American Politics 18

[DanteGabriel]

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/10...n.php?ref=fpblg

On the floor of Congress, a Republican Representative from Texas rambles on about... well... you watch.

As a commenter on TPM said:

"You know, after what Dan Savage did to Rick Santorum, if my name was as distinctive as 'Gohmert,' I'd probably keep my mouth shut about this kind of thing."

[Lord O' Bones]

What district is this guy from? They should be humiliated.

Somewhere in Texas, so chances are, no.

[Commodore]

How do people feel about increasing the size of the House of Representatives?

A Congress of, say, 5,000 citizen-legislators would change that overnight. Would it cost more money? Yes. But today’s huge staffs could be cut, and perks and pork might even be curtailed by using the old chewing gum rule: If there’s not enough for everyone, nobody can have any.

Term-limit activists have the right idea — getting new blood in Washington — but their remedy is anti-democratic. The trick is to swamp Congress with new blood and new ideas. Want more minorities in Congress? Done. Want more libertarians? More socialists? More blue-collar workers? Done, done, done.

In free-speech debates, it’s often said that the cure for bad speech is more speech. Well, the cure for a calcified Congress just might be more members; the remedy for an undemocratic system, more democracy.

When you look at the congressional corruption scandals of the last 20 years, it’s hard not to see them as stemming from a system that has, in fact, led to the “permanent elevation of the few on the depression of the many.â€

This isn't a new idea, I would love it if the 30,000 people per representative ratio were employed, that would mean about 10,000 representatives. Sounds like alot. but it would allow for alot more viewpoints and alot less party line voting. Plus you wouldn't need a ton of money to run for office.

It would never happen of course, politicians aren't going to vote to dillute their power.

[Peter Irving]

Woah that guy is a fucking idiot. He's in a race with Bachman for most insane member of the House.

[Deluge]

How do people feel about increasing the size of the House of Representatives?

This isn't a new idea, I would love it if the 30,000 people per representative ratio were employed, that would mean about 10,000 representatives. Sounds like alot. but it would allow for alot more viewpoints and alot less party line voting. Plus you wouldn't need a ton of money to run for office.

It would never happen of course, politicians aren't going to vote to dillute their power.

You would have to increase it to a pretty big number for me to want to go along with it. Otherwise, you'd get even more idiots trying to draw national attention to themselves, in order to overcome the relative obscurity of being a member of the House. There's got to be some sort of number, where after that point people start to think "well, shit, I might as well do my fucking job."

[SpectralFremen]

LOL how does someone like that get elected?

Edit:

Did he try and compare Gay rights to Hitler coming into power?! He might be an idiot but hes bloody creative! :lol:

[Lord O' Bones]

LOL how does someone like that get elected?

*clears throat*

Somewhere in Texas

Edit: Interestingly, Texas' 1st District was traditionally Democratic until some very recent redistricting resulting in our hero's election.

[El-ahrairah]

How do people feel about increasing the size of the House of Representatives?

This isn't a new idea, I would love it if the 30,000 people per representative ratio were employed, that would mean about 10,000 representatives. Sounds like alot. but it would allow for alot more viewpoints and alot less party line voting. Plus you wouldn't need a ton of money to run for office.

It would never happen of course, politicians aren't going to vote to dillute their power.

This is what I want (exact numbers subject to change): A House of 1,000 members in three classes. 500 represent single-member districts like they do now. 400 are elected by proportional representation - any party gets one member per 1/4 per cent of the nationwide vote. These classes serve for two years as the House does now, and their members cannot be reelected. The third class is 100 people chosen by random lot - just as in a jury. The third class reforms every year, and anyone are eligible save those having previously served in Congress.

[Watcher]

I'd like to see their term increased from 2 years to 3 or 4, to give them more time to craft good bills and be able to study the effects of them.

[CloudFlare]

I'd like to see their term increased from 2 years to 3 or 4, to give them more time to craft good bills and be able to study the effects of them.

Lol. You're so naive. The "effects" are the benefits for the corporate paymasters. And the bills are written by lobbyists.

[Shryke]

Lol. You're so naive. The "effects" are the benefits for the corporate paymasters. And the bills are written by lobbyists.

Someone actually said this EXPLICITLY awhile back when they came right out and complained that bills were passing too fast for lobbyists to properly figure out which way he should vote.

Also, I believe California had term limits on their house or whatever and it ends up being a fucking TERRIBLE idea.

[CloudFlare]

Also, I believe California had term limits on their house or whatever and it ends up being a fucking TERRIBLE idea.

The upside of CA term limits is that no one knows how to work the mic system, giving us plenty of entertainment.

[WhiteHaven]

What has Hitler to do with sex with animals? oO

[Jon AS]

Oh, come now. You know he loved his German Shepherds.

[WhiteHaven]

Oh, come now. You know he loved his German Shepherds.

Geez, I almost forgot. Blondi was his favorite.

[Inigima]

Miss Death Panel has had a debate with representative Wiener

Wow. "Americans spend more on healthcare because they can afford it." Talk about out of touch.

Cleary Americans can't afford it, you fucking twit, because a lot of them are uninsured against their will.

[lokisnow]

Lol. You're so naive. The "effects" are the benefits for the corporate paymasters. And the bills are written by lobbyists.

well, sure the republican bills are, ;)

actually this canard annoys me more, it has some truth, but a great deal of legislation is written by the staffs and congresspeople, but everyone complicitly agreeing to not challenge this sort of BS is what allows anti-government sentiment to fester and develop. I don't think government is inherently the problem and I think a lot of great legislation has passed despite the so called 'corporate paymasters'. if corporate were the only interests involved we wouldn't have nutrition labels on food and the tobacco lobby would have never been broken, just to take two exampls from after 'government is EVIL EVIL EVIL'-Reagan rhetoric began.

It's really sort of brilliant, a phrase like corporate paymasters. Democrats hate big corporations because big corporations are all about destroying the rights of the individual in the name of maximum profit. "If we were all slaves to a business entity, most every corporation out there would think it was a net positive," sort of thing. Republicans tap into the anti corporation sentiment by tieing the corporation and government together by saying that the government only responds to the dictates of da evilz corporations. And that's just one of the many ways, Republicans get Democrats to dance to their tunes.

haven't you ever noticed how when one beats a republican in a debate on the issues their response is "well but it doesn't matter becasue the lobbyists will never allow it." and then one nods along in agreement and despite having lost the debate the republican regains control of the discussion. that shit needs to be challenged, not agreed to.

I think government is a good thing and I think there is good legislation being passed regularly, often without being written by lobbyists, just no one cares to actually find out how many are because its not sensational enough. and lazy 'government bad, lobbyist bad, corporation bad," thinking threads only exacerbate the situation--such thinking is so lazy that these folks could have their brains forcibly removed from their heads with a spoon* and they'd never notice the difference. :)

*it's dull you twit, it'll hurt more.

[Annelise]

So Dems are on the attack, saying Republicans have backwards attitudes about women:

“If Nancy Pelosi’s failed economic policies are any indicator of the effect she may have on Afghanistan, taxpayers can only hope McChrystal is able to put her in her place,†the NRCC release concluded.

“This is about [how] the Speaker of the House is taking on a highly decorated general who has outlined a strategy in Afghanistan that she once claimed to advocate,†Spain said.

Yeah.. I also remember that Pussy Galore ad they did on Pelosi.

Anyhow, more from Stabenow after last week's exchange with Kyl over covering maternity care:

Stabenow also pointed to 30 Senate Republicans who voted Tuesday against an amendment from Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) to bar funds to the Halliburton Co. if it prohibits employees from suing for rape or sexual harassment. All the senators who voted against the Franken amendment were men.

“You put it all together, and it’s extreme and it’s backwards,†Stabenow said of Republicans.

http://thehill.com/homenews/house/62157-de...ch-and-extreme-

[Elrostar]

Ah, Justice Scalia. Where would we be without your classic rantings. Apparently the cross isn't a Christian symbol after all?

...

Justice Antonin Scalia disputed the premise behind the lawsuit, telling Mr. Eliasberg that it was unfair to view the cross merely as a Christian symbol.

"The cross is the most common symbol of the resting place of the dead," he said. "What would you have them erect? Some conglomerate of a cross, a Star of David, and you know, a Muslim half moon and star?"

"I have been in Jewish cemeteries. There is never a cross on a tombstone of a Jew," Mr. Eliasberg said. "So it is the most common symbol to honor Christians."

"I don't think you can leap from that to the conclusion that the only war dead that that cross honors are the Christian war dead," Justice Scalia said. "I think that's an outrageous conclusion."

...

Really, Scalia? An outrageous conclusion?

[Galactus]

Hmmm, I'm not certain actually. The cross has kind of expanded in meaning, it's the symbol for "hospital", for instance.