If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Politico)   This may come as a shock to some of you, but it looks like Comcast is spreading the wealth around D.C. as their merger goes for approval   (politico.com) divider line 53
    More: Obvious, Comcast, Capitol Hill, mergers, Dick Durbin, Amy Klobuchar, 39th state, Time Warner Cable  
•       •       •

3584 clicks; posted to Main » on 10 Mar 2014 at 8:51 AM (25 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



53 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-03-10 08:53:48 AM
Dragging down our future for a buck, that should resonate in DC.
 
2014-03-10 08:55:38 AM
We really need some CEOs to be taken down by snipers. America can't endure this sh*t for much longer.
 
2014-03-10 08:59:14 AM
Well, fortunately for Comcast they've just managed to (ab)use their already dominant market position to extract some extra cash from Netflix, which they can now use to bribe lobby Congrescritters to let them dramatically increase their market dominance on the promise they won't abuse it, at least for a few years.
 
2014-03-10 09:02:49 AM

Billy Bathsalt: Dragging down our future for a buck, that should resonate in DC.


Resonate? That's arguably the entire reason many of them are there.
 
2014-03-10 09:04:24 AM
How is it even legal to take money from a company while at the same time participating in a committee to make a major decision on said company.  The same guys make the rules?  Ok then, fair enough.
 
2014-03-10 09:07:20 AM
It's not bribery when Job Creators do it
 
2014-03-10 09:07:23 AM

TV's Vinnie: We really need some CEOs to be taken down by snipers. America can't endure this sh*t for much longer.


Not snipers, but the guillotine needs to make a comeback.
 
gja [TotalFark]
2014-03-10 09:07:42 AM

TV's Vinnie: We really need some CEOs to be taken down by snipers. America can't endure this sh*t for much longer.


Careful, you're sounding dangerously close to moderate with talk like that. The leftists here will gut you for such heresy.

Besides, the problem is you kill one and 5 spring up to replace it. Like cancer cells. The entire system needs a clearing.
 
2014-03-10 09:10:07 AM
Fark these assholes.
 
2014-03-10 09:13:17 AM
In any other less developed country this type of thing might be called "Bribery".  Here in good ole god's country it's just job creators trickling down the wealth.  This is just the free market bearing what it's worth.
Clearly anyone objecting is a godless communist.

/am I doing it right?
//Feel the wealth trickling down all over your back
///Don't look up, you don't want it in the eyes
 
2014-03-10 09:13:36 AM

TV's Vinnie: We really need some CEOs to be taken down by snipers. America can't endure this sh*t for much longer.


Didn't RoboCop (the original) didn't teach you anything?  The execs below the CEO can be worse!
 
2014-03-10 09:19:23 AM

gja: TV's Vinnie: We really need some CEOs to be taken down by snipers. America can't endure this sh*t for much longer.

Careful, you're sounding dangerously close to moderate with talk like that. The leftists here will gut you for such heresy.

Besides, the problem is you kill one and 5 spring up to replace it. Like cancer cells. The entire system needs a clearing.


zOMG SOOOOOOOCIALISM!
 
2014-03-10 09:21:51 AM
What's remarkable about it all just how cheap this access is.  IIRC when Congress retroactively legalized AT&T's shenanigans with the NSA, I worked out the math and the House sold out the 4th Amendment for something like $5k a head.  That's peanuts for a multi-billion-dollar company!  And while Comcast is spending millions on this merger, the merger itself is worth billions.

Yo, D.C., I know you guys are a bunch of shameless sociopathic douchebags who pretend to hate each other, but FFS can you at least bid these bribes up??  If the RoI on corruption is 1000:1 you'd have to be pants-on-head stupid to not play the game.
 
2014-03-10 09:31:55 AM
Remember to vote so you can choose the letter next to the name of the guy accepting the bribes.
 
2014-03-10 09:32:54 AM
I was told this merger was good for the consumer. Why would they need to bribe the legislators?
 
2014-03-10 09:44:12 AM
But if We The People try to collectively get into this game (via Workers Unions), that's evilikkypoopoobad and it must be stopped at all costs!
 
2014-03-10 09:51:13 AM

TV's Vinnie: But if We The People try to collectively get into this game (via Workers Unions), that's evilikkypoopoobad and it must be stopped at all costs!


Anyone can, in fact, legally and shamelessly bribe an elected representative under the thinly-veiled notions of "lobbying" and "campaign contribution".  Corporations and labor unions alike do this under the auspices of "political action committees".

The fact that "We The People" allow this is the problem.
 
2014-03-10 09:52:15 AM
i'm not worried. I've been informed by the fark brigades that the gov't will protect me from these shennanigans since they only have my interests at heart and are working tirelessly to make tomorrow a brighter place where we all get our fair share.
 
2014-03-10 10:00:56 AM

IrishBlunder: Anyone can, in fact, legally and shamelessly bribe an elected representative under the thinly-veiled notions of "lobbying" and "campaign contribution".


By "anyone" you mean people with tens of thousands of dollars they won't miss.

IrishBlunder: The fact that "We The People" allow this is the problem.


As if we had any say in the matter.
 
2014-03-10 10:12:17 AM
 
2014-03-10 10:18:05 AM
Predictably it's the CEOs who get the blame, when it's the regulators setting the rules for the game.

Do you think Comcast  wants to have to bribe regulators to conduct their business?
 
2014-03-10 10:23:22 AM
IrishBlunder: The fact that "We The People" allow this is the problem.

generallyso: As if we had any say in the matter.


We actually do. Politicians need TWO things - money and votes. We keep electing people who:

• Promise us something for nothing.
• Perpetuate the broken campaign finance system.
• Perpetuate heavily gerrymandered districts which entrenches incumbents.

We can't help ourselves. We want our guy to get in (gerrymandering); we want our guy to be responsive to us (political contributions); and we want stuff but don't want to pay for it (debt - something for nothing).
 
2014-03-10 10:24:08 AM

generallyso: IrishBlunder: Anyone can, in fact, legally and shamelessly bribe an elected representative under the thinly-veiled notions of "lobbying" and "campaign contribution".

By "anyone" you mean people with tens of thousands of dollars they won't miss.


Theoretically, no.  The largest contribution allowed is like $5,000.  Theoretically.

IrishBlunder: The fact that "We The People" allow this is the problem.

As if we had any say in the matter.


You could always start a PAC for the reformation of election contribution laws.
 
2014-03-10 10:26:56 AM
I hope every one of those whores gets an incurable STD.
 
2014-03-10 10:29:28 AM

jaybeezey: i'm not worried. I've been informed by the fark brigades that the gov't will protect me from these shennanigans since they only have my interests at heart and are working tirelessly to make tomorrow a brighter place where we all get our fair share.


Good point. We should just let the corporations do whatever they want. After all, they only have our interests at heart and are working tirelessly to make tomorrow a brighter place where we all get our fair share, right?
 
2014-03-10 10:30:07 AM

MugzyBrown: Predictably it's the CEOs who get the blame, when it's the regulators setting the rules for the game.

Do you think Comcast  wants to have to bribe regulators to conduct their business?


This is insightful. Legislators (politicians) control regulators. Politicians have written the laws such that political contributions are both legal and necessary if you don't want to be shaken down. Businesses have found politicians will both do their bidding and leave them alone if they give them money.

"Government of the highest bidder, by the highest bidder, for the highest bidder."
 
2014-03-10 10:38:12 AM

JungleBoogie: We actually do. Politicians need TWO things - money and votes. We keep electing people who:


Democrats/Republicans are a political monopoly that pretends to be a duopoly. Anyone else is so thoroughly locked out of the political system they aren't even allowed to participate in the presidential debates.


IrishBlunder: Theoretically, no. The largest contribution allowed is like $5,000. Theoretically.


Buying a single politician isn't all that useful.


IrishBlunder: You could always start a PAC for the reformation of election contribution laws.


And for my first trick I could wave this magic wand to spontaneously create the money with which to get it off the ground, my second trick being the generation of support for such a PAC among a useful number of Congressmen.
 
2014-03-10 10:45:21 AM

generallyso: JungleBoogie: We actually do. Politicians need TWO things - money and votes. We keep electing people who:

Democrats/Republicans are a political monopoly that pretends to be a duopoly. Anyone else is so thoroughly locked out of the political system they aren't even allowed to participate in the presidential debates.
IrishBlunder: Theoretically, no. The largest contribution allowed is like $5,000. Theoretically.

Buying a single politician isn't all that useful.


There are a number of factors there; for example, if the your selection of elected representative is the head of a particular "committee", he or she could be very useful.

IrishBlunder: You could always start a PAC for the reformation of election contribution laws.

And for my first trick I could wave this magic wand to spontaneously create the money with which to get it off the ground, my second trick being the generation of support for such a PAC among a useful number of Congressmen.


One wonders how kickstarter.com would treat such a notion.
 
2014-03-10 10:46:14 AM

Mr.Tangent: How is it even legal to take money from a company while at the same time participating in a committee to make a major decision on said company.  The same guys make the rules?  Ok then, fair enough.


And this is why all of Congress needs recalled--with the  stipulation that no person who has served in any elected position, including dog catcher, is eligible to run, term limits instituted for Congress, pensions for Congresscritters repealed and eliminated (no reason why these people can't get a damned job), and lobbying outright banned.

Or, change everything to say "They the Corporations" instead of "We the People." Either way. Just call a spade a spade and be done with it (but be prepared for the consequences).
 
2014-03-10 10:53:56 AM
Too bad they're not spending it on their DC customers, or upgrading their DC infrastructure...

// $130/mo for tubes (25 down!) and (VERY limited) Tube is highway farking robbery
 
2014-03-10 11:00:19 AM
Politicians should have to recluse themselves from any item where they have a direct interest - in the same way that judges do.

Why yes, I understand that this would disrupt our current system of buying favor.
 
2014-03-10 11:15:50 AM
This could be good for us. I can see prices coming down and service going up........bwhahahahahahahahahahaha
 
2014-03-10 11:19:01 AM
So long, net neutrality. I'll miss you.
 
2014-03-10 11:50:06 AM
Best government money can buy.
 
2014-03-10 11:52:55 AM

Aigoo: Mr.Tangent: How is it even legal to take money from a company while at the same time participating in a committee to make a major decision on said company.  The same guys make the rules?  Ok then, fair enough.

And this is why all of Congress needs recalled--with the  stipulation that no person who has served in any elected position, including dog catcher, is eligible to run, term limits instituted for Congress, pensions for Congresscritters repealed and eliminated (no reason why these people can't get a damned job), and lobbying outright banned.

Or, change everything to say "They the Corporations" instead of "We the People." Either way. Just call a spade a spade and be done with it (but be prepared for the consequences).


Aside from all the horrible ideas in here, why do you assume that the replacements would be in any way superior to the current Congress?
 
2014-03-10 12:03:10 PM

qorkfiend: Aigoo: Mr.Tangent: How is it even legal to take money from a company while at the same time participating in a committee to make a major decision on said company.  The same guys make the rules?  Ok then, fair enough.

And this is why all of Congress needs recalled--with the  stipulation that no person who has served in any elected position, including dog catcher, is eligible to run, term limits instituted for Congress, pensions for Congresscritters repealed and eliminated (no reason why these people can't get a damned job), and lobbying outright banned.

Or, change everything to say "They the Corporations" instead of "We the People." Either way. Just call a spade a spade and be done with it (but be prepared for the consequences).

Aside from all the horrible ideas in here, why do you assume that the replacements would be in any way superior to the current Congress?


Because "kick the bums out" is a response that doesn't actually require any real thought, or address any of the real issues. It's a lazy way out, so you make a lot of really stupid assumptions along the way.
 
2014-03-10 12:12:33 PM

Aigoo: And this is why all of Congress needs recalled--with the  stipulation that no person who has served in any elected position, including dog catcher, is eligible to run, term limits instituted for Congress, pensions for Congresscritters repealed and eliminated (no reason why these people can't get a damned job), and lobbying outright banned.


So replacing all the wheelers and dealers with people who have no idea what they're doing is an improvement how... ?

Seems like this would empower the lobbyists even more, not having term limits means they have more experience and know how everything runs, all the easier to prey on all the new first-term congresscritters.
 
2014-03-10 12:13:41 PM
Mr.Tangent: How is it even legal to take money from a company while at the same time participating in a committee to make a major decision on said company.  The same guys make the rules?  Ok then, fair enough.

Aigoo: And this is why all of Congress needs recalled--with the  stipulation that no person who has served in any elected position, including dog catcher, is eligible to run, term limits instituted for Congress, pensions for Congresscritters repealed and eliminated (no reason why these people can't get a damned job), and lobbying outright banned. ...


Term limits are absolutely essential because... power corrupts. And once you get a few bad apples who make it easier to get money (legalize bribery) and stay in office (gerrymandering and the like), the meme spreads like a cancer throughout the legislative body.

With regular turnover and people not allowed to spend their lives in Congress, it would be harder for corruption to entrench and blossom.

We didn't want an imperial presidency so we term-limited it. We have an imperial Congress. It needs to be term-limited.

Three things will purge Congress of its unabashed corruption:
1) Term limits.
2) Stopping legalized bribery.
3) Stopping gerrymandering.

If a Congressman can at most lose spending 6 or 8 years in DC, he'll be much more likely to be honest with the public than someone who is trying to make an entire career of it.
 
2014-03-10 12:21:42 PM

cardex: TV's Vinnie: We really need some CEOs to be taken down by snipers. America can't endure this sh*t for much longer.

Not snipers, but the guillotine needs to make a comeback.


And not CEOs but lobbyists.
 
2014-03-10 12:25:13 PM

JungleBoogie: We didn't want an imperial presidency so we term-limited it. We have an imperial Congress. It needs to be term-limited.


Maybe a bit esoteric, but the function of an executive makes that job better suited to term limits than a legislator.

An executive has advisers and such, and is expected to lead a division of government. This kind of position is best suited to quick-ish decision making and policy planning, and really doesn't need an experienced person so much as one willing to seek out advice.

A legislator has to be familiar with the objects of legislation - they have to "walk a mile in our shoes" so that they know what our (state- or district-level) problems are. This necessarily requires more experience, with both laws and lawmaking and with life in general (knowing more about where the problems can potentially come from - "life lessons").

// not-so-shamelessly borrowed from Federalists (just one of several arguments against term limits)
// I like the idea of rotation (you can only serve, e.g., 3 years in any 6-year period), but not of limiting entirely
 
2014-03-10 12:45:18 PM

Dr Dreidel: A legislator has to be familiar with the objects of legislation - they have to "walk a mile in our shoes" so that they know what our (state- or district-level) problems are. This necessarily requires more experience, with both laws and lawmaking and with life in general (knowing more about where the problems can potentially come from - "life lessons")


John Dingell, US Representative from Michigan, has been in the House since 1955.  Almost 60 years.  I assure you he has no idea what it's like to "walk a mile in our shoes"
 
2014-03-10 01:02:21 PM

Target Builder: Well, fortunately for Comcast they've just managed to (ab)use their already dominant market position to extract some extra cash from Netflix, which they can now use to bribe lobby Congrescritters to let them dramatically increase their market dominance on the promise they won't abuse it, at least for a few years.


You just sound bitter.
 
2014-03-10 01:02:26 PM
Really? Is having former cable/internet company chairman and industry-shill Wheeler in charge of the FCC not as valuable as it used to be?
 
2014-03-10 01:05:26 PM

generallyso: IrishBlunder: IrishBlunder: The fact that "We The People" allow this is the problem.

As if we had any say in the matter.


If only there were some way to avoid giving your money to cable companies.
 
2014-03-10 02:34:28 PM
And of course he's hardly the only one, but Obama's been palling around with Comcast's chief lobbyist.

http://bgr.com/2014/02/14/comcast-obama-connections/
 
2014-03-10 04:13:14 PM

AngryDragon: cardex: TV's Vinnie: We really need some CEOs to be taken down by snipers. America can't endure this sh*t for much longer.

Not snipers, but the guillotine needs to make a comeback.

And not CEOs but lobbyists.


Why not both ?
 
2014-03-10 05:29:44 PM

gja: TV's Vinnie: We really need some CEOs to be taken down by snipers. America can't endure this sh*t for much longer.

Careful, you're sounding dangerously close to moderate with talk like that. The leftists here will gut you for such heresy.

Besides, the problem is you kill one and 5 spring up to replace it. Like cancer cells. The entire system needs a clearing.


How?
 
2014-03-10 06:17:05 PM

JungleBoogie: Mr.Tangent: How is it even legal to take money from a company while at the same time participating in a committee to make a major decision on said company.  The same guys make the rules?  Ok then, fair enough.

Aigoo: And this is why all of Congress needs recalled--with the  stipulation that no person who has served in any elected position, including dog catcher, is eligible to run, term limits instituted for Congress, pensions for Congresscritters repealed and eliminated (no reason why these people can't get a damned job), and lobbying outright banned. ...

Term limits are absolutely essential because... power corrupts. And once you get a few bad apples who make it easier to get money (legalize bribery) and stay in office (gerrymandering and the like), the meme spreads like a cancer throughout the legislative body.

With regular turnover and people not allowed to spend their lives in Congress, it would be harder for corruption to entrench and blossom.

We didn't want an imperial presidency so we term-limited it. We have an imperial Congress. It needs to be term-limited.

Three things will purge Congress of its unabashed corruption:
1) Term limits.
2) Stopping legalized bribery.
3) Stopping gerrymandering.

If a Congressman can at most lose spending 6 or 8 years in DC, he'll be much more likely to be honest with the public than someone who is trying to make an entire career of it.


They also shouldn't be allowed to vote for or implement anything regarding their benefits like pay, vacations, etc. If those were tied into the popular vote, the corruption would taper off as the people regain control of the reins.

They should be required to ask the boss for a raise.
 
gja [TotalFark]
2014-03-10 07:10:36 PM

ourbigdumbmouth: gja: TV's Vinnie: We really need some CEOs to be taken down by snipers. America can't endure this sh*t for much longer.

Careful, you're sounding dangerously close to moderate with talk like that. The leftists here will gut you for such heresy.

Besides, the problem is you kill one and 5 spring up to replace it. Like cancer cells. The entire system needs a clearing.

How?


A rewrite that includes term limits that can extend only if justified by a peer+public review agrees the persons performance MERITS it.

Severe and permanent sanctions and censure measures for those found to break the laws. More so than we are or have ever done.

Public transparency of all lobbyist activity with required publication and disclosure of all source and destination of monies.

Full and public disclosure of all members in a SIG/lobby group. Corporate entities are forbidden to sponsor and fund directly.

Conflict of interests regulations that tighten the current scope and loopholes.

All government employees (and that includes congress, etc..) are required to use only health plans and investment plans offered to the public.

Severe punishment for insider trading and investments infractions including but not limited jail time and loss of all gains found to be tied to the infraction and possibly punitive damages. (somewhere along the line a message needs to be sent and that means making an example of someone). So be it.

No lifetime guaranteed pensions. For anyone. Ever.
What they get would be tied to service length and performance measurement criteria, like the rest of us slobs (would need to be developed).

And we need to age out the current crop via review and replacement measures. The incoming need to be made to understand business as usual is over and dirty tactics will not be tolerated. The AGs and judges need to be much more neutral politically and philosophically than they have ever been, or currently are. Lean too far either way and "well...bye".

And yes, I am saying here and now that since religion has become such a devise issue we need to expunge it from the political arena. It has proven to be a bad influence when allowed to drive decisions in this respect. And we need to start making smarter decisions. We can't afford poor decisions anymore. We lost the luxury of that long ago.
 
2014-03-10 07:13:22 PM

k4mi: In any other less developed country this type of thing might be called "Bribery".  Here in good ole god's country it's just job creators trickling down the wealth.  This is just the free market bearing what it's worth.
Clearly anyone objecting is a godless communist.

/am I doing it right?
//Feel the wealth trickling down all over your back
///Don't look up, you don't want it in the eyes


I see all of you liberals blaming the private industry and very few acknowledging the government role I this. Some would say concentrating power in the hands of a central collective leads to corruption, liberals seem to only blame those paying said collective. Im sure the government in Venezuela is completely devoid of blame too.
 
Displayed 50 of 53 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report