As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/

Congress CXV: Absurdly long special election edition

12467100

Posts

  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    Preacher wrote: »
    tbloxham wrote: »
    Preacher wrote: »
    Roz wrote: »
    Preacher wrote: »
    tbloxham wrote: »
    kaid wrote: »
    Houn wrote: »
    Houn wrote: »
    Knight_ wrote: »
    Honestly, I would be happy if they brought back earmarks no matter what the circumstances of the process were.

    We need earmarks to have a functional government. Obviously that is a long, long, long way from where we are currently standing, but it's a good step.

    You are aware that they're only bringing it back now because they are in a position to exploit it. The moment they lose the Executive or Senate they'll scream about Dem Corruption and take it away again. This is a grifter's game.

    They're the ones who removed them.

    They're bringing them back to help bring their insane wing (Freedom Caucus) back in line.

    Yes, I know.

    Dem President? "Drain the Swamp!"
    Pub President? "Functional Government!"

    They can play this for decades and the public would be none the wiser.

    Except that's not the game. The removal of earmarks coincided with the rise of the Teapers, and I seriously doubt that was coincidence. Earmarks have always been a tool of the leadership to run herd on the rank and file - the push to remove them necessarily weakened the ability of the leadership to control subordinates, as well as making representatives less accountable to their districts.

    Yup they were the sugar to help people take their medicine and sell it to their voting base of stuff that normally tastes bad but is good for you. This way they can say hey look I got you this school or this bridge even though you may not have liked this farm bill or what have you it let your voters see the bill did something concrete that benefited them. Without it most normal people have no way to tell what if anything their reps do and you wind up with the highly polarized nonsense we have now. It was tried it seemed like a good idea at the time but clearly has proven to be a failed plan and should be reverted.

    Oh, it was known to be a bad idea at the time too, the Republicans just didn't realize that it was their own base which would be most affected by it. They thought that it would make the democrats, the party which likes government to help them, hate their representatives and vote them out. Instead, what they discovered is that (just like democrats had always said), its Republicans who live on the government dime and losing out on all their sweetheart infrastructure and military basing projects made all the heartland towns they represented ripe for even more hatred of the government.

    TLDR, it was supposed to shift democratic voters to the right. It ended up shifting Republican voters to the right. Which has been a disaster for the business interests in the US government which introduced the idea.

    And it got them the house senate and presidency so how was it bad for the right?

    Bad for certain establishment Republicans for certain, but as a tool to make government dysfunctional to weaken a President's message it worked wonders. But they now know that it can also be used against them, so they want them gone otherwise Democrats may play the same game. But it also gives their moderate members more power over the zealots.

    How can it be used against them? Like dems are still the adult party that is also big tent, so they'll side with the GOP on shit a lot more than the GOP will ever side with dems even with earmarks.

    Its heads I win tails you lose. American people are fucking stupid and our congressional actions reflect that. GOP shut down the government, our country rewarded them with the senate and then the presidency. GOD BLESS AMERICA!

    Its not about using it against them. Its about literally bribing extremist members of congress to be less extremist, and members of the opposition party to sign your bills. It creates a natural power in the center of the stage where moderate republicans get rewards for their districts by working on bills which they can persuade democrats to sign. Then your extremist becomes less appealing, because his ideological purity means you don't get a new post office, or money to fix the local high school.

    I don't think earmarks will be used in the trump admin to do anything moderate. If anything it'll be used against whatever is considered a moderate in the GOP caucus to sign on with really regressive awful things.

    The new bar for the GOP is Donald Trump, that's their baseline, you can't earmark your way to a mythical moderate gop.

    Nah, it won't be used against the moderates, it'll be used against the anti-establishment extremists by the establishment extremists.

    Look at the ACA fight as an example. Currently they can't progress with anything because the Freedom Caucus won't sign on for a bill that will also get all the Senators on board. The point of earmarks is to reign in the Freedom Caucus so the Congressional Leadership can then move on their plans without those idiots mucking up the works and keeping them from passing Paul Ryan's insane extremist agenda.

  • MillMill Registered User regular
    shryke wrote: »
    Preacher wrote: »
    tbloxham wrote: »
    Preacher wrote: »
    Roz wrote: »
    Preacher wrote: »
    tbloxham wrote: »
    kaid wrote: »
    Houn wrote: »
    Houn wrote: »
    Knight_ wrote: »
    Honestly, I would be happy if they brought back earmarks no matter what the circumstances of the process were.

    We need earmarks to have a functional government. Obviously that is a long, long, long way from where we are currently standing, but it's a good step.

    You are aware that they're only bringing it back now because they are in a position to exploit it. The moment they lose the Executive or Senate they'll scream about Dem Corruption and take it away again. This is a grifter's game.

    They're the ones who removed them.

    They're bringing them back to help bring their insane wing (Freedom Caucus) back in line.

    Yes, I know.

    Dem President? "Drain the Swamp!"
    Pub President? "Functional Government!"

    They can play this for decades and the public would be none the wiser.

    Except that's not the game. The removal of earmarks coincided with the rise of the Teapers, and I seriously doubt that was coincidence. Earmarks have always been a tool of the leadership to run herd on the rank and file - the push to remove them necessarily weakened the ability of the leadership to control subordinates, as well as making representatives less accountable to their districts.

    Yup they were the sugar to help people take their medicine and sell it to their voting base of stuff that normally tastes bad but is good for you. This way they can say hey look I got you this school or this bridge even though you may not have liked this farm bill or what have you it let your voters see the bill did something concrete that benefited them. Without it most normal people have no way to tell what if anything their reps do and you wind up with the highly polarized nonsense we have now. It was tried it seemed like a good idea at the time but clearly has proven to be a failed plan and should be reverted.

    Oh, it was known to be a bad idea at the time too, the Republicans just didn't realize that it was their own base which would be most affected by it. They thought that it would make the democrats, the party which likes government to help them, hate their representatives and vote them out. Instead, what they discovered is that (just like democrats had always said), its Republicans who live on the government dime and losing out on all their sweetheart infrastructure and military basing projects made all the heartland towns they represented ripe for even more hatred of the government.

    TLDR, it was supposed to shift democratic voters to the right. It ended up shifting Republican voters to the right. Which has been a disaster for the business interests in the US government which introduced the idea.

    And it got them the house senate and presidency so how was it bad for the right?

    Bad for certain establishment Republicans for certain, but as a tool to make government dysfunctional to weaken a President's message it worked wonders. But they now know that it can also be used against them, so they want them gone otherwise Democrats may play the same game. But it also gives their moderate members more power over the zealots.

    How can it be used against them? Like dems are still the adult party that is also big tent, so they'll side with the GOP on shit a lot more than the GOP will ever side with dems even with earmarks.

    Its heads I win tails you lose. American people are fucking stupid and our congressional actions reflect that. GOP shut down the government, our country rewarded them with the senate and then the presidency. GOD BLESS AMERICA!

    Its not about using it against them. Its about literally bribing extremist members of congress to be less extremist, and members of the opposition party to sign your bills. It creates a natural power in the center of the stage where moderate republicans get rewards for their districts by working on bills which they can persuade democrats to sign. Then your extremist becomes less appealing, because his ideological purity means you don't get a new post office, or money to fix the local high school.

    I don't think earmarks will be used in the trump admin to do anything moderate. If anything it'll be used against whatever is considered a moderate in the GOP caucus to sign on with really regressive awful things.

    The new bar for the GOP is Donald Trump, that's their baseline, you can't earmark your way to a mythical moderate gop.

    Nah, it won't be used against the moderates, it'll be used against the anti-establishment extremists by the establishment extremists.

    Look at the ACA fight as an example. Currently they can't progress with anything because the Freedom Caucus won't sign on for a bill that will also get all the Senators on board. The point of earmarks is to reign in the Freedom Caucus so the Congressional Leadership can then move on their plans without those idiots mucking up the works and keeping them from passing Paul Ryan's insane extremist agenda.

    Ironically, the insane Freedom Caucus is probably helping the GOP keep seats that they should lose, by preventing the GOP from getting some of that shit passed. Sure the democrats will filibuster what they can (granted, hitting that point might doom the GOP), but some of it will likely get through the GOP will get stuck owning it.

  • TryCatcherTryCatcher Registered User regular
    This goes in many threads, but this one seems the most relevant:

    So, not even a month and already on the "fuck it, let it all burn" state.

  • RozRoz Boss of InternetRegistered User regular
    TryCatcher wrote: »
    This goes in many threads, but this one seems the most relevant:

    So, not even a month and already on the "fuck it, let it all burn" state.

    This I love.

  • PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    TryCatcher wrote: »
    This goes in many threads, but this one seems the most relevant:

    So, not even a month and already on the "fuck it, let it all burn" state.

    Republicans opened this can of worms against Obama, and the country rewarded them for it, so turn about is fair play.

    I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.

    pleasepaypreacher.net
  • RozRoz Boss of InternetRegistered User regular
    Preacher wrote: »
    TryCatcher wrote: »
    This goes in many threads, but this one seems the most relevant:

    So, not even a month and already on the "fuck it, let it all burn" state.

    Republicans opened this can of worms against Obama, and the country rewarded them for it, so turn about is fair play.

    We have the ultimate defense "Republicans taught us the game"

  • HounHoun Registered User regular
    While I agree that we should absolutely throw their tactics back at them, I kind of fear that we're at a point where the country, and our government, is completely broken. That is not to say that we should capitulate; I just wonder what we're fighting for when we live in two separate realities that cannot be reconciled. From this point forward, each party MUST, of necessity, do everything to undermine and dismantle the other. There is no compromise, there is only whoever has the seats this time.

    This cannot persist. The bottom will fall out eventually.

  • PellaeonPellaeon Registered User regular
    I, uh, don't know that holding the country hostage works when the adults are no longer in charge.

    Like, what do you do when you threaten to shoot the hostage, and the cops shoot him first?

  • BlackDragon480BlackDragon480 Bluster Kerfuffle Master of Windy ImportRegistered User regular
    Pellaeon wrote: »
    I, uh, don't know that holding the country hostage works when the adults are no longer in charge.

    Like, what do you do when you threaten to shoot the hostage, and the cops shoot him first?

    Get trapped on a bus that can't go below 55MPH?

    No matter where you go...there you are.
    ~ Buckaroo Banzai
  • tbloxhamtbloxham Registered User regular
    Roz wrote: »
    Preacher wrote: »
    TryCatcher wrote: »
    This goes in many threads, but this one seems the most relevant:

    So, not even a month and already on the "fuck it, let it all burn" state.

    Republicans opened this can of worms against Obama, and the country rewarded them for it, so turn about is fair play.

    We have the ultimate defense "Republicans taught us the game"
    Roz wrote: »
    Preacher wrote: »
    TryCatcher wrote: »
    This goes in many threads, but this one seems the most relevant:

    So, not even a month and already on the "fuck it, let it all burn" state.

    Republicans opened this can of worms against Obama, and the country rewarded them for it, so turn about is fair play.

    We have the ultimate defense "Republicans taught us the game"

    No, we shouldn't even play with the debt ceiling. The republicans know we won't destroy the government, so pretending we will isn't worth it. It will make other issues where we can actually filibuster and follow through on it less effective.

    "That is cool" - Abraham Lincoln
  • LabelLabel Registered User regular
    If the government we'd be destroying is treasonously subservient to Russia, is that really the same thing?

  • PolaritiePolaritie Sleepy Registered User regular
    edited February 2017
    I keep wondering if uncapping the House would fix things or make it worse.

    I'm fairly sure that more districts are easier to gerrymander unfortunately, but I'm not sure how it would shake out (aside from shoving POTUS to much closer to following popular vote by un-penalizing CA and NY)

    Polaritie on
    Steam: Polaritie
    3DS: 0473-8507-2652
    Switch: SW-5185-4991-5118
    PSN: AbEntropy
  • ViskodViskod Registered User regular
    Debt Ceiling shenanigans only work when the people in charge are sane enough to realize you can't default.

  • BlackDragon480BlackDragon480 Bluster Kerfuffle Master of Windy ImportRegistered User regular
    Viskod wrote: »
    Debt Ceiling shenanigans only work when the people in charge are sane enough to realize you can't default.

    Yeah, countries don't get the benefit of Chapter 11 protections.

    No matter where you go...there you are.
    ~ Buckaroo Banzai
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    Preacher wrote: »
    TryCatcher wrote: »
    This goes in many threads, but this one seems the most relevant:

    So, not even a month and already on the "fuck it, let it all burn" state.

    Republicans opened this can of worms against Obama, and the country rewarded them for it, so turn about is fair play.

    Never make a threat you won't carry through.

  • Knight_Knight_ Dead Dead Dead Registered User regular
    moniker wrote: »
    Preacher wrote: »
    TryCatcher wrote: »
    This goes in many threads, but this one seems the most relevant:

    So, not even a month and already on the "fuck it, let it all burn" state.

    Republicans opened this can of worms against Obama, and the country rewarded them for it, so turn about is fair play.

    Never make a threat you won't carry through.

    I mean, Preacher would carry through on it, but I don't think the democrats will.

    The actual party of responsibility will probably blink at some point instead of letting the GOP end the economy. I'm still not entirely sure what I'd do.

    aeNqQM9.jpg
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    Houn wrote: »
    While I agree that we should absolutely throw their tactics back at them, I kind of fear that we're at a point where the country, and our government, is completely broken. That is not to say that we should capitulate; I just wonder what we're fighting for when we live in two separate realities that cannot be reconciled. From this point forward, each party MUST, of necessity, do everything to undermine and dismantle the other. There is no compromise, there is only whoever has the seats this time.

    This cannot persist. The bottom will fall out eventually.

    The bottom will fall out eventually if the Democrats do nothing too. That's the problem. The government is already completely broken in the sense you mean. It only takes one party acting this way for that to happen.

    The only question now is whether the Democrats act like it's not broken and lose or admit the truth and get some real gains.

  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    Polaritie wrote: »
    I keep wondering if uncapping the House would fix things or make it worse.

    I'm fairly sure that more districts are easier to gerrymander unfortunately, but I'm not sure how it would shake out (aside from shoving POTUS to much closer to following popular vote by un-penalizing CA and NY)

    More districts would be harder to gerrymander because they are smaller. They also put the Elected much closer to their constituency. I can walk to my Alderman's office and bitch, with a reasonable chance he'd be there instead of City Hall. Congressman? It's an L ride, and he won't be.

  • Phoenix-DPhoenix-D Registered User regular
    moniker wrote: »
    Polaritie wrote: »
    I keep wondering if uncapping the House would fix things or make it worse.

    I'm fairly sure that more districts are easier to gerrymander unfortunately, but I'm not sure how it would shake out (aside from shoving POTUS to much closer to following popular vote by un-penalizing CA and NY)

    More districts would be harder to gerrymander because they are smaller. They also put the Elected much closer to their constituency. I can walk to my Alderman's office and bitch, with a reasonable chance he'd be there instead of City Hall. Congressman? It's an L ride, and he won't be.

    Also it unfucks the EV to a certain degree.

  • CapekCapek Registered User regular
    edited February 2017
    cookpolitical.com/story/10258
    President Trump, as we know, is more transactional than ideological. He campaigned as the guy who could make the “best deals” – whether it’s free trade or the cost of concrete for the new border wall – without the pressure having to stay within the bounds of traditional republican orthodoxy. Forget about the “old way” of doing business, Trump was going to come to DC and rewrite the whole playbook. It was this attitude that led plenty of voters – despite their inherent wariness about Trump’s trustworthiness and his lack of experience in government – to support him. But, many of these voters are just as transactional as Trump. In fact, polling and other economic analysis suggests that these voters could easily sour on the president if their economic livelihood doesn’t meaningfully improve or Trump’s promises to “Make America Great Again” don’t live up to their expectations.

    Good read re: 2018

    Capek on
    So we beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past. - Fitzgerald
  • ArcTangentArcTangent Registered User regular
    edited February 2017
    I really can't see someone who categorically believes and declares all things liberal, Democrat, blue state, CNN, foreign, etc, as evil, fake, wrong, etc, and all things Republican, Fox, rich, corporate, or Russian as perfection is anything but ideological. He's only transactional at the most personal, base, and corrupt level.

    ArcTangent on
    ztrEPtD.gif
  • Mr KhanMr Khan Not Everyone WAHHHRegistered User regular
    It's a question of whether he gets any part of his economic agenda accomplished or not. If everything stayed just as it is, then the economy may well be great in 2018 and create problems. If not, then the GOP is in trouble.

  • SpoitSpoit *twitch twitch* Registered User regular
    Mr Khan wrote: »
    It's a question of whether he gets any part of his economic agenda accomplished or not. If everything stayed just as it is, then the economy may well be great in 2018 and create problems. If not, then the GOP is in trouble.

    See the problem is that right now people are looking at the dow, which is doing okay, but if we look at the (ugh I hate myself for saying this) "economic anxiety" underclass? Nothing in his plans will even start looking at actually improving things for them, just his millionaire buddies. Of course, that's actually predicated on them actually caring about their own well being.

    steam_sig.png
  • MayabirdMayabird Pecking at the keyboardRegistered User regular
    Democratic members of the Hispanic Caucus were expelled from a meeting with the acting ICE director by Paul Ryan's staffers. Remember that Speaker Ryan is the guy who is always whining about everyone else being uncivil.

  • HakkekageHakkekage Space Whore Academy summa cum laudeRegistered User regular
    Mayabird wrote: »
    Democratic members of the Hispanic Caucus were expelled from a meeting with the acting ICE director by Paul Ryan's staffers. Remember that Speaker Ryan is the guy who is always whining about everyone else being uncivil.

    Paul Ryan is just dutifully following the orders of the textbook racism guy

    Maybe a Hispanic reporter can arrange a meeting between the Congressional Hispanic Caucus and the ICE director

    3DS: 2165 - 6538 - 3417
    NNID: Hakkekage
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    Capek wrote: »
    cookpolitical.com/story/10258
    President Trump, as we know, is more transactional than ideological. He campaigned as the guy who could make the “best deals” – whether it’s free trade or the cost of concrete for the new border wall – without the pressure having to stay within the bounds of traditional republican orthodoxy. Forget about the “old way” of doing business, Trump was going to come to DC and rewrite the whole playbook. It was this attitude that led plenty of voters – despite their inherent wariness about Trump’s trustworthiness and his lack of experience in government – to support him. But, many of these voters are just as transactional as Trump. In fact, polling and other economic analysis suggests that these voters could easily sour on the president if their economic livelihood doesn’t meaningfully improve or Trump’s promises to “Make America Great Again” don’t live up to their expectations.

    Good read re: 2018

    That first sentence makes zero sense. Trump is both ideological and transactional.

  • TryCatcherTryCatcher Registered User regular
    edited February 2017
    Mayabird wrote: »
    Democratic members of the Hispanic Caucus were expelled from a meeting with the acting ICE director by Paul Ryan's staffers. Remember that Speaker Ryan is the guy who is always whining about everyone else being uncivil.

    Huh. Would expect that from Bannon, not Ryan. Ryan seemed to just want to be as invisible as he can while he disables the safety net.

    TryCatcher on
  • TaramoorTaramoor Storyteller Registered User regular
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/congress/chaffetz-seeks-charge-of-ex-clinton-aide-in-email-inquiry/2017/02/16/28673692-f4a7-11e6-9fb1-2d8f3fc9c0ed_story.html?utm_term=.59e8290cd8a4
    WASHINGTON — The Republican chairman of the House Oversight Committee, who has refused Democratic requests to investigate possible conflicts of interest involving President Donald Trump, is seeking criminal charges against a former State Department employee who helped set up Hillary Clinton’s private email server.

    Sigh.

  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    TryCatcher wrote: »
    Mayabird wrote: »
    Democratic members of the Hispanic Caucus were expelled from a meeting with the acting ICE director by Paul Ryan's staffers. Remember that Speaker Ryan is the guy who is always whining about everyone else being uncivil.

    Huh. Would expect that from Bannon, not Ryan. Ryan seemed to just want to be as invisible as he can while he disables the safety net.

    That's the image he likes to project, with his willing accomplices in the press, but no he too is a total asshole.

    Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    Taramoor wrote: »
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/congress/chaffetz-seeks-charge-of-ex-clinton-aide-in-email-inquiry/2017/02/16/28673692-f4a7-11e6-9fb1-2d8f3fc9c0ed_story.html?utm_term=.59e8290cd8a4
    WASHINGTON — The Republican chairman of the House Oversight Committee, who has refused Democratic requests to investigate possible conflicts of interest involving President Donald Trump, is seeking criminal charges against a former State Department employee who helped set up Hillary Clinton’s private email server.

    Sigh.

    nero-rome.jpg

  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    TryCatcher wrote: »
    Mayabird wrote: »
    Democratic members of the Hispanic Caucus were expelled from a meeting with the acting ICE director by Paul Ryan's staffers. Remember that Speaker Ryan is the guy who is always whining about everyone else being uncivil.

    Huh. Would expect that from Bannon, not Ryan. Ryan seemed to just want to be as invisible as he can while he disables the safety net.

    That's the image he likes to project, with his willing accomplices in the press, but no he too is a total asshole.

    Yeah, Paul Ryan is a hardcore ideologue, a complete dickhole and an idiot. His reputation is propped up by the DC media desperate for their to be someone opposite Obama on the Republican side during negotiations so they don't have to admit that the GOP has gone completely fucking insane at a fundamental level.

  • AstaerethAstaereth In the belly of the beastRegistered User regular
    edited February 2017
    Taramoor wrote: »
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/congress/chaffetz-seeks-charge-of-ex-clinton-aide-in-email-inquiry/2017/02/16/28673692-f4a7-11e6-9fb1-2d8f3fc9c0ed_story.html?utm_term=.59e8290cd8a4
    WASHINGTON — The Republican chairman of the House Oversight Committee, who has refused Democratic requests to investigate possible conflicts of interest involving President Donald Trump, is seeking criminal charges against a former State Department employee who helped set up Hillary Clinton’s private email server.

    Sigh.

    Watch as the media jumps at the chance to say "Hillary Clinton" and "emails" together in 9,000 stories to provide "balance" for all the negative Trump stories they've been running.

    Astaereth on
    ACsTqqK.jpg
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited February 2017
    shryke wrote: »
    TryCatcher wrote: »
    Mayabird wrote: »
    Democratic members of the Hispanic Caucus were expelled from a meeting with the acting ICE director by Paul Ryan's staffers. Remember that Speaker Ryan is the guy who is always whining about everyone else being uncivil.

    Huh. Would expect that from Bannon, not Ryan. Ryan seemed to just want to be as invisible as he can while he disables the safety net.

    That's the image he likes to project, with his willing accomplices in the press, but no he too is a total asshole.

    Yeah, Paul Ryan is a hardcore ideologue, a complete dickhole and an idiot. His reputation is propped up by the DC media desperate for their to be someone opposite Obama on the Republican side during negotiations so they don't have to admit that the GOP has gone completely fucking insane at a fundamental level.

    This is why I refuse to trust Ezra Klein still. But I hold a grudge.

    enlightenedbum on
    Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
  • Harry DresdenHarry Dresden Registered User regular
    TryCatcher wrote: »
    Mayabird wrote: »
    Democratic members of the Hispanic Caucus were expelled from a meeting with the acting ICE director by Paul Ryan's staffers. Remember that Speaker Ryan is the guy who is always whining about everyone else being uncivil.

    Huh. Would expect that from Bannon, not Ryan. Ryan seemed to just want to be as invisible as he can while he disables the safety net.

    Ryan may be W. era congress shady, and kicking out Dems for doing their jobs is right up their ally. It's important to remember standard GOP operates only slightly better than Trump.

  • BlackDragon480BlackDragon480 Bluster Kerfuffle Master of Windy ImportRegistered User regular
    moniker wrote: »
    Taramoor wrote: »
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/congress/chaffetz-seeks-charge-of-ex-clinton-aide-in-email-inquiry/2017/02/16/28673692-f4a7-11e6-9fb1-2d8f3fc9c0ed_story.html?utm_term=.59e8290cd8a4
    WASHINGTON — The Republican chairman of the House Oversight Committee, who has refused Democratic requests to investigate possible conflicts of interest involving President Donald Trump, is seeking criminal charges against a former State Department employee who helped set up Hillary Clinton’s private email server.

    Sigh.

    nero-rome.jpg

    Bad comparison. Even if Nero did fiddle/lyre, he also opened up large portions of his personal estates for the homeless and displaced, lowered the price of grain, and did a whole lot to soften the severity of the blow for the city as a whole.

    Only thing I'm seeing Chaffetz do is persecute the Christians.

    No matter where you go...there you are.
    ~ Buckaroo Banzai
  • Captain MarcusCaptain Marcus now arrives the hour of actionRegistered User regular
    JoeUser wrote: »

    oh hey it's my rep (who was voted in unopposed)

    He doesn't really know what he's doing- he's got it somehow stuck in his head that all the EPA's regulations are the equivalent of "buy this lightbulb or pay huge fines" and kill small businesses. He admits that he might be wrong and is asking his constituents to weigh in on the matter. Sent him an email today and will write him a letter tomorrow. I'm against abolishing the EPA, in case any of you had doubts.

    Oddly enough he's really into hearing from his constituents- I get multiple phone calls and emails a week (that don't ask for donations, at all!) that give an update on what he's done that day and give multiple ways to contact him. Unfortunately I was too late to join a conference call(!) with him today but the recording said he'll hold another one soon. I've never had a representative that takes his job seriously. It's weird in a nice sort of way.

    The guy before him was bugfuck insane. Like, called for "deployable mini-nukes" and abolishing the U.N. insane. Gaetz is a step up in comparison.

  • JoeUserJoeUser Forum Santa Registered User regular
    Recently many Republican Congressmen have been getting blasted in town halls.

    With a recess coming up, this wax expected to get worse as they returned to their districts.

    But what if they just didn't have any?

  • QuidQuid Definitely not a banana Registered User regular
    Cowards.

  • OptimusZedOptimusZed Registered User regular
    Quid wrote: »
    Cowards.

    We need elected officials to start using this word.

    We're reading Rifts. You should too. You know you want to. Now With Ninjas!

    They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    JoeUser wrote: »

    oh hey it's my rep (who was voted in unopposed)

    He doesn't really know what he's doing- he's got it somehow stuck in his head that all the EPA's regulations are the equivalent of "buy this lightbulb or pay huge fines" and kill small businesses. He admits that he might be wrong and is asking his constituents to weigh in on the matter. Sent him an email today and will write him a letter tomorrow. I'm against abolishing the EPA, in case any of you had doubts.

    Oddly enough he's really into hearing from his constituents- I get multiple phone calls and emails a week (that don't ask for donations, at all!) that give an update on what he's done that day and give multiple ways to contact him. Unfortunately I was too late to join a conference call(!) with him today but the recording said he'll hold another one soon. I've never had a representative that takes his job seriously. It's weird in a nice sort of way.

    The guy before him was bugfuck insane. Like, called for "deployable mini-nukes" and abolishing the U.N. insane. Gaetz is a step up in comparison.

    My old Rep in the suburbs did something similar (though she was in a competitive district, which made it more necessary) and I sat in on a few of the phone town halls. It's kinda nifty, though you get plenty of idiot neighbors like anything. (windmills are terrible and that one time I drove by them it wasn't windy). You basically get to say something, they respond with slightly altered boilerplate then move on to the next caller. Still, kinda fun in a civics are important way.

    Not sure if current Congressional does similar since we're hoping to move to a condo within the year and would be in a different district.

This discussion has been closed.