U.S. Congress Part 116

[DogofWar1]

32 minutes ago, StillUnknown said:

 

if Gillespie wins after those bull**** ads, i fully expect to see 95% of republicans running Corey Stewart type ads with Isis coming out of the bushes to attack blonde, blue-eyed white women

 

Northam has the personality of wood, but where's the damn line?

It'll be especially silly since per Trump he single handedly defeated ISIS.

 

 

But in all seriousness, this would be one of the major issues with an Ed win.  The other major problem, of course, is that Ed is basically a focus group Republican, and will basically retread policies and legislation that have failed elsewhere time and again.  He's probably not Brownback 2.0, but he'll be too close for comfort.

 

And naturally, NoVa will foot the bill one way or another for the mistakes.

[Cooked Crack]

Quote

The 79-year-old Cochran appeared frail and at times disoriented during a brief hallway interview on Wednesday. He was unable to answer whether he would remain chairman of the Appropriations Committee, and at one point, needed a staffer to remind him where the Senate chamber is located.

Quote

Cochran had to be guided around a security checkpoint inside the Capitol by staffers. He began to walk into a first-floor room — the Senate chamber is on the second floor — and was retrieved by an aide. He was then taken up to the Senate.

 

[88Comrade2000]

7 minutes ago, Cooked Crack said:

 

You really need an age limit for politicians. The retirement age should apply to political office also.

[twa]

Just now, Rdskns2000 said:

You really need an age limit for politicians. The retirement age should apply to political office also.

 

And term limits and a competency test.

[visionary]

 

[visionary]

 

[visionary]

 

[visionary]

 

[nonniey]

On 10/18/2017 at 4:18 PM, Rdskns2000 said:

You really need an age limit for politicians. The retirement age should apply to political office also.

I don't know about that - Two examples of highly effective leaders over 65 -  Churchill and Reagan were older than 65 when they assumed the top office for their respective countries. 

[Cooked Crack]

8 minutes ago, nonniey said:

I don't know about that - Two examples of highly effective leaders over 65 -  Churchill and Reagan were older than 65 when they assumed the top office for their respective countries. 

The guy who might have had Alzheimer's while in office?

[nonniey]

3 minutes ago, Cooked Crack said:

The guy who might have had Alzheimer's while in office?

And Churchill had a heart attack. I said examples of highly effective leaders I know many on the left like to throw that out there but weak sauce as he was in fact highly effective.

[Cooked Crack]

13 minutes ago, nonniey said:

And Churchill had a heart attack. I said examples of highly effective leaders I know many on the left like to throw that out there but weak sauce as he was in fact highly effective.

A heart attack isn't the same as loss of mental function. You can still be effective by your definition if you have good people around you. I don't think advanced age is a deal breaker but a competency test should be needed when you start getting up there.

[visionary]

 

 

 

 

[DogofWar1]

10 hours ago, visionary said:

I mean, literally nothing matters in Alabama when it comes to politics so I don't think it proves anything.

 

Roy Moore was REMOVED from the 'Bama Supreme Court and then the people of 'Bama re-elected him to the SAME DANG POST.

Edited October 21, 2017 by DogofWar1

[twa]

19 hours ago, DogofWar1 said:

I mean, literally nothing matters in Alabama when it comes to politics so I don't think it proves anything.

 

Roy Moore was REMOVED from the 'Bama Supreme Court and then the people of 'Bama re-elected him to the SAME DANG POST.

 

But he was not removed by the voters, so something obviously matters to the people.

[Larry]

5 hours ago, twa said:

 

But he was not removed by the voters, so something obviously matters to the people.

 

. . . it just isn't the constitution or the rule of law.  

[twa]

Just now, Larry said:

 

. . . it just isn't the constitution or the rule of law.  

 

they followed the law and the constitution or he could not have been re-elected.

 

Why do ya'll hate Democracy when you lose? 

[Larry]

12 minutes ago, twa said:

 

they followed the law and the constitution or he could not have been re-elected.

 

The "Judge" just didn't follow the constitution or the law.  

 

The topic was whether the voters thought that was important.  

 

But nice attempt at distortion.  

 

And now, those "value voters" have found a place they can give him power, where he is unlikely to be kicked out for ignoring the constitution or the rule of law,  

 

A place where, I'm pretty sure, he will once again be required to take an Oath of Office in which he will swear to protect and defend the constitution.  And he will proudly, gloatingly, put his hand on a bible (which he also falsely claims to revere), raise his hand, and openly lie his *** off.  

 

And every person in the audience will know that he's lying.  And his supporters, including you, will rousingly cheer this moment.  Because who cares if he's a bald-faced liar and proudly anti-American, he's on my team.  

 

And next to team loyalty, what's the Bible, the constitution, and the country?  

 

[twa]

So you are saying he is like Lincoln?

[Larry]

1 hour ago, twa said:

So you are saying he is like Lincoln?

 

So are you saying that you don't disagree with a single thing I said, but you can make things up that I didn't say?  

 

[twa]

33 minutes ago, Larry said:

 

So are you saying that you don't disagree with a single thing I said, but you can make things up that I didn't say?  

 

 

Why not, you do 

Lincoln did what he thought was best under the law, despite questions of legality.

 

 

I do disagree that the topic was if the voters found that matter important, the post I replied to said nothing matters....obviously something does (just not what the poster wishes)

 

On 10/21/2017 at 10:41 AM, DogofWar1 said:

I mean, literally nothing matters in Alabama when it comes to politics so I don't think it proves anything.

 

 

[DogofWar1]

Hey hey hey, I was making a joke there, don't drag me back into this.

 

The point is simple.  'Bamans love them some ridiculous Roy Moore, despite the billion and a half absurd things he's done.  None of that has mattered to the GOP voters and indeed to the majority of the voters generally.  He's on team GOP, therefore he wins.

 

I hope the people of Alabama prove me wrong, but I'm not super optimistic.

[twa]

 

the guy he beat in the primary was a GOP guy....ya'll aren't learning.

 

which is fine 

[DogofWar1]

20 minutes ago, twa said:

 

the guy he beat in the primary was a GOP guy....ya'll aren't learning.

 

which is fine 

They love them some Roy Moore though.  That other guy isn't Roy Moore.  That other guy isn't the guy who they sent to the Bama Supreme Court twice, the second time after he'd been removed for misconduct.

 

It's not that we're not learning, we know plenty.  The Alabama GOP is as backwards as any group of people anywhere, and the fact that they have the right to vote at all is frankly a defect of our system.

 

Sure, it's a "feature" too, but it's absolutely a defect that people who would elect Roy Moore to public office now a THIRD time get to vote in actual, consequential elections.

[twa]

Told ya ya'll hate democracy....when you lose.