Speaking of needing to resign...

We are ruled by disgusting old people who are experiencing clear cognitive decline. Clean house. 

Term limits would be nice. 

25 minutes ago, Gannan said:

Term limits would be nice. 

it's the only way to truly drain the swamp. 

46 minutes ago, Alpha_TATEr said:

it's the only way to truly drain the swamp. 

I go back and forth on that ... I tend to think it would just empower shadow reps in the form of handlers, like the guy whispering in Feinstein's ear.. you limit reps to 6 years and senators to 12, you'll get a revolving door of people who are checking in and out for a lifetime of benefits in return for "getting with the program" and it may push stuff further from public view.

I'm not 100% convinced of what I'm saying here, just one of the nagging concerns about term limits for those seats. 

1 minute ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

lifetime of benefits

Those should be done away with too 

When will McConnell resign? Oh and by the way, if he does resign, he has to be replaced by a Republican, that's the law in Kentucky. Real American isn't it. 

 

 

2 hours ago, Kz! said:

Speaking of needing to resign...

We are ruled by disgusting old people who are experiencing clear cognitive decline. Clean house. 

Watching that is definitely a concern. Experience is great, but being able to do your job is more important.

3 hours ago, Tnt4philly said:

Or we, the citizens, could just stop voting for people who are obviously ready to retire. 

In pretty much any other industry, when trying to fill a position of supreme importance or influence, you'd never see anyone hire a candidate in their seventies or eighties. It would be widely ridiculed for a variety of reasons. And yet nobody bats an eyelash when it's for a member of congress or the F'ing presidency itself. All because the people who vote the most reliably are old as F, and for some reason they think someone even older is the best candidate for the job.

In-F'ing-sanity.

1 minute ago, we_gotta_believe said:

In pretty much any other industry, when trying to fill a position of supreme importance or influence, you'd never see anyone hire a candidate in their eighties. It would be widely ridiculed for a variety of reasons. And yet nobody bats an eyelash when it's for a member of congress or the F'ing presidency itself. All because the people who vote the most reliably are old as F, and for some reason they think someone even older is the best candidate for the job.

In-F'ing-sanity.

It's because voters are stupid and name recognition is the most powerful force in Congressional elections. 

Thomas Jefferson Johnson taught us this over 30 years ago.

2 minutes ago, vikas83 said:

It's because voters are stupid and name recognition is the most powerful force in Congressional elections. 

Thomas Jefferson Johnson taught us this over 30 years ago.

Great movie! I'm not even joking, I literally learned a lot about civics from Eddie Murphy.

Just now, we_gotta_believe said:

Great movie! I'm not even joking, I literally learned a lot about civics from Eddie Murphy.

I was wondering if anyone would get that reference. That movie cracked me up back when I saw it.

Just now, vikas83 said:

I was wondering if anyone would get that reference. That movie cracked me up back when I saw it.

Why do he rob banks? 

Because that's where the money is!

3 hours ago, mr_hunt said:

holy sheet...resign already. 

 

 

idk how true this is....but here's one of the replies to that tweet:

 

 

37 minutes ago, vikas83 said:

It's because voters are stupid and name recognition is the most powerful force in Congressional elections. 

Thomas Jefferson Johnson taught us this over 30 years ago.

Incumbents winning well over 90% of their elections is the main reason I’m for term limits. 

1 hour ago, mr_hunt said:

idk how true this is....but here's one of the replies to that tweet:

 

 

that's insane if true.

17 hours ago, Tnt4philly said:

Incumbents winning well over 90% of their elections is the main reason I’m for term limits. 

I'm all for tests. A good test right now is clearing your internet browser, if you can't compete the simple task then you can't run. 

Remember when this guy didn't even know what the internet was or how it worked?

 

6 minutes ago, Gannan said:

Remember when this guy didn't even know what the internet was or how it worked?

 

"It's not a dump truck.."

Feinstein?

You mean fiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiine-stein!

 

 

I really don't get why Dems don't force her out. It's an embarrassment, and Newsom would appoint a Democrat to replace her.

43 minutes ago, vikas83 said:

I really don't get why Dems don't force her out. It's an embarrassment, and Newsom would appoint a Democrat to replace her.

I don't know if it's true but someone posted an argument that she would lose Dems a committee seat or something. 

If so that's a failure of bureaucracy.

9 minutes ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

I don't know if it's true but someone posted an argument that she would lose Dems a committee seat or something. 

If so that's a failure of bureaucracy.

the judiciary committee.

repugs blocked the dems efforts to pick a temporary replacement for feinstein while she was out with shingles. lady g has said that he will follow precedent for replacing her on the judiciary committee if she resigns...fwiw. 

It is sickening at all you liberals defending this senile old woman.

It's a cult.

2 hours ago, vikas83 said:

I really don't get why Dems don't force her out. It's an embarrassment, and Newsom would appoint a Democrat to replace her.

This.  The weekend at Bernie's crap needs to end.  I get she has a seat on Judiciary committee but she is serving no purpose and should be no where near Capital Hill.  Go retire and live the rest of your life with dignity.  She doesn't know who she is or where she is or what she's doing.