Are there any rules about legislating while drunk?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

FerrelGeek

Diamond Member
Jan 22, 2009
4,670
271
126
Why not? I think I speak for a vast majority of workers when I say I can't be drunk when I'm working. If I was I'd be fired immediately. This guy should be no different - especially considering he's being paid by our taxes and allegedly representing our best interests.

ROFLMAO!
And the naive post of the day award goes to......

This poor man actually believes that congressdroids actually care about him and listen to him! Oh son, you crack me up!
 

Greenman

Lifer
Oct 15, 1999
20,473
5,221
136
Teddy also killed a woman while being drunk and then left the crime scene.
I would like to think that killing someone while being drunk is worse than legislating while drunk.......

Apparently he get's a pass on the killing for being a Kennedy, and for all of his "good work" since then. There is a thread about it around here somewhere.
 

FerrelGeek

Diamond Member
Jan 22, 2009
4,670
271
126
Heh. I'm sure it's a longstanding bipartisan American tradition, at every level of government. The actual state of consciousness really isn't an issue wrt the voting itself- what matters is the level of sobriety in the consideration and judgement used to determine the vote.

When Repubs controlled both the legislative and executive branches during the GWB years, they were drunk on power the whole time... not to mention being intellectually and emotionally crippled by cookie cutter litmus test ideology...

And you think this is different now???? I guess we have a close second place finish in the naive post of the day award.
 

FerrelGeek

Diamond Member
Jan 22, 2009
4,670
271
126
It's really annoying that every single thread turns into a "the other team was worse" shit fest. I don't care how many on each side are fucked up, or how it's ok for Senator dickweed to screw a kid because Senator numbnuts screwed two, I just want them gone. A worthless drunken piece of crap is a worthless drunken piece of crap, no matter what letter is after his name.

/thread. This should be the proper attitude.
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
ROFLMAO!
And the naive post of the day award goes to......

This poor man actually believes that congressdroids actually care about him and listen to him! Oh son, you crack me up!

Um, I think the gist of his post was that he DOESN'T believe the Senator cares about him or listens to him, although that is more or less the Senator's job, i.e. to represent the interests of the citizens in his state. (Originally a Senator's job was to represent the state's interests, a much better system in my opinion.) Thus his point (as I read it anyway) was that the Senator is demonstrably not doing his nominal job and thus should be fired, not that any are politicians are properly doing their jobs - his post did not address that point at all - or that Senator Baucus would care about or listen to his constituents if only he were not drunk. It's a small but important distinction, I think, as there is nothing inherently naive about what he actually posted. Had he indicated any belief that the Senator would be fired, then I would totally agree that was naive.
 

FerrelGeek

Diamond Member
Jan 22, 2009
4,670
271
126
I get that, and to what Robor was saying. My point on being naive was that, given how congress works these days, that'll never happen. In retrospect, I should have given the award to Jhhnn. Sorry, Robor.

Um, I think the gist of his post was that he DOESN'T believe the Senator cares about him or listens to him, although that is more or less the Senator's job, i.e. to represent the interests of the citizens in his state. (Originally a Senator's job was to represent the state's interests, a much better system in my opinion.) Thus his point (as I read it anyway) was that the Senator is demonstrably not doing his nominal job and thus should be fired, not that any are politicians are properly doing their jobs - his post did not address that point at all - or that Senator Baucus would care about or listen to his constituents if only he were not drunk. It's a small but important distinction, I think, as there is nothing inherently naive about what he actually posted. Had he indicated any belief that the Senator would be fired, then I would totally agree that was naive.