jerseyhoya wrote:Paul: I Support the Civil Rights Act

As far as damage control goes, this is pretty good. Still a dumb hornet's nest to kick, and it will continue to hurt down the line.

traderdave wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:Paul: I Support the Civil Rights Act

As far as damage control goes, this is pretty good. Still a dumb hornet's nest to kick, and it will continue to hurt down the line.

Nice work by Paul's staff; he needs to give somebody a raise. If Paul had said something like that to begin with rather than try to get cute with the private vs. public thing (which appears to be his really stupid way of trying to say that he thinks gov't is too much up in our grill) he wouldn't have had to spend the last two days putting out a 10-alarm fire and the next few months putting out hot spots.

drsmooth wrote:

Rococo4 wrote:i meant we dont need mcmahon, someone who has no business being in the senate, like franken

thanks, that clarifies it. So you ARE in Ohio, but feel the US Senate doesn't need either McMahon or Franken. I sure don't think CT really will be effectively represented by McMahon.

Help me with something. From your posts I've assumed you skew conservative. Isn't it a conservative tenet that states' prerogatives should be honored? If so, how can you presume to say that any particular person "has no business" being in the Senate? Isn't that entirely up to any given state's voters, however crazy they happen to be? Isn't it hypocrisy to suggest otherwise publicly, since it would theoretically be none of your $#@! business, as long as the candidate meets the constitutional thresholds for eligibility (at least 30 years old, a citizen of the United States for at least nine years, and be a (legal) inhabitant of the state they represent; I had to look it up)?

You're not obliged to reply of course but that just kind of confused me.

Rococo4 wrote:

drsmooth wrote:

Rococo4 wrote:i meant we dont need mcmahon, someone who has no business being in the senate, like franken

thanks, that clarifies it. So you ARE in Ohio, but feel the US Senate doesn't need either McMahon or Franken. I sure don't think CT really will be effectively represented by McMahon.

Help me with something. From your posts I've assumed you skew conservative. Isn't it a conservative tenet that states' prerogatives should be honored? If so, how can you presume to say that any particular person "has no business" being in the Senate? Isn't that entirely up to any given state's voters, however crazy they happen to be? Isn't it hypocrisy to suggest otherwise publicly, since it would theoretically be none of your $#@! business, as long as the candidate meets the constitutional thresholds for eligibility (at least 30 years old, a citizen of the United States for at least nine years, and be a (legal) inhabitant of the state they represent; I had to look it up)?

You're not obliged to reply of course but that just kind of confused me.

yes obviously scum like al franken can legally be in the senate. he meets the requirements. So do I for that matter. That doesnt mean I should be.

We only have 100 Senators. They do important business. We dont need Linda McMahon there. Its embarassing. But of course a state can elect whomever they want if they meet the requirement.

TenuredVulture wrote:What specifically makes Franken scum?

drsmooth wrote:

TenuredVulture wrote:What specifically makes Franken scum?

{sigh} whatever Rush says makes him scum

we've been over this & over this

jerseyhoya wrote:Paul: I Support the Civil Rights Act

As far as damage control goes, this is pretty good. Still a dumb hornet's nest to kick, and it will continue to hurt down the line.

pacino wrote:what makes Franken scum?

pacino wrote:well, when he wasn't not answering her questions and giving a history lesson
he likes it in regards to an organization receiving public monies and that's it

Rococo4 wrote:

pacino wrote:what makes Franken scum?

he's a vile piece of garbage. he's unprofessional. he exploited the death of a soilder in ad - that wasnt accurate. Franken was involved in the Air America scandal that ripped off the Boys and Girls club, though he "didnt know." i dont think he truly won the election. Its a joke that he was elected.

Now there are a lot of lowlifes in the Senate. But he is the worst. The guy's despicable. its fine if your a democrat and your happy he's in there. But the guy is a vulgar miserable human.

Like I said only 100 people can be in the Senate, 2 per state. There's no place for McMahons, Frankens, etc.

jerseyhoya wrote:

pacino wrote:well, when he wasn't not answering her questions and giving a history lesson
he likes it in regards to an organization receiving public monies and that's it

traderdave and I were talking about it like three posts above the one you quoted I was being sarcastic brah

Christie kills millionaires' tax bill
TRENTON - Gov. Chris Christie blew out of his inner office with a pen in his hand to meet the forward advance of state Senate President Steve Sweeney (D-West Deptford) and an onrush of Statehouse reporters.

Sweeney handed over the millionaires' tax bill that moments earlier passed by a 23-17 party line vote in the senate.

Christie took the document from Press Secretary Michael Drewniak, who had received it from Sweeney.

Then Christie, seated, vetoed the bill.

Sweeney convened a brief, impromtu press conference in the governor's outer office that broke up when Drewniak yelled that the governor would in fact take questions and Christie again appeared.

"More and more people have left the state and continue to leave the state because of the tax situation," announced Christie.

Someone in the press corp threw up to the governor a quote from earlier in the day attributed to Assembly Majority Leader Joe Cryan (D-Union Twp.), who evidently told reporters that tomorrow's headline should be, "Christie to seniors: Drop Dead."

"I long ago stopped caring about what Joe Cryan said about anything," said Christie.

Rococo4 wrote:Now there are a lot of lowlifes in the Senate. But he is the worst.

drsmooth wrote:

Rococo4 wrote:Now there are a lot of lowlifes in the Senate. But he is the worst.

so you're seeing daylight between him and,say, John Ensign?