Current Dumbass Residents of "The Family" Home

[dan foster]

The Associated Press wrote about the Fellowship in 2003. Interesting to note that Sen. John Ensign, who admitted to an extramarital affair, is also closely affiliated with the group and is a resident of C Street:

    Six members of Congress live in a $1.1 million Capitol Hill town house that is subsidized by a secretive religious organization, tax records show.

    The lawmakers, all Christians, pay low rent to live in the stately red brick, three-story house on C Street, two blocks from the Capitol. It is maintained by a group alternately known as the "Fellowship" and the "Foundation" and brings together world leaders and elected officials through religion.

    The Fellowship hosts receptions, luncheons and prayer meetings on the first two floors of the house, which is registered with the Internal Revenue Service as a church.

    The six lawmakers—Reps. Zach Wamp, R-Tenn.; Bart Stupak, D-Mich.; Jim DeMint, R-S.C.; Mike Doyle, D-Pa.; and Sens. John Ensign, R-Nev. and Sam Brownback, R-Kan.—live in private rooms upstairs.

    Rent is $600 a month, DeMint said.

    "Our goal is singular—and that is to hope that we can assist them in better understandings of the teachings of Christ, and applying it to their jobs," said Richard Carver, a member of the Fellowship's board of directors who served as an assistant secretary of the Air Force during the Reagan administration.

    The house, valued at $1.1 million, is owned by the C Street Center, a sister organization of the Fellowship. It received more than $145,000 in Fellowship grants between 1997 and 2000, according to IRS records—including $96,400 in 1998 for reducing debt.

    Its tenants dine together once a week to discuss religion in their daily lives.

    "We do have a Bible study," said DeMint, a Presbyterian who asked to move into the house less than a year ago when there was a vacancy. "Somebody'll share a verse or a thought, but mostly it's more of an accountability group to talk about things that are going on in our lives, and how we're dealing with them."

    Few in the Fellowship are willing to talk about its mission.

    It organizes the annual National Prayer Breakfast attended by the president, members of Congress, and dignitaries from around the world. The group leaves its name off the program, even though it spent $924,373 to host the event in 2001, bringing in $606,292 in proceeds, according to the most recent available IRS records, and pays travel expenses for foreign officials to attend.

http://www.usnews.com/blogs/god-and-country/2009/06/24/sanford-cites-secretive-christian-groups-role-in-helping-confront-affair.html

[Henry Hawk]

WOW!!!! Dan....that is horrible.....Lawmakers ACTUALLY trying to get a good deal on rent...and damn those guys for eating lunch together and discussing religion.........don't they know they are being paid by taxpayers.

I most certainly understand your concern and fear....

[dan foster]

WOW!!!! Dan....that is horrible.....Lawmakers ACTUALLY trying to get a good deal on rent...and damn those guys for eating lunch together and discussing religion.........don't they know they are being paid by taxpayers.

I most certainly understand your concern and fear....

It is called lobbying and gifts, from the lobbyists, you jackass.  The "renters" should be in jail for taking payoffs to do political favors.

[me]

It is called lobbying and gifts, from the lobbyists, you jackass.  The "renters" should be in jail for taking payoffs to do political favors.

You mean like the UAW, huge contributors to the dems, who was given a huge interest in GM by Obama, or ACORN, also huge contributors, who is getting all kinds of stimulus money?  Or maybe you mean the banks who got TARP money, even though they didn't need it, that Franks and some of the other democratic congressmen either have an interest in or someone they know does.

[dan foster]

You mean like the UAW, huge contributors to the dems, who was given a huge interest in GM by Obama, or ACORN, also huge contributors, who is getting all kinds of stimulus money?  Or maybe you mean the banks who got TARP money, even though they didn't need it, that Franks and some of the other democratic congressmen either have an interest in or someone they know does.

Your analogies are completely irrelevant.  And, what kind of moron thinks that the GM bailout was payback to the UAW?

[me]

Your analogies are completely irrelevant.  And, what kind of moron thinks that the GM bailout was payback to the UAW?

The bail out wasn't it was giving the UAW part ownership that was.  They came ahead of the stock holders which is totally wrong.

[Philodox]

Your analogies are completely irrelevant.  And, what kind of moron thinks that the GM bailout was payback to the UAW?

___________________________________________________________________-

That all depends on which end of the goat you are looking at.

Investors look at the goat square in the eye & decide to invest or not.

Union members largely are looking up a goats ass for any & all ways to screw the pooch.

The 'new gm' is a goat'sass proposition & the only investor(s) will be our grandkids.

.
( I used an allegory that I knew you'd understand )

.

[me]

 

[dan foster]

The bail out wasn't it was giving the UAW part ownership that was.  They came ahead of the stock holders which is totally wrong.

Sure they should come before the stockholders (the stockholders never worked a day in their life), but I doubt you have it correct.  You will need to cite a reference for your claim.

[dan foster]

___________________________________________________________________-

That all depends on which end of the goat you are looking at.

Investors look at the goat square in the eye & decide to invest or not.

Union members largely are looking up a goats ass for any & all ways to screw the pooch.

The 'new gm' is a goat'sass proposition & the only investor(s) will be our grandkids.

.
( I used an allegory that I knew you'd understand )

.

As before, your allegory is irrelevant, dumbass.  But, kudos for learning a big word.  You sure do write purdy, now.

[pariann]

I think you are incorrect. 

The word "an" is used before a word starting with a vowel: we say "a horse", "a child" but "an orange", "an elephant".

Allergory is a noun...so 'an' would be correct.

[dan foster]

I think you are incorrect. 

The word "an" is used before a word starting with a vowel: we say "a horse", "a child" but "an orange", "an elephant".

Allergory is a noun...so 'an' would be correct.

I changed it as it really wasn't what I meant, anyway.  The allegory was irrelevant.

[Philodox]

Sure they should come before the stockholders (the stockholders never worked a day in their life), but I doubt you have it correct.  You will need to cite a reference for your claim.

______________________________________________________________________

Gee F/C... those brokers who oversee your mutual funds or 401 ( along with the state of Indies ) retirement accounts may have a disagreement with your oversimplified analysis.

They must have put the part about the union getting the gravy & every other legitament investor getting the shaft in fine print.

Union folk got no time for no stinkin fine print, do they f/c ?

.

[me]

Sure they should come before the stockholders (the stockholders never worked a day in their life), but I doubt you have it correct.  You will need to cite a reference for your claim.

I do believe a lot of the stock holders were people who worked there.  They might not have had any controlling interests but they did have stock which suddenly became worthless.  I really think you open your mouth before you think sometimes.

[dan foster]

I do believe a lot of the stock holders were people who worked there.  They might not have had any controlling interests but they did have stock which suddenly became worthless.  I really think you open your mouth before you think sometimes.

And both of you a'holes have now made claims that you fail to back up with any kind of facts.  Please cite something.  And, please tell me how your current statement has anything to do with what the UAW got vs stockholders vs anything else?