influence and the power of duress like a drunken sailor perhaps some time passed out in a figurative alley will do the country good.

If putting some dismissive political label that lets you put me in a box makes you feel good have fun. But the fact remains that this congress failed to perform their most basic Constitutional function (create a working budget). That should not be acceptable to anyone of any political ilk.

Is it socialist to use commas?

I work for the government. Trust me, it's a job. Try working just one day at mine. You won't be so dismissive of the hard work we do. :mad:

I used to work for the government. It was barely a job and nobody worked very hard.

I think that by "government service" Tramspotter is referring to elected office, but I had to read his post four times to figure out where the puncuation needed to go for the sentences to make sense so I could be wrong.

Yes Alex did parse my meaning on the button. Sorry for the confusion. I was refering to Govenment service=elected office holders.

Civil service is a different bag... though, in light of all the thought police harshing, quivering lip whining, and general bul****/negative mojo let me requalify my relitively benign statment instead say I recomend a general pounding of sand.

And GD: Pot, Kettle, Black.

Is that enough commas for you, MBC? (and while not outright socialist commas are usally pinko IMO)

Umm, no idea what you're referring to, but whatever. You still haven't said anything to dissuade me from my position that this session of Congress was a abject failure.

I am not trying to dissuade you from that position (self made box) or the series of positions and rules that you laydown for others yet can't seem to follow yourself.

However my point that you continue to sidestep by getting all bent does in a way sidestep yours so I can see why you might see it as "Dismissive."

My Position is that we are better served by a government that does little to nothing substansial, than one that overreaches and meddles and makes a mokery of oversight.

Your entire point that the government must have a concensus budget passed or it is an abject failure IMO is a big ol red herring.

Interum stop gap spending of absolutely essensal programs at current levels is automatic. And those programs that do not get funded and start screaming the loudest get emergency funding those that are unworthy yet scream bitch and mule for funding get the added benifit of public oversight.

Anyone of any Ilk should be able to at least grasp the alternate without feeling thier own position is attacked, well anyone with a point that is worth defending.

Chosing to argue that alternate is of course completely optional.

And as far as Mr Kettle is concerned I am continualy astounded by how someone with such a dismissive argumentitive style is so easily riled up when his own iron clad arguments are poo pooed in any real or precieved way.