|
August 28, 2009
This is government, right?
Here's how Senator Robert Byrd appeared over a year ago, crying about Ted Kennedy and saying.... something. (It's so incomprehensible I can't really make out the details.) While it's sad for anyone to have be in such a deteriorated mental state, because Byrd is a powerful man with enormous responsibility, it's also a bit scary. The man could barely talk. Yet somehow, today, 15 months later, he is reported as having "issued the following statement upon learning of the passing of his dear friend Senator Ted Kennedy." The full statement follows, with the quotes in original: "I had hoped and prayed that this day would never come. My heart and soul weeps at the lost of my best friend in the Senate, my beloved friend, Ted Kennedy."Considering Senator Byrd's pathetic condition as evidenced by his near inability to talk over a year ago, I think there are some serious credibility problems with the above "statement." I realize that it was "issued" by his "office," but since the man's ability to speak is in serious doubt, have the words ever been confirmed as actually having been uttered by him? If he did not say them, then did he write them? How can we be sure? Especially considering that one of the principle objections to the health care bill is that it's "authors" have never read it, I think verifying the authorship of "Byrd's" "statement" is highly relevant. And what if it turns out that he didn't say it or write it. Can we even be sure he even read it? I seriously doubt it. What is going on? A bill that no one ever read is "renamed" by a pathetic dodderer who issued a "statement" he didn't write and cannot read, but who knows how to run the medical profession? This is a joke, right? posted by Eric on 08.28.09 at 01:23 AM
Comments
I'm guessing senators like Byrd are less about doing actual legislating, and really are more of a brand name. It's the Senator Byrd(TM) committee. And the Byrd(TM) Brand committee just released a statement about the founder of the Ted Kennedy(TM) Brand committee. silvermine · August 28, 2009 02:19 AM Exactly silvermine. When people say, "Bush had Kennedy write his No Child Left Behind deal", I always say, "No, Bush let Kennedy's staff write NCLB". Eh, unless we institute term limits it's what's gonna happen. One, you can't protect people from themselves and if you try, well, that way lies the nanny-state. Two, it's not in the Consititution (except for Presidents). I like the Consitution, it was written by people smarter than I who really looked into what they were doing. Veeshir · August 28, 2009 11:38 AM Veeshir: The limits on serving as President wasn't enforced until the passing of the 22nd amendment in 1951. Whether by that time the people were actually smarter than you can be questioned. Before then, it was merely decorum, set by Washington, to only serve two terms. I'm personally for term limits, though I woud probably give Congress a bit more leeway (about 18 years or so). There are also downsides to term limits, given the gold-plated benefits and pensions they get after leaving office. But new blood keeps things from stagnating, and hopefully keeps our congresscritters from becoming serial grafters. Anon · August 28, 2009 12:47 PM Anon, I know that, but it's in the Constitution now. That's the deal. If it's in the Constitution, it's the law of the land. I would have voted against it though. Term limits say that we're too stupid to know who to vote for. Freedom is messy and mean, but people get to make their own mistakes instead of having to live with other's. Veeshir · August 28, 2009 04:44 PM Post a comment
You may use basic HTML for formatting.
|
|
August 2009
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR
Search the Site
E-mail
Classics To Go
Archives
August 2009
July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 May 2002 AB 1634 MBAPBSAAGOP Skepticism See more archives here Old (Blogspot) archives
Recent Entries
The torch is
Spare the boycott and spoil the backlash! How Is That Boycott Coming? Red Ted This is government, right? Mind-Blowing Chutzpah, Or Mind-Boggling Lack Of Self-Awareness? What's In A Name Happy birthday, Glenn Reynolds! (You're in good company...) Win One For Mary Jo Heather has THREE mommies!
Links
Site Credits
|
|
3rd in line of succession, having Pelosi 2nd, and Biden 1st is bad enough.
Has any president had better assassination insurance than those three?