5 minute speeches in the House this morning

"Cock" and "mothafucka" aren't words you can say on television before 8pm. Well, unless you're on cable.

There's no such issue with "and that's real, yo."


So what's the real problem here?







*I would gladly vote for Stephen Harper for the rest of my life if he told Jack Layton to "suck my cock mothafucka" in the middle of Question Period.

wtf

If you don't get the point bud maybe you could try hanging out with a slightly older crowd?

It seems you sorta understand the concept of limits, but are just a bit arrested in your development. Which is cool, it takes all kinds. [I know they joke about you being a pederast. And I kind of laughed when they did it in Idiocracy. S'all good in da hood. Or maybe that should be 'the trunk'.]

Oh please! The photo ID just shows that you are YOU. That YOU are voting; not some Tom, Dick or Harry that stole your voter's card.
Do you bitch when the clerk asks to see your driver's license (a photo ID) when you use the credit card or cash a check?
How in the is that "disenfranchising" the legitimate voter?

Why should I have to display ID to exercise my constitutional rights?

I don't have a constitutional right to use a credit card or a check, and the cashier is not the government, so it's a complete fallacy. That being said, I do get irritated if it's for my credit card.

By creating a barrier to exercising their rights. Listen, we didn't have photo ID cards until well into the 20th century, and the republic managed to somehow not destroy itself. Just as the justice system is designed such that a thousand guilty men should go free than a single man imprisoned unjustly, so should it be with voting. I'd rather an army of immigrants vote themselves boatloads of free health care than to deny the most basic of rights to an American Citizen.

Twas a much a simpler world then.

We didn't have to wear helmets when we rode bicycles.

A 10-year-old could disappear locally and just be back for dinner, without incident.

On the specific point - there was much much less opportunity for fraud.

E.g. ACORN and it's whore factories weren't even in existance.

So Congress should be more like the British House of Lords? There should be robes and fancy wigs, and everyone's speaking the Queens English?

Yeah, that's not elitist.

Good. You should get outright pissed when she denies the sale then.

Just like the person who can't identify themselves gets told to hit the bricks when they want to vote.

Wow, it is just like that, waddayaknow?

This discussion isn't really with you, just the words you typed.

British politics is a good deal grittier than any other apsect of those civilized folk, even if it turns out the HOL sniff their own farts as you imply.

American politics haven't ever been as nasty as British HOC interactions. But even the Brits haven't invited gutterspeak into their forums for adult discourse.

And propriety isn't something than can be explained, except to a child as he grows, which is why I'm not responding to you, as I said. No point, really. You probably could've used the newspaper across the snout a bit more when you were being reared IMO, but that's a pretty subjective opinion.

And you didn't answer my question, do you prefer the trunk or the hood?

Careful, Async's gonna sue you for copyright infringement.

All conservatives look the same anyway.

Hint: I'm the one on this continent.

I never claimed it was "offensive." I'm claiming that it was so incredibly out of place and disrespectful that it almost made me physically ill.

The floor of the US House is no place for thuggish phrases. Just like in a courtroom, or a city council meeting, or any other place where a sense of decorum is important and expected. Using "urban lingo" is unacceptable on the floor of the US House.

"Thuggish phrases?"

What other types of speech are unacceptable on the floor of the US House, as far as you're concerned? If someone was to say "y'all," would you be similarly effected?

That you view "urban lingo" associated with black Americans as "thuggish" says more about you than you may care to admit.

"That's real, yo" is thuggish. That's a fact. It's out of place on the floor of the US House. Perhaps you're unfamiliar with the concept of decorum?

It's not a race issue.

Prove it, then. If it's a fact....

How does it stack up compared to someone shouting "You lie!" at a sitting President? Or a Vice President telling someone "Go fuck yourself" on the floor of the House?

Were you equally as sick over those incidents as well?

Not a great source, but here ya go. Please note instruction #4.

That was also a violation of basic decorum.

It was on the floor of the Senate, but also clearly a violation of decorum.

Nope. Although I acknowledge they were inappropriate, there's a difference between someone being angry and saying something inappropriate and someone not having enough respect for the institution to speak with appropriate decorum. Saying "well, someone else did it!" is a really poor excuse.

You don't think the speaker might be angry about what he sees as a Republican attempt at voter suppression?

Asking someone to produce an id to vote is not voter suppression.

It's a poll tax, unless the government is giving IDs away for free.

Nice try Raytard.

Neither is, say, making sure polling stations are located as far away from "undesirable" voters as possible. Or making it harder for working people to vote by cutting back on polling hours and disallowing no-reason absentee voting. That doesn't change the net effect: a disenfranchisement that falls disproportionately on certain select groups.

I don't doubt he was angry about what he perceives as voter suppression. But I don't think he said what he said in a "fit of anger" like Cheney and Wilson did. He certainly didn't seem angry when he said it.

Here are the decorum rules for the US House. I suppose it's debatable whether "that's real, yo" is "unparliamentary speech" but that appears to be up to the Speaker of the House.

Sorry it makes you nauseous. What makes ME nauseous is that in Florida the Republicans said they want to combat voter fraud. Who could be against that, right? The problem is that the real vote fraud in Florida is not committed by "undesirables" who can't prove their identity. Here's a quote from someone who should know: Do I agree with all of the changes made by HB 1355? Certainly not. Do I think that voter fraud is a widespread problem? Certainly not. Do I agree that “government should make it easy to register and to cast a ballot,” as your editorial asserted? Absolutely. But I also understand the reality that compromise is what makes our political system work.
Read more: http://www.nwfdailynews.com/articles/changes-40415-lux-florida.html#ixzz1ScHspN3u

That quote is from the Okaloosa County Supervisor of Elections. In order to "solve" a non existent problem, the Legislature and Governor have come up with a system that disenfranchises a lot of people who demographically speaking are likely to vote for Obama in what might be the key swing state of the 2012 election.

You want to call bullshit on Congress critters blowing hot air over issues that are clearly state's rights matters, I have no problem with that.
If other states feel they have a problem they are welcome to do whatever they see fit to take care of it. In Florida, where I live, I'm calling bullshit on the Governor and Legislature.

So first you excused breaking decorum if the person was "angry," but now it has to be a "fit of anger."

Yeah, that's not spin.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unparliamentary_language

From what I'm seeing, there's no precedent for anything other than insults to be deemed "unparliamentary speech." It appears that offending your cultural sensibilities doesn't count.

Nope. It's a better explanation. You know, clarifying what I meant and what you know is the difference between what happened today and what Cheney and Wilson did.

Hmm. You must have missed the second sentence in the article:

There's also a very good summation in the second paragraph:

"That's real, yo" is pretty undignified.

Most states do offer free ID cards.

This is the perfect example of the lengths the party of jackasses is willing to go to win. 'By hook or crook, we will win'. Every 2 years, it's the same shit. The dead vote, the convicted felons vote, the busses are lined up to make sure they can arrive, and some even make sure they vote at as many polling stations as possible. And they always seem to turn out in droves for the party that's most likely to give them the most 'free' shit.

Another reason why these parasite motherfuckers known as Democrats should be lined up against the wall and shot.

1. Perhaps you're unclear about what "precedent" means.

2. Hiding behind vague procedural rules in an attempt to justify your own cultural biases isn't that dignified either, but I'm managing to keep my lunch down.

I know exactly what it means. But it makes a poor excuse when attempting to use it to justify current behavior.

It's not a cultural bias to expect elected representatives to address their assemblies with a sense of decorum.

Hank Johnson is an educated man. He's a lawyer. Do you think he used language like "that's real, yo" when he was taking his oral exams in law school? I'm willing to bet he didn't.

Let's be clear that the only reason Ray finds this mushmouth shit acceptable is because Johnson has the right letter by his name.