Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

GOP-Controlled House to Kick Off by Reading Constitution Aloud

2456

Posts

  • wwtMaskwwtMask Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    [Right, Bush never held anyone that he couldn't put on trial.
    I mean look at all the terror trials we got.
    We were having terror trials left and right with Bush!

    Jesus, Deacon at least TRY not to be a fucking parody of the Right.

    Well, I very clearly remember a bunch of Obama stump speeches wrt Gitmo about how the right thing isn't always easy, and the rule of law should always be followed.

    I also remember McCain taking a pragmatic approach and getting skewered for it.

    So, while reading the Constitution is kind of a stunt and probably deserving of a few snarky responses, I'm not about to let a comment go by that implicates the left has the moral high ground when it comes to consitutional issues.

    Because you don't have it.

    Sure we do, mainly because the GOP has been occupying the gutter for so long and steadily making it deeper.

    When he dies, I hope they write "Worst Affirmative Action Hire, EVER" on his grave. His corpse should be trolled.
    Twitter - @liberaltruths | Google+ - http://gplus.to/wwtMask | Occupy Tallahassee
  • nexuscrawlernexuscrawler Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    BOTH PARTIES ARE EXACTLY THE SAME!
    Spoiler:

  • OptimusZedOptimusZed Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    wwtMask wrote: »
    Thanatos wrote: »
    wwtMask wrote: »
    Deacon's been beating the "Look, Obama isn't the messiah!" horse for a while now. It's pretty much his only thing. Oh, and being a black Republican, though I may be getting him confused with someone else that no longer posts here.
    He was outed awhile ago as a white guy.

    Yeah, someone PMed me that, I just wasn't sure if it was Deacon that it was about. I always thought it was odd that there was a black Republican that was not either ex-military, wealthy, or straight up crazy.
    I'm trying to remember the name of that freshman from Florida that is, in fact, all three so I can google up an ironic picture.

    But for some reason its escaping me.

    We're reading Rifts. You should too. You know you want to. On Hiatus!

    Any gamers in the Danville, PA area? PM me if you're interested in some tabletop gaming.
  • DeaconBluesDeaconBlues __BANNED USERS
    edited January 2011
    wwtMask wrote: »
    Oh, and being a black Republican, though I may be getting him confused with someone else that no longer posts here.

    Long story short... totally white.

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • DeaconBluesDeaconBlues __BANNED USERS
    edited January 2011
    wwtMask wrote: »
    Well, I very clearly remember a bunch of Obama stump speeches wrt Gitmo about how the right thing isn't always easy, and the rule of law should always be followed.

    I also remember McCain taking a pragmatic approach and getting skewered for it.

    So, while reading the Constitution is kind of a stunt and probably deserving of a few snarky responses, I'm not about to let a comment go by that implicates the left has the moral high ground when it comes to consitutional issues.

    Because you don't have it.

    Sure we do, mainly because the GOP has been occupying the gutter for so long and steadily making it deeper.

    "Less Unconstitutional" isn't as catchy as "Hope" but maybe you could bring the font size down and squeeze it in there under that picture.

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • wwtMaskwwtMask Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    OptimusZed wrote: »
    wwtMask wrote: »
    Thanatos wrote: »
    wwtMask wrote: »
    Deacon's been beating the "Look, Obama isn't the messiah!" horse for a while now. It's pretty much his only thing. Oh, and being a black Republican, though I may be getting him confused with someone else that no longer posts here.
    He was outed awhile ago as a white guy.

    Yeah, someone PMed me that, I just wasn't sure if it was Deacon that it was about. I always thought it was odd that there was a black Republican that was not either ex-military, wealthy, or straight up crazy.
    I'm trying to remember the name of that freshman from Florida that is, in fact, all three so I can google up an ironic picture.

    But for some reason its escaping me.

    Alan West. He's like Clarence Thomas, except from the military and ten times the crazy.

    Deacon, I'd be delighted if you'd explain what the point was of your deception. Like, what did you stand to gain from doing that? Feel free to PM me.

    When he dies, I hope they write "Worst Affirmative Action Hire, EVER" on his grave. His corpse should be trolled.
    Twitter - @liberaltruths | Google+ - http://gplus.to/wwtMask | Occupy Tallahassee
  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    wwtMask wrote: »
    Oh, and being a black Republican, though I may be getting him confused with someone else that no longer posts here.

    Long story short... totally white.
    I don't really think "I'm totally not a racist, I just like to wear internet blackface" is that long of a story.

  • OptimusZedOptimusZed Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    wwtMask wrote: »
    OptimusZed wrote: »
    wwtMask wrote: »
    Thanatos wrote: »
    wwtMask wrote: »
    Deacon's been beating the "Look, Obama isn't the messiah!" horse for a while now. It's pretty much his only thing. Oh, and being a black Republican, though I may be getting him confused with someone else that no longer posts here.
    He was outed awhile ago as a white guy.

    Yeah, someone PMed me that, I just wasn't sure if it was Deacon that it was about. I always thought it was odd that there was a black Republican that was not either ex-military, wealthy, or straight up crazy.
    I'm trying to remember the name of that freshman from Florida that is, in fact, all three so I can google up an ironic picture.

    But for some reason its escaping me.

    Alan West. He's like Clarence Thomas, except from the military and ten times the crazy.
    Ah, yes.

    cimg1437.jpg

    We're reading Rifts. You should too. You know you want to. On Hiatus!

    Any gamers in the Danville, PA area? PM me if you're interested in some tabletop gaming.
  • wwtMaskwwtMask Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    wwtMask wrote: »
    Well, I very clearly remember a bunch of Obama stump speeches wrt Gitmo about how the right thing isn't always easy, and the rule of law should always be followed.

    I also remember McCain taking a pragmatic approach and getting skewered for it.

    So, while reading the Constitution is kind of a stunt and probably deserving of a few snarky responses, I'm not about to let a comment go by that implicates the left has the moral high ground when it comes to consitutional issues.

    Because you don't have it.

    Sure we do, mainly because the GOP has been occupying the gutter for so long and steadily making it deeper.

    "Less Unconstitutional" isn't as catchy as "Hope" but maybe you could bring the font size down and squeeze it in there under that picture.

    When your bad behavior and ridiculous posturing has shifted the debate so much that "less unconstitutional" is the high ground, you can take your righteous indignation and stick into a bodily orifice of your choosing.

    When he dies, I hope they write "Worst Affirmative Action Hire, EVER" on his grave. His corpse should be trolled.
    Twitter - @liberaltruths | Google+ - http://gplus.to/wwtMask | Occupy Tallahassee
  • wwtMaskwwtMask Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    OptimusZed wrote: »
    wwtMask wrote: »
    OptimusZed wrote: »
    wwtMask wrote: »
    Thanatos wrote: »
    wwtMask wrote: »
    Deacon's been beating the "Look, Obama isn't the messiah!" horse for a while now. It's pretty much his only thing. Oh, and being a black Republican, though I may be getting him confused with someone else that no longer posts here.
    He was outed awhile ago as a white guy.

    Yeah, someone PMed me that, I just wasn't sure if it was Deacon that it was about. I always thought it was odd that there was a black Republican that was not either ex-military, wealthy, or straight up crazy.
    I'm trying to remember the name of that freshman from Florida that is, in fact, all three so I can google up an ironic picture.

    But for some reason its escaping me.

    Alan West. He's like Clarence Thomas, except from the military and ten times the crazy.
    Ah, yes.

    cimg1437.jpg

    The Congressional Black Caucus invited him and another black Republican to join them. Strom Thurmond is more appropriate than those guys to be in that Caucus.

    When he dies, I hope they write "Worst Affirmative Action Hire, EVER" on his grave. His corpse should be trolled.
    Twitter - @liberaltruths | Google+ - http://gplus.to/wwtMask | Occupy Tallahassee
  • DeaconBluesDeaconBlues __BANNED USERS
    edited January 2011
    wwtMask wrote: »
    When your bad behavior and ridiculous posturing has shifted the debate so much that "less unconstitutional" is the high ground, you can take your righteous indignation and stick into a bodily orifice of your choosing.

    That's exactly what I'm saying!

    Feel free to make fun of this as a publicity stunt, I certainly won't defend it. But you don't get to ride on the high horse anymore.

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • wwtMaskwwtMask Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    wwtMask wrote: »
    When your bad behavior and ridiculous posturing has shifted the debate so much that "less unconstitutional" is the high ground, you can take your righteous indignation and stick into a bodily orifice of your choosing.

    That's exactly what I'm saying!

    Feel free to make fun of this as a publicity stunt, I certainly won't defend it. But you don't get to ride on the high horse anymore.

    Yes we do, because we're better than you guys when it comes to following the Constitution. Riding a high horse is not synonymous with being perfect all the time, nor does the fact that our side isn't 100% perfect mean that we can't hold you guys up as examples of bad defenders of the constitution. Because your side is demonstrably shitty at upholding the things outlined in the document that you act like is a religious text.

    When he dies, I hope they write "Worst Affirmative Action Hire, EVER" on his grave. His corpse should be trolled.
    Twitter - @liberaltruths | Google+ - http://gplus.to/wwtMask | Occupy Tallahassee
  • DeaconBluesDeaconBlues __BANNED USERS
    edited January 2011
    Thanatos wrote: »
    I don't really think "I'm totally not a racist, I just like to wear internet blackface" is that long of a story.

    I don't really think that's accurate, warranted, or salient Thanatos.

    As a (former?) mod, it seems strange that you'd just pop into the thread and contribute nothing other than poking at me, but whateves.

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • The Muffin ManThe Muffin Man Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    [Right, Bush never held anyone that he couldn't put on trial.
    I mean look at all the terror trials we got.
    We were having terror trials left and right with Bush!

    Jesus, Deacon at least TRY not to be a fucking parody of the Right.

    Well, I very clearly remember a bunch of Obama stump speeches wrt Gitmo about how the right thing isn't always easy, and the rule of law should always be followed.

    I also remember McCain taking a pragmatic approach and getting skewered for it.

    So, while reading the Constitution is kind of a stunt and probably deserving of a few snarky responses, I'm not about to let a comment go by that implicates the left has the moral high ground when it comes to consitutional issues.

    Because you don't have it.

    I never implied we did. YOU made the point that Obama was holding a bunch of guys we couldn't put on trial but had no real cases on. When, in fact, this was the defining factor of Bush's presidency.

    But you edited out the posts above mine for a reason, I imagine.

    But go ahead and call me when the Left pulls a stunt that is only to waste time and parade around that they pretend to give two shits what the constitution says about a weak before they crap all over it in a show of cognitive dissonance.

    Especially when they get to the parts about equality.
    Or how they insist we're a Christian nation and get to the part about "no National Religion" being established.


    I don't really think that's accurate, warranted, or salient Thanatos.

    As a (former?) mod, it seems strange that you'd just pop into the thread and contribute nothing other than poking at me, but whateves.
    Jokepost: Well now you know why it was preceded with "former".
    Seriouspost: A position of power does not make him infallible OR more mature than anyone else. Sorry if this sounds a bit harsh to Than, but there are a lot of mods/admins/whatever who are still gigantic assholes. For a neutral non-PA example, Amirox at Neo-GAF is a mod/admin and pretty much an awful human being.

    And you really should not talk about popping in to make snide remarks and contributing nothing. Shit, as much crap as I give Modern Man at least he has the balls to make an argument before he (and, in all fairness, almost everybody) devolves into snide one-liners that don't go anywhere.
    Feel free to make fun of this as a publicity stunt, I certainly won't defend it. But you don't get to ride on the high horse anymore.
    Then why are you in the thread about this publicity stunt if not to defend or discuss it?

    And no we totally do get to ride the high horse until the Dems pull a stunt this hilariously stupid.

    shamanhealingwave.jpgabilitypaladinshieldofv.png
  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    Thanatos wrote: »
    I don't really think "I'm totally not a racist, I just like to wear internet blackface" is that long of a story.

    I don't really think that's accurate, warranted, or salient Thanatos.

    As a (former?) mod, it seems strange that you'd just pop into the thread and contribute nothing other than poking at me, but whateves.
    Given that for years you put on the modern version of a minstrel show, I couldn't possibly care less what you think. i just wanted it made clear that you aren't a person, you're a caricature, and that nothing you say should ever be taken as anything remotely resembling the truth.

  • DeaconBluesDeaconBlues __BANNED USERS
    edited January 2011
    I never implied we did. YOU made the point that Obama was holding a bunch of guys we couldn't put on trial but had no real cases on.

    The post from page 1 that I was responding to was full of smarmy partisan honkey-tonk.
    But you edited out the posts above mine for a reason, I imagine.

    I always edit because I hate multi thread trees!
    But go ahead and call me when the Left pulls a stunt that is only to waste time and parade around that they pretend to give two shits what the constitution says

    Can I go back in time and call you when Obama made his big "HEY GUYS WE CLOSED GITMO WOOO" press conference?

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • wazillawazilla Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    Can we go back in time to when no republican Governor/Senator would allow Gitmo detainees to be transfered to their state?

  • Toxin01Toxin01 Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    Sure are a lot of self righteous geese in this thread.

    Anyhow, I don't know if anyone actually is buying that them reading the constitution is any more than a publicity stunt. At least, I hope not.

    Aiden Baail: Level 1 Swordmage: 19 AC 14 Fort 15 Ref 13 Will (Curse Of The Black Pearls)
    GM: Rusty Chains (DH Ongoing)
  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    Toxin01 wrote: »
    Sure are a lot of self righteous geese in this thread.

    Anyhow, I don't know if anyone actually is buying that them reading the constitution is any more than a publicity stunt. At least, I hope not.
    I'm sure the right-wing wurlitzer is hailing it as the beginning of a new era, that only incidentally happens to use exactly the same language as the last several Republican "new eras."

  • wwtMaskwwtMask Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    Can I go back in time and call you when Obama made his big "HEY GUYS WE CLOSED GITMO WOOO" press conference?

    Yeah, assuming you can actually find when he said that. Go ahead and google for it, we'll wait.

    What's that, he didn't actually say that? Huge surprise, you're wrong again.

    When he dies, I hope they write "Worst Affirmative Action Hire, EVER" on his grave. His corpse should be trolled.
    Twitter - @liberaltruths | Google+ - http://gplus.to/wwtMask | Occupy Tallahassee
  • OptimusZedOptimusZed Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Toxin01 wrote: »
    Sure are a lot of self righteous geese in this thread.

    Anyhow, I don't know if anyone actually is buying that them reading the constitution is any more than a publicity stunt. At least, I hope not.
    I'm sure the right-wing wurlitzer is hailing it as the beginning of a new era, that only incidentally happens to use exactly the same language as the last several Republican "new eras."
    The really ironic thing about each of those "new eras" is that the were hailed by and for the same group of people.

    The GOP voting block hasn't substantially changed since the late 1970s.

    We're reading Rifts. You should too. You know you want to. On Hiatus!

    Any gamers in the Danville, PA area? PM me if you're interested in some tabletop gaming.
  • Goose!Goose! Yeah I wrote that Its called I Wanna Rock Your Body (till the break of dawn)Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Toxin01 wrote: »
    Sure are a lot of self righteous geese in this thread.

    Anyhow, I don't know if anyone actually is buying that them reading the constitution is any more than a publicity stunt. At least, I hope not.
    I'm sure the right-wing wurlitzer is hailing it as the beginning of a new era, that only incidentally happens to use exactly the same language as the last several Republican "new eras."

    I read that its something that has never been done in the House before, so there's that.

    Maybe they'll establish a precedent where every new house starts with a public reading of the Constitution.

  • KalTorakKalTorak Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    Goose! wrote: »
    Maybe they'll establish a precedent where every new house starts with a public reading of the Constitution.

    Better yet, let's bring back this old tradition:
    Spoiler:

  • GaddezGaddez Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    I like how Deacon tried desperatley to derail this thread.

    Honestly though, I'm in the same boat as most of you, in that republicans are totally unfit to act as "defenders of the constitution" based on there actions throughout the new millenium.

    Spoiler:
  • BurtletoyBurtletoy Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    Gaddez wrote: »
    I like how Deacon tried desperatley to derail this thread.

    Honestly though, I'm in the same boat as most of you, in that republicans are totally unfit to act as "defenders of the constitution" based on there actions throughout the new millenium.

    Well, how can you expect them to defend it until they read it?

    Johnny on the spot after this, though.

  • KalTorakKalTorak Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    Burtletoy wrote: »
    Gaddez wrote: »
    I like how Deacon tried desperatley to derail this thread.

    Honestly though, I'm in the same boat as most of you, in that republicans are totally unfit to act as "defenders of the constitution" based on there actions throughout the new millenium.

    Well, how can you expect them to defend it until they read it?

    Johnny on the spot after this, though.

    I expect a fit of coughing to overcome the reader during amendments 14-16.

  • nexuscrawlernexuscrawler Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    Burtletoy wrote: »
    Gaddez wrote: »
    I like how Deacon tried desperatley to derail this thread.

    Honestly though, I'm in the same boat as most of you, in that republicans are totally unfit to act as "defenders of the constitution" based on there actions throughout the new millenium.

    Well, how can you expect them to defend it until they read it?

    Johnny on the spot after this, though.

    course these are the people who claimed they couldn't read a 500 page bill in 6 months

  • kildykildy Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    Goose! wrote: »
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Toxin01 wrote: »
    Sure are a lot of self righteous geese in this thread.

    Anyhow, I don't know if anyone actually is buying that them reading the constitution is any more than a publicity stunt. At least, I hope not.
    I'm sure the right-wing wurlitzer is hailing it as the beginning of a new era, that only incidentally happens to use exactly the same language as the last several Republican "new eras."

    I read that its something that has never been done in the House before, so there's that.

    Maybe they'll establish a precedent where every new house starts with a public reading of the Constitution.

    I'm not sure why it needs to be read aloud to start a session. It's pointless and only serves to turn it even further into a religious style doctrine. We don't start every business year with the public reading aloud of our company documents.

    That said, I'm terribly amused that they're just skipping all the parts we've decided were Wrong over the years. Can't we just read them anyways and acknowledge that over the decades we've decided the founding fathers got a few things wrong?

  • GoslingGosling Looking Up Soccer In Mongolia Right Now, Probably Watertown, WIRegistered User regular
    edited January 2011
    I see a reading of the Constitution that strips out all the uncomfortable stuff they don't want to get caught reading.

    I see a vote to disenfranchise people for no compelling reason that in effect does nothing but royally piss people off. (Please note, these places still get to elect delegates to the Republican National Convention and help pick the party nominee.)

    Of these two actions, I know which one I give more weight to.

    EDIT: That is not going to be a precedent. Most Houses with parties that have just taken power would like to spend this time rattling off quick, easy votes on nice-sounding legislation. When Pelosi took power, she was using this time to get off a vote on raising the minimum wage. All the GOP's doing here is wasting any honeymoon period they may have and making easy legislative fights that much harder.

    And here's the other thing. Most Houses with parties that have just taken power would like to spend this time rattling off quick, easy votes on nice-sounding legislation. When Pelosi took power, she was using this time to get off a vote on raising the minimum wage. All the GOP's doing here is wasting any honeymoon period they may have and making easy legislative fights that much harder.

    And the choice of a first legislative act? Yikes. Your first legislative act is going to get headlines no matter what it is, so you need to pick something that's going to look good splashed across the front page. Minimum wage raised looks good. Lilly Ledbetter looks good. 'NEW CONGRESS DISENFRANCHISES TERRITORIES' does not.

    I have a blog. Read it. Blog-reading makes you pretty and popular.
  • Dignified PauperDignified Pauper Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    This is absolutely ridiculous. These people were elected to legislate, not read to their colleagues.

    PSN: DignifiedPauper
    3DSFF: 5026-4429-6577
  • KalTorakKalTorak Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    This is absolutely ridiculous. These people were elected to legislate, not read to their colleagues.

    Actually, the federal government not doing anything to exercise its power and just sitting around tugging one out probably suits their constituents right down to the ground.

  • Gnome-InterruptusGnome-Interruptus Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    OptimusZed wrote: »
    wwtMask wrote: »
    I think there will be a lot of mumbling around the Commerce clause.
    "...provide for the general welfare.... WTF? GENERAL welfare? This thing must have been written by commies."

    General Welfare is the military funding for contractors that have retired Flag officers / generals hired as consultants. :P

    steam_sig.png
    MWO: Adamski
    Brave Frontier: Adamski (481 077 56)
    Puzzles & Dragons: Adamski@pa (313 842 296)
  • SammyFSammyF Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    I'm waiting for the part afterwards where they get to enjoy their handful of non-buttered popcorn on a paper napkin before settling down for nap time on their carpet squares.

  • wwtMaskwwtMask Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    SammyF wrote: »
    I'm waiting for the part afterwards where they get to enjoy their handful of non-buttered popcorn on a paper napkin before settling down for nap time on their carpet squares.

    Sir, are you implying that these Republicans are acting like toddlers? Because that's awfully unkind to toddlers.

    When he dies, I hope they write "Worst Affirmative Action Hire, EVER" on his grave. His corpse should be trolled.
    Twitter - @liberaltruths | Google+ - http://gplus.to/wwtMask | Occupy Tallahassee
  • SammyFSammyF Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    wwtMask wrote: »
    SammyF wrote: »
    I'm waiting for the part afterwards where they get to enjoy their handful of non-buttered popcorn on a paper napkin before settling down for nap time on their carpet squares.

    Sir, are you implying that these Republicans are acting like toddlers? Because that's awfully unkind to toddlers.

    Oh no no no, you misunderstand entirely; I was implying that John Boehner is acting like a kindergarten teacher in the middle of story time.

    It's an entirely different thing, altogether.

  • OptimusZedOptimusZed Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    wwtMask wrote: »
    SammyF wrote: »
    I'm waiting for the part afterwards where they get to enjoy their handful of non-buttered popcorn on a paper napkin before settling down for nap time on their carpet squares.

    Sir, are you implying that these Republicans are acting like toddlers? Because that's awfully unkind to toddlers.
    Seriously.

    Toddlers don't have mistresses.

    We're reading Rifts. You should too. You know you want to. On Hiatus!

    Any gamers in the Danville, PA area? PM me if you're interested in some tabletop gaming.
  • Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    Pretty sure Deacon just places notches in his belt when he gets one of you guys to say something infractable.

    sig.jpg
  • OptimusZedOptimusZed Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    SammyF wrote: »
    wwtMask wrote: »
    SammyF wrote: »
    I'm waiting for the part afterwards where they get to enjoy their handful of non-buttered popcorn on a paper napkin before settling down for nap time on their carpet squares.

    Sir, are you implying that these Republicans are acting like toddlers? Because that's awfully unkind to toddlers.

    Oh no no no, you misunderstand entirely; I was implying that John Boehner is acting like a kindergarten teacher in the middle of story time.

    It's an entirely different thing, altogether.
    That explains the near-constant weeping.

    We're reading Rifts. You should too. You know you want to. On Hiatus!

    Any gamers in the Danville, PA area? PM me if you're interested in some tabletop gaming.
  • kildykildy Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    KalTorak wrote: »
    This is absolutely ridiculous. These people were elected to legislate, not read to their colleagues.

    Actually, the federal government not doing anything to exercise its power and just sitting around tugging one out probably suits their constituents right down to the ground.

    "elect us to show you that government can't do anything right" always amuses me.

    I wonder how I'd react to an interview candidate showing up and telling me if I hire him, he'll make it so none of my systems work.

  • wwtMaskwwtMask Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    "I believe that the government sucks at everything and can't do anything right, and if you elect me I will work my hardest to make sure of it!"

    When he dies, I hope they write "Worst Affirmative Action Hire, EVER" on his grave. His corpse should be trolled.
    Twitter - @liberaltruths | Google+ - http://gplus.to/wwtMask | Occupy Tallahassee
This discussion has been closed.