17 Jan 07
Originally posted by Dace AceThat would be GREAT! Then there would be no more Republicans and only half the Democrats. LONG LIVE THE INDEPENDENTS!!!
Why can't we make it a death penalty issue? Your found guilty of corruption, while serving in public office, you get some saddam action.
You Repulicrats and Democans all suck.
17 Jan 07
Originally posted by der schwarze Ritternice thread title, BTW.
Democratic Speaker Nancy Pelosi is all about raising the minimum wage until it affects her campaign contributors or companies which she and her husband own stock in:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB116891896808477346.html
If you can’t access this link, here is a summary of what has transpired:
http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?page ...[text shortened]... he Samoa exemption from members of the U.S. House:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Te34Jn9IRvU
17 Jan 07
4 edits
Originally posted by zeeblebotYes. Any evidence to the contrary?
that's very interesting. Nancy Pelosi has been the congressperson from the S.F. district since 1987. eclipsing your "at least 17 years". the district where Starkist Tuna happens to be headquartered.
coincidence?
And "17 years" ain't mine; if you follow the link to the statute given on the DOL website (29 U.S.C. 205), the legislation which set up the industry committees in American Samoa was passed in 1989.
EDIT: It would been a little difficult for Pelosi to aid Del Monte, the California based owner of Starkist in 1989 by exempting American Samoa from the minimum wage - DM didn't buy Starkist until 2002. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2002/06/14/BU27976.DTL&type=business
17 Jan 07
Originally posted by no1marauderoh, and looky here, guess who owned Starkist before then:
Yes. Any evidence to the contrary?
And "17 years" ain't mine; if you follow the link to the statute given on the DOL website (29 U.S.C. 205), the legislation which set up the industry committees in American Samoa was passed in 1989.
EDIT: It would been a little difficult for Pelosi to aid Del Monte, the California based owner of Starkist in 1989 by ...[text shortened]... .sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2002/06/14/BU27976.DTL&type=business
HEINZ !!!!
are you trying to bamboozle us? is this going to be the official party line? bet you get a bonus if you can make us believe it.
the plot thickens ...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Del_Monte
"Del Monte Foods again became a publicly traded company in 1999 and in 2002 Del Monte purchased several brands from US food giant Heinz in an all stock transaction that left Heinz shareholders with 74.5% of Del Monte and original Del Monte shareholders with 25.5% of the company and nearly tripled Del Monte Foods size; Today Del Monte Foods products include canned fruits and vegetables, baby foods, tuna, and pet foods under labels such as Del Monte, Contadina, and StarKist Tuna.
"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H._J._Heinz_Company
"H. J. Heinz II's son was United States Senator from Pennsylvania John Heinz, who died in a plane crash on April 4, 1991. His widow, Teresa, married U.S. Senator from Massachusetts John Kerry in 1995. Kerry ran unsuccessfully for President in 2004. Thanks to Teresa Heinz Kerry, the 2004 presidential campaign gave the Heinz Company considerable publicity.
"
17 Jan 07
Originally posted by zeeblebot😴😴
oh, and looky here, guess who owned Starkist before then:
HEINZ !!!!
are you trying to bamboozle us? is this going to be the official party line? bet you get a bonus if you can make us believe it.
the plot thickens ...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Del_Monte
"Del Monte Foods again became a publicly traded company in 1999 and in 2002 Del M ...[text shortened]... z Kerry, the 2004 presidential campaign gave the Heinz Company considerable publicity.
"
Your premise is refuted but like a very bad X-Files plot, you just switch gears.
17 Jan 07
1 edit
Originally posted by zeeblebotHow exactly???
oh, it's not refuted at all. it's magnified.
way to go, no1m! gettin' the goods on those corrupt corporations!
Upton Sinclair would be proud of you ...
The original premise was that Pelosi was "corrupt" because she added an exemption to the minimum wage law for American Samoa BECAUSE it benefited a corporation who's home headquarters was in her district.
Turns out the exemption had been part of the law since 1989, SO:
Dumbleboot says "well Pelosi's been in the House since 1987" suggesting that her "corruption" was back in 1989, but still real; BUT
Del Monte the company in her district didn't even own Starkist in 1989; SO:
HTF does the fact that Heinz (who back in 1989 the politician associated with them a heir to the family fortune was a REPUBLICAN Senator) was the owner of Starkist Tuna in 1989 show Pelosi's "corruption"?
Please try to follow this; I know you have trouble thinking but it's not tooooooooooooo hard.
EDIT: From your post:
Nancy Pelosi has been the congressperson from the S.F. district since 1987. eclipsing your "at least 17 years". the district where Starkist Tuna happens to be headquartered.
coincidence?
17 Jan 07
somehow, they managed to include a wage hike for the N. Marianas.
http://www.topix.net/content/ap/3438199786202289466403306877391295041823?threadid=F31OEUH5N5801E8T
"The bill was passed Wednesday by the House as part of the Democrats' 100-hour agenda. The measure included in its coverage another U.S. territory, the Northern Mariana Islands, which had been shielded in the past from the wage law with the help of former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas, and GOP lobbyist Jack Abramoff, now serving a prison sentence."