Do you really think they give a fuck about Americans?

[Scuba]

[hobbit709]

1. I realized that a long time ago.

They care about us as I care about a flea.

[GeoWilliam750]

13. More like how a flea cares about a dog

[EvolveOrConvolve]

77. Fleas serve a useful purpose in the food chain

Politicians, not so much.

[avebury]

2. No surprise, nothing new. nt

[KG]

3. dear fellow working people:

you are on your own. expect no help from DC. either party.

[Brigid]

48. Ladies and gentlemen, we have our winner.

[Boomerproud]

63. Never have, never will.

n/t

[truedelphi]

66. Yep, all any loyalists to the DLC can expect is

More props on gay marriage, a few bones thrown along the way on pot (We will try and abide by states' right, says the Great Corporate Spokesperson. Except when we get tired of doing that and need to justify all the employees over at DOJ and DEA. After all, the Puppet Masters of Wall Street are not letting us go after the Big Banks, not even when they get caught red handed laundering billions of dollars of violent drug cartel monies.)

And if you have been participant in a gay marriage, just wait till you try to collect any Federal benefits. Good luck to you on that! It is only good so far as you can buy a license and have a ceremony and a reception.

The changes that need to be made regarding the money end of things are lagging far behind the other items.

[customerserviceguy]

4. On the other hand

I don't see a lot of attendance in the audience (or whatever you call the spectators at a Congressional hearing), and I only see two people in the back, not sure if they are press or Congressional staffers.

Maybe this picture was taken at a time nothing terribly significant was going on.

[Scuba]

5. Long term unemployment is a significant problem. What's your point?

[treestar]

14. Maybe that this picture was taken at a time when nothing significant was going on?

When you observe a legislature, it often looks odd. I remember being in the gallery of the Senate and they seem to mill around, walk in and out and talk to each other. It just doesn't look the way we'd expect. It doesn't prove they aren't working on an issue.

[Fuddnik]

34. Walk out to the front lawn of the Capitol.

You'll see them all out there on cell phones, groveling to their masters for campaign money. Or they're meeting with a lobbyist. If there's a vote they want to vote on, a bell rings in their office building, and they might bother to run to the chamber to vote on a bill that they know nothing about.

They really don't give a fuck about Americans. In their view, their main job is to get re-elected. Period.

[meanit]

56. This is what the GOP meant

when they said government should be "run like a business".

[tofuandbeer]

79. Picturing that angers me. Sure sounds like they do work for the lobbyists. Arrgh!

[rhett o rick]

59. You are exactly right. The picture doesnt by itself prove anything. However, I still dont

think they give a shit about the 99%, how about you?

[treestar]

62. Some do, some don't

It's not uniform.

I'm happy with my representative and both Senators. I don't see them as just taking advantage of us all. Though I am from a small state, and they've held other offices in it. Seems like once a person is the Governor of Delaware, they get to go to Congress and then the Senate quite often, if they've done a good job statewide and the voters trust them. Then again, everyone is like that - hates Congress, except for their own critters.

[LiberalAndProud]

88. Not everyone is like that.

I hate my own critters very much.

[rhett o rick]

94. The question of the OP was, "Do you really think they give a fuck about Americans?"

I dont believe that Congress, as a whole, gives a fuck about the 99%. What do you think?

[treestar]

95. I think they do

Probably many of them actually do.

[rhett o rick]

96. You do know that the 99% is in deep shit? That in the last 30 years

the 1% has been reaping huge rewards while the 99% has been sliding backwards. We are currently in the start of another Great Depression and many of our important rights have been taken from us. Congress cares for the 1% and doesnt give a shit about us.

[Mr. Evil]

81. What we're supposed to be

To the 1% and their political allies we are supposed to be obedient worker drones, give reverence and be in awe of the 1% and to stfu and accept our lot in life.

[Skittles]

74. how about the long-term unemployment stats?

do THEY convince you???

[bec]

7. I agree people need to start taking

politics more seriously. With that said, how do you expect them (unemployed) to afford a trip to D.C.?

[hfojvt]

39. the trouble really is

that Americans, in general, do not give a crap about other Americans

the long term unemployed are perhaps 1 million people - in a working class of perhaps 150 million. Probably a huge majority of those 149 million do not care all that much about the problems of the other million. I mean if they hear a story about one or two people who can't find a job, they probably sympathize and would say "dang, that's rough" or some such thing, or "good luck in your job search" but it does not occur to them that THEY should do something about it.

They probably think that there is nothing they can do to help.

And they are correct in that, pretty much. They cannot do much by voting, writing to their congressperson, or even marching in the streets. As one person, they do not have any more power than any of the rest of us.

The other thing is - they are not gonna hear very much about this issue. If they watch the TV news, as I do for about 1.5 hours per day (two local news shows and one national). Well, this week, they will hear perhaps an hour a day going over every detail of the "Boston Bombing" story. Whereas there is unlikely to even be a two minute story once a month about the long term unemployed, or income inequality, or any of a number of issues. And the newspaper is likely to be the same way, as well as packed with rightwing talking points.

[bvar22]

69. The last I looked, there were 5 Million Long Term Unemployed,

and the reality is probably three times that many, disproportionately affecting the 50+ age group.
That is a significant number.

[hfojvt]

87. that's what I get for not looking it up

but it is still only about 3% of the labor force as BLS shows 142.5 million employed and that does not even include the military and 12.5 million unemployed with 5.14 million unemployed for over 26 weeks.

There are 88.3 million not in the labor force, with 6.6 million of them saying they want a job, but 3.4 million of them have not searched in the last year.

Even with that, it is only about 7% of the labor force and an even smaller part of potential voting population, which includes lots of retired people.

It's a significant number, but in a democracy should you represent 10% of the population or 90% of the population?

Most of the 90% probably DO care about the problems of the 10%, but they don't care enough to demand action.

Which, as I said, is partly because the "news" does not talk about the 10% very much, and for another thing because there is no clear plan being offered to help the 10%. The stimulus has gotten berated as a failure, even though I, myself, have always claimed that it worked (as I posted this a number of times, periodically http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021566043 ). But these days even Obama proposes mostly trickle-down plans, and even Obama claims the deficit is a serious problem requiring cuts in spending.

So what's left? More tax cuts for the rich?

[thesquanderer]

54. Well, at least you don't have to worry about them being able to get a day off from work.

More seriously, unemployed people don't necessarily have to be able to afford a trip to D.C. to get there. D.C. itself has an 8.6% unemployment rate. So there are plenty of "prospects" who don't have to travel very far at all.

[customerserviceguy]

71. Wouldn't there be plenty of unemployed people in the greater DC area?

Also, again, perhaps some routine stuff was going on that wasn't really the interesting part. Like I observed, there wasn't a lot of press there, in fact, I can imagine that the photographer who took the photo might just have been the only journalist in the room.

If anybody here has been to court, it doesn't all look like Judge Judy. There are a lot of routine procedural matters to be attended to, and if the public and the press don't feel they're worth observing, I don't blame most of the members of that committee for not being there while every 'i' is dotted and every 't' is crossed.

[Divernan]

10. I count 13 staffers in the row behind the committee members seats.

Probably there to report back to the members who didn't show, or will show up later to put in 5 minutes of face time and thereby qualify to be listed as having participated. The seats in the public - "audience" area, behind the presenters' table, are usually filled by lobbyists, people who are waiting to present and journalists.

When I worked for a state legislature and organized/administered legislative hearings, it was common for members from both parties to show up, sign in, sit down for 10 minutes and then leave. They wanted to be in the capitol to be wined and dined and golf-outinged by lobbyists, and by showing up for 10 minutes of an official activity could bill their transportation/lodging costs to their legislative expense account for full reimbursement.

[customerserviceguy]

72. You've got better eyes than I do

Again, my point is that not every moment of every hearing is the Watergate-style variety, or Ollie North at the Iran-Contra hearings that we think of as riveting testimony. I would be willing to bet that the average Congressional staffer considers them to be among the worst parts of the job.

Whether or not Congresscritters give a damn about unemployment is not fully 100% evident from one photograph.

[99Forever]

12. "Maybe this picture was taken at a time nothing terribly significant was going on."

So, basically it could have been at any given moment when Congress was in session.

[Rex]

53. Exactly...nice try though huh?

I swear the excuses people will make for politicians is sickening.

[malaise]

6. Get thee to the greatest page

The long term unemployed aren't sharing out money like the corporations.

[RedstDem]

8. amazing

The one thing that is their job to do, they can't be bothered
Pox on both houses
Obama might be the last dem I vote for or give money to.

[sorefeet]

9. And the sheeple ain't going to do nothin

Vote every 2 years and that is just symbolic it doesn't mean shit.

[fasttense]

27. Right now, congress and the President are paying more attention to the rich

We had our turn with the rigged elections, it's now time for congress and the president to make those deals that will make them filthy rich.

We workers are of no importance to them because we allow the filthy rich to exploit us and gives us very shitty wages so they can rig elections and buy our politicians.

It all comes down to the fact that our political system is bought with money from our labor. AND we let them do it.

We have to take over the corporations. Kick out the CEOs and board of directors and put ourselves in charge of our own production. Why do we let these uber rich fools use us?

[KharmaTrain]

11. The Only Time Us Little Folk Matter...

...is the weeks leading up to an election. The rest of the time they only answer to those who write the big checks....

[treestar]

15. "Us little folk" could easily write or call them

or go to the hearings.

They know "us little folk" are apathetic.

"Us little folk" makes us sound like poor little victims of the people we chose to elect.

[KharmaTrain]

16. The Arrogance Of Some Politicians...

...I fully agree that Liberals/Progressives need to be more active in getting in the faces of ALL elected officials. Reward our friends and keep the pressure on those who stand in the ways of our common goals. Unfortunately the beltway lives in its own world...one devoid of having to worry about having too much month left at the end of the money. It's the best way to explain how an issue that garners over 85% of public support in every poll I see (background checks) gets rejected in the Senate and is DOA in the House.

The corruption of money in our political system is its undoing. When a congresscritter has to spend several hours a day "dialing for dollars" so they can raise the $5 million or more for their next election, us "little folk" don't stand a chance...

[treestar]

18. "Us little folk" are the ones who apparently respond to the spending of dollars

That's the root at which we can attack the problem.

Why does it take them so much money to run a campaign? I would posit the answer: "us little folk" respond to TV ads because we watch TV, and don't give greater consideration to the question of who we elect than that - respond to what we happen to see while watching TV. "Us little folk" have always had the option of going to meetings, going to meet candidates, listening to candidates on the radio or reading about what they said in the papers. With the internet, we have more options and it is even easier to find out a candidate's position on issues or voting record.

"Us little folk" need to stop acting like victims and act like responsible adults who elect their own leaders.

In fact, one of my Senators did a random call and created a teleconference. I stayed on the line and listened to the whole thing. He did that on his own initiative. Bet a lot of people were called and did not stay on the line and listen.

[KharmaTrain]

28. The Grassroots Is Where The Future Lies...

...while I'm sure we both detest all things rushpublican, one thing they did for years was build up a grassroots organization that is now infested in many state governments. While Democrats were focused on winning the Presidency and high profile elections, they fell asleep at the switch on the state and local level. This is how we've ended up with so many teabagger legislatures hacking away at all sorts of civil rights. Dr. Dean's 50-state approach when he ran the DNC was a step in the right direction but that was left behind when Kaine and now DWS are in charge. This is where the real change can and should begin, but it takes a lot of time and patience...and we can see in this instant gratification world...those two assets are in short supply.

I wish there was some quick fix or guaranteed way for the electorate to regain control on those who are supposedly representing us but as long as campaigns remain so expensive (and in a congresscritter's case, no sooner is one election over than then next begins) and there's no desire for reform, we're stuck with gridlock and politicians selling out for their own best interests...

[AnotherMcIntosh]

44. Only if someone can come up with a way to distinguish bona fide grassroots from astroturf.

[Brigid]

50. I'll bet he did that as an experiment.

To see how many would stay on the line and participate.

[fasttense]

20. Now you do not really think they do the fund raising themselves do you?

That is a job best left to their staffers so that they can, you know, NOT attend the hearings.

[KharmaTrain]

26. Of Course They Do...

Here's a good read on that subject...(sorry it's a PDF)

http://www.columbia.org/pdf_files/publiccampaign15.pdf

I've heard many a Congresscritter complain about having to go to their campaign office or wherever they do the calls to their "legal" and beg for bucks. If I'm a high roller, I won't want to talk to a staffer...I wanna to talk to "the man" or "woman". The staffers do the grunt work...deal with the "little folk" so that the boss can bring home the bacon.

There are some, mostly Democratic, congresscritters who can avoid this game...usually in very safe districts...but they're sucked up into the party hierarchy which, again, centers around bringing in as much money as possible. Welcome to the post Citizens United world...

Cheers...

[Hotler]

17. Or get really, really pissed off and take to the streets in protest.

It's time to get fighting mad.

[Fuddnik]

36. Uh, we tried that last year, and the Gestapo visited every city with protests.

They used the Powell Doctrine of overwhelming force.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

45. Exactly! And the attacks were co-ordinated on a national level.

[Hotler]

92. How many millions of people showed up at the Washington Mall for....

Obama's inaugurations? If we had that many people at a mass protest then we would the overwhelming force. A few hundred people at a protest is not going cut it. We need tens of thousand at a time, at the same time in every major city.

[sabrina 1]

46. 'Us little folk' have been doing that for decades. Now, since that hasn't worked, do you have

any other suggestions?

We do not 'choose' who to elect. The parties' leaderships, on the advice of Big Corps chooses who gets to run for us. They have way more money than 'us little folds' have.

My solution is for us 'little folks' to form a huge Corporation, one that is too 'big to fail' with all 300 million of us as members, I'm sure we could find enough important sounding titles for enough of us to make us seem important, and then with the money we concentrate into our OWN corporation, we get to name our own candidates.

But as of now, we are 'little to save' so until we get organized, the 'too big to fail' contingency is running things and they simply ignore all calls from 'us little folk'.

I'm open to some suggestions from you that might actually work. The above is mine, nothing else has worked, they simply don't care what the people think right now.

[treestar]

49. If that is true, and I do not think it entirely is

We let them.

Why do they need so much money? For TV ads. Suppose we did more to find out about them than just react to TV ads. In greater numbers, that is. Some people think about it but not enough do, so they masses watching American Idol instead of paying some attention to self government allow the money people to have a big say. That's on them.

[sabrina 1]

55. Well, we did that. We even organized, donated huge amounts of money to Liberal

Orgs like Moveon since individuals have so little power, then our Democratic Leadership sent a warning to Moveon for doing exactly as you just said we should do, choose our own reps and eliminate the corporate tools, Rahm called Moveon's attempt to do just that 'retarded ideas' and thanks to some who were present on that phone call, we know he berated them and ordered them to stop. I guess the punishment was if they did try to benefit the people, by helping to inform the public about those corporate shills, they would lose the access they thought they naturally had to what is after all, a Democratic Administration. One btw, which THEY and WE helped get elected.

So now what? The leadership of our own Party doesn't agree with you regarding informing the public about our Reps. They think that is a 'retarded idea'.

[raouldukelives]

65. Interesting idea. I certainly think you are 100% correct.

I personally feel what it requires is for good people to choose not to support bad things. Even, or especially, if it pays well. It's really not that complicated.
If you don't believe in human bondage, don't invest in third world sweatshops. If you don't believe in raping the land for short term gain, don't invest in corporations that do. If you would like to live a life that may actually leave the planet better for your existence, not standing with the people who are assuredly leaving it a wasteland is the only way to start.
Sadly, the beauty of money is far sweeter to most than the beauty of nature.

[hue]

19. No I don't think they ever cared...

[Scuba]

21. Cynic.

Hard not to be.

[raccoon]

22. No. nt

[libdude]

23. Some do,

most only as an abstract idea. To use a phrase from Mrs. Romney, " I love you women ", she was speaking in the abstract, that is why her husband can berate and disparage the 47% of the American people. Some people have what you might call intrinsic value, the makers, some don't, the takers, in their view. The point of this being that many of the people in the upper income levels or in upper society, which most politicians fall into that category are, in my opinion to some degree sociopathic. They don't have empathy for others.
Cuts to meals on wheels,
Cuts to Headstart,
Long term unemployed,
Cuts to Social Security and Medicare,
these groups have very little influence so they don't deserve attention as they are not able to advance the political agenda of many politicians,
political parties or even the media.
Fortunately, there are some politicians that are concerned and work to help those who have little voice, that are not abstracts.

[Scuba]

25. A few, yes.

[spanone]

24. absolutely worse congress ever....both fucking sides of the aisle

Last edited Thu Apr 25, 2013, 09:36 AM - Edit history (1)

they care about their jobs....PERIOD.

[dembotoz]

29. it is not pleasant being a peasant

[Octafish]

30. Human Resources

Cannon Fodder

[Paper Roses]

31. Nothing new here. How many times to you see pictures of almost empty

hearings. Too many other things to do than worry about doing their jobs.

[OLDMDDEM]

32. Nope.

And never will. It's all about lobbyist cash and getting rich. Everyone one of them should be recalled.

[abelenkpe]

37. Lobbying is just a nice word for Bribery.

If we want to rid our government of corruption we should start there. Also make it illegal for government officials to take corporate positions for a number of years after leaving office. Didn't there used to be such a rule?

[MannyGoldstein]

33. This would be number 9,215?

As some DUer previously posted:

Nobody with power gives a shit about your pathetic life, part 8,264

[Fumesucker]

41. Meh, if they gave a shit about you they wouldn't have power in the first place

Other than in a few extraordinary cases, Bernie Sanders comes to mind.

Only Nixon could go to China and only a Roosevelt or maybe a Kennedy could take on the seriously entrenched money interests. I don't think Obama is capable of doing it even if he wants to, the astronomical momentum of all that money just washes everything before it.

It's going to take a remarkable series of people and events to save our asses if it happens.

[MannyGoldstein]

43. Ahem. *cough*, *cough*, *ElizabethWarren*, *cough*, *cough* nt

[abelenkpe]

35. They care if you're rich and ready to write them a check.

Otherwise no. Not at all.

[mother earth]

38. Clearly they do not. nt

[Triana]

40. Nope. Didn't before - this is just confirmation of it.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022749908

[onenote]

42. Incredibly poor scheduling

This result was guaranteed the moment this hearing was scheduled. It overlapped with two dozen other hearings being held at the same time. This "Joint Economic Committee" is a dog and pony show committee with zero authority, which may explain why its members don't include the high and mighty of Congress. There are four Democratic House members on the Committee. At least three (and probably all four) had hearings that conflicted with this hearing. For example, Elijah Cummings, who is a House member of the Joint Economic Committee, is ranking Democratic member of the Oversight and Reform Committee, which had a hearing at the same time. Cummings isn't going to skip his own committee's hearing for this one.

There was much less going on during the afternoon on April 24. Why this hearing was scheduled for 10 am when it was a near guarantee that no one would show up is a reasonable question to ask.

[Brigid]

52. It was calculated that way.

How much you wanna bet?

[DevonRex]

70. Ok. So it has zero authority. It's for show only.

So they can say there is a committee and they have meetings basically. They probably have staffers who dig up some good information for them, perhaps to use in other committee assignments. Let's face it. It's the House. Nothing good will come out of there until after the midterms, and only then if we win. Which means we have to elect more Democrats. Which means we have to encourage voter turnout.

Thank you for your information. It was very helpful.

[sabrina 1]

47. They probably had more important business to attend to, such as the big celebration

of the opening of one of our most esteemed president's libraries!

[rhett o rick]

97. Now that the law has been changed, they have a lot of insider trading to catch up on.

hi sabrina 1

[Rex]

51. They not only don't give a fuck, but quit working for us

and only depend on us for a vote now. Which they get anyway, with their endless gerrymandering. Congress is broken and the rich like it that way! SO will this be frontpage news in the M$M...hahahaha, I keed.

[Uncle Joe]

57. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, Scuba.

[uponit7771]

58. +1

[BlueCheese]

60. I agree they don't really care very much.

But this isn't really evidence of that. On the other hand, congressional hearings are usually little more than theater. All of the important work is done by staffers behind the scenes.

[TruthBeTold65]

61. Did we send our lobbyists??

Oh yeah...they are supposed to be OUR lobbyists.

Silly me.

[Canuckistanian]

67. The Long Term Unemployed lobby is very small

Ok, Very, very small.

Ok, non-existant.

[davidthegnome]

64. About rich Americans? Yes.

About the rest of us? Not so much. Why the hell should they care about long term unemployment as long as the gravy train keeps rewarding them so richly? These so called lawmakers are, for the most part, already rich enough that they don't have to be terribly concerned about where their food is coming from, how to pay their rent, what to do when they can't afford gas or daycare. They will most likely never have that internal debate about whether to spend their last twenty dollars on food, medicine, or keeping the phone turned on for another month. They don't have to care - because what the heck are we going to do about it? Not much. Complain on DU or facebook maybe. Beyond that, we're too damn tired, too apathetic, too depressed, much too BROKE to go to a campaign rally, a political meeting - or to get involved with campaign fund raising.

The problem is that the public either does not care, or we are too busy trying to survive to become politically active - or at least, that's what my friends on campus tell me. Part of the problem is these rich pricks who are concerned primarily for their own wealth, the other part of the problem is that we have an ignorant, not terribly well educated, only-semi-literate populace.

I don't see a solution. Perhaps if a movement like Occupy becomes powerful enough to turn the tables...

[usaf-vet]

68. Where is Rep. Sean Duffy from Wisconsin's 7th

Congressional District.?

To busy to worry about the unemployed constituents in your district?

Busy raising money from the fat cats?

Well which is it?

[onethatcares]

73. who were the 4 that showed up?

I went to the Huff but couldn't find the story.

[SunSeeker]

91. All Dems, of course.

Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), the committee's vice-chair, opened and was there for the entire roughly 90-minute session.  Sen. Christopher Murphy (D-Conn.) arrived eight minutes into the hearing. Once the hearing had been under way for 35 minutes, Rep. John Delaney (D-Md.) was also in attendance. Eventually Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Md.) also joined, bringing the crowd to four. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mobileweb/2013/04/24/lawmaker-unemployment-hearing_n_3148362.html

[valerief]

75. Of course, they don't give a shit about us. It's obvious. nt

[bowens43]

76. We're not Americans , we are consumers and America is not a country , it's a corporation.

[Honeycombe8]

78. There's no campaign funding $ in long term unemployed, I guess.

It's disgraceful.

But hey, the sequestor has impacted plane flights, and all hell has broken loose in Congress...since wealthy people and politicians fly a lot. They've already held hearings on it!

[Brimley]

80. Clearly Not

And neither does the lapdog media that underreports news like this.

[L0oniX]

82. Gee ...the unemployed don't give money to campaigns. Go figure why they don't care.

[blkmusclmachine]

83. .

.

[russspeakeasy]

84. The 4 people setting there must be dolts.

[Quantess]

89. Who are they anyway? Idealistic newbies? (no text)

[russspeakeasy]

93. That was my thought.

They must be new and thought they were suppose to do something to earn their pay.

[City Lights]

85. No.

They haven't given a fuck about us little folk in a long time.

[Go Vols]

86. Eat the Rich

[LeftInTX]

90. K & R

They care more about Benghazi and gun rights.

[woo me with science]

98. kick