• Menu
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Before Header

  • About Us
  • Lexicon
  • Contact Us
  • Our Store
  • ↑
  • ↓
  • ←
  • →

Balloon Juice

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

“Squeaker” McCarthy

Fuck these fucking interesting times.

No offense, but this thread hasn’t been about you for quite a while.

It’s the corruption, stupid.

Jesus, Mary, & Joseph how is that election even close?

The GOP couldn’t organize an orgy in a whorehouse with a fist full of 50s.

Hot air and ill-informed banter

Whoever he was, that guy was nuts.

After roe, women are no longer free.

Accountability, motherfuckers.

Let there be snark.

Only Democrats have agency, apparently.

Republican obstruction dressed up as bipartisanship. Again.

The republican caucus is already covering themselves with something, and it’s not glory.

You don’t get rid of your umbrella while it’s still raining.

Nancy smash is sick of your bullshit.

We are builders in a constant struggle with destroyers. let’s win this.

Not all heroes wear capes.

Some judge needs to shut this circus down soon.

A lot of Dems talk about what the media tells them to talk about. Not helpful.

Republicans in disarray!

We’ve had enough carrots to last a lifetime. break out the sticks.

Imperialist aggressors must be defeated, or the whole world loses.

Red lights blinking on democracy’s dashboard

Mobile Menu

  • Winnable House Races
  • Donate with Venmo, Zelle & PayPal
  • Site Feedback
  • War in Ukraine
  • Submit Photos to On the Road
  • Politics
  • On The Road
  • Open Threads
  • Topics
  • Balloon Juice 2023 Pet Calendar (coming soon)
  • COVID-19 Coronavirus
  • Authors
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Lexicon
  • Our Store
  • Politics
  • Open Threads
  • War in Ukraine
  • Garden Chats
  • On The Road
  • 2021-22 Fundraising!
You are here: Home / Open Threads / Hand tools, not hand outs

Hand tools, not hand outs

by DougJ|  March 17, 201112:00 pm| 139 Comments

This post is in: Open Threads

FacebookTweetEmail

Libby Spencer gives yet another example of why it’s getting harder and harder to parody these nuts:

Just when you think they’ve hit rock bottom, the GOPers dig to a new low:

Newly minted Republican Sen. Mike Lee of Utah said in a lecture posted to his YouTube channel that Congressional laws banning child labor are forbidden by the US Constitution.

Well I guess you could call this the GOP’s first attempt at actual job creation.

Via Woody, the man of a thousand blogs. I’m stealing this comment from Rick on his Facebook page as the best response: “We musn’t deny our citizens the opportunity to “bootstrap” it. Welfare is demeaning, and only encourages laziness. Our children don’t need hand outs, they need hand tools.”

FacebookTweetEmail
Previous Post: « Times digital subscriptions
Next Post: Japan: An Inside Take »

Reader Interactions

139Comments

  1. 1.

    Poopyman

    March 17, 2011 at 12:04 pm

    Breaking news! Writers for Onion and SNL have given up! They’ve just been placed on suicide watch.

  2. 2.

    Poopyman

    March 17, 2011 at 12:05 pm

    Seriously? This is a Yoo Ess frickin’ Senator that said that? In 2011?

  3. 3.

    RSR

    March 17, 2011 at 12:05 pm

    That’s pretty well aligned with the ‘deport the latinos so we can send the urban black youth out to the field to pick the crops’ scenario from that western NY candidate.

  4. 4.

    matryoshka

    March 17, 2011 at 12:06 pm

    Our children don’t need hand outs, they need hand tools.

    And chickens, so they can get medical care.

  5. 5.

    Comrade Javamanphil

    March 17, 2011 at 12:06 pm

    That would be exceptionally stupid policy in Utah, especially. Unemployment rates would quadruple or quintuple overnight.

  6. 6.

    maya

    March 17, 2011 at 12:07 pm

    I can haz iPick?

  7. 7.

    Paul in KY

    March 17, 2011 at 12:07 pm

    Par for the course anymore. I guess he sees all those kids out there in Utah just wasting their time all day playing & working on their Joesph Smith dioramas & thought ‘Why can’t they be helping our local biznesses. Their small, nimble fingers can clean out the chicken pluckers better than any adult Mexican’.

    Speaking as a Democrat, when your opposition is on record as opposing Child Labor Laws, can’t we paint them in a bad light? Is there a good commercial in there somewhere?

  8. 8.

    Poopyman

    March 17, 2011 at 12:08 pm

    Just to provide some background, his Wikipedia entry:

    Michael Shumway “Mike” Lee (born June 4, 1971) is the junior United States Senator from Utah. He is a member of the Republican Party. Supported by the Tea Party movement, he describes himself as a “constitutional conservative.” Prior to serving in the United States Senate, he had never held political office.
    __
    A native of Provo, Utah, Lee is a graduate of Brigham Young University. Lee has been a constitutional lawyer in Utah and Washington, D.C, in addition to serving as a clerk for then-Judge Samuel A. Alito, Jr.. His father, Rex E. Lee, was the founding dean of Brigham Young University’s J. Reuben Clark Law School.
    __
    In 2009, Lee officially announced his candidacy for the United States Senate seat held by then-Senator Bob Bennett of Utah. Lee won the Republican Party’s nomination in June 2010, defeating Bennett for his own party’s nomination. In the general election, Lee defeated Sam Granato on November 2, 2010. As a supporter of the Tea Party movement, Lee has been vocal in advocating for term limits and a balanced budget amendment, in addition to the widespread reduction of federal spending. At the age of 39, Lee is the youngest current U.S. Senator.

    Lawyer. Tea Party. Alito. Yep! At least it’s all consistent.

    ETA: Hey! The edit function works again!

  9. 9.

    bkny

    March 17, 2011 at 12:10 pm

    i love the 45-car garage:

    A Republican Fund-Raiser Is Indicted in a Ponzi Scheme
    By THE NEW YORK TIMES
    LOS ANGELES — A prominent Republican fund-raiser was charged Wednesday in a federal grand jury indictment with orchestrating a Ponzi scheme that defrauded investors of hundreds of millions of dollars.

    The fund-raiser, Timothy Durham, 48, was arrested early in the morning at his West Hollywood home and charged with 12 counts of securities and wire fraud in federal court here. …

    From 2002 to 2009, more than 5,000 investors were defrauded out of more than $200 million, the indictment said. The company later filed for bankruptcy.

    The bankruptcy trustee for Fair Finance told creditors in August that much of the $54 million Mr. Durham had lent himself helped finance his lavish lifestyle — at his Indianapolis home, a 45-car garage housed an Aston Martin designed to look like the car James Bond drove in “Goldfinger,” while in Miami he kept a four-bedroom yacht.

    Mr. Durham donated more than $800,000 to the Republican Party and candidates in Indiana, including almost $200,000 to Gov. Mitch Daniels.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/17/us/17durham.html?src=recg&pagewanted=print

  10. 10.

    Suffern ACE

    March 17, 2011 at 12:10 pm

    @Paul in KY: He’s not actually opposed to such laws – they’re just unconstitutional. Hmmmm. I don’t think they are, but if they were ever found to be such, I wonder if the child labor amendment would even pass enough states to create that authority any longer.

  11. 11.

    Zifnab

    March 17, 2011 at 12:11 pm

    Newly minted Republican Sen. Mike Lee of Utah said in a lecture posted to his YouTube channel that Congressional laws banning child labor are forbidden by the US Constitution.

    How is it unconstitutional? STFU, that’s how.

  12. 12.

    The Political Nihilist Formerly Known As Kryptik

    March 17, 2011 at 12:12 pm

    Well…this is kinda old already, and the GOP seems to be proven willing to act on this nuttery if Missouri is any indication. So…yeah, enjoy, we probably have at least a decade of this bullshit ahead of us now. And it’s more than likely utterly unstoppable because the country apparently really does want these fuckers to rule wholesale.

  13. 13.

    dmsilev

    March 17, 2011 at 12:12 pm

    Sigh. I see we’re going to have to go through this again. Attention Republicans! The following authors were writing cautionary tales or satires, not how-to manuals:

    George Orwell
    Margaret Atwood
    Jonathan Swift
    Charles Dickens

    dms

  14. 14.

    Zifnab

    March 17, 2011 at 12:14 pm

    @Paul in KY:

    Speaking as a Democrat, when your opposition is on record as opposing Child Labor Laws, can’t we paint them in a bad light? Is there a good commercial in there somewhere?

    In Utah, good luck.
    Although this does seem to exemplify yet another problem with the two party system. Namely, how it can quickly degrade into the one party system.

  15. 15.

    Paul in KY

    March 17, 2011 at 12:16 pm

    @Suffern ACE: Well, that just messes my rant up. Dammit, I worked on that one for over 30 secs.

  16. 16.

    New Yorker

    March 17, 2011 at 12:18 pm

    I think it’s time to invest in the German language program from Rosetta Stone, so if/when I need to flee the insane asylum that this country is becoming, I can get a good job in a nice place like Vienna or Munich.

  17. 17.

    Tim F.

    March 17, 2011 at 12:18 pm

    The Constitution was a notoriously liberal document. Let’s just roll that back and re-apply to the British Commonwealth.

  18. 18.

    dmsilev

    March 17, 2011 at 12:18 pm

    And apparently he’s something of a moron as far as Constitutional law is concerned (I know, shocking, huh?). Following the links, we have:

    “Congress decided it wanted to prohibit that practice, so it passed a law. No more child labor. The Supreme Court heard a challenge to that law, and the Supreme Court decided a case in 1918 called Hammer v. Dagenhardt,” Lee said. “In that case, the Supreme Court acknowledged something very interesting — that, as reprehensible as child labor is, and as much as it ought to be abandoned — that’s something that has to be done by state legislators, not by Members of Congress.”
    […]
    The key Congressional law that addresses child labor is the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, which placed a series of restrictions against the employment of people under 18 in the public and private sectors.
    __
    The Supreme Court unanimously upheld the law in the 1941 United States v. Darby Lumber decision, overturning Hammer, on the basis of the constitutional authority of Congress to regulate interstate commerce. It has hardly run into controversies since.

    So, he’s basing his argument on a Supreme Court ruling from 1918. Twenty years later, Congress passed a law restricting child labor which was subsequently upheld by the Supreme Court. Now, Senator, pay close attention here because the next step is complicated. The Supreme Court is the arbiter of what is and isn’t constitutional. By upholding that law, they have declared child-labor restrictions to be constitutional. Barring a later Supreme Court decision overturning that one, the state of affairs is that Congress indeed has the constitutional authority to pass the law that you apparently hate so much.

    dms

  19. 19.

    fasteddie9318

    March 17, 2011 at 12:19 pm

    @Paul in KY:

    Speaking as a Democrat, when your opposition is on record as opposing Child Labor Laws, can’t we paint them in a bad light? Is there a good commercial in there somewhere?

    Well sure, I mean there are good commercials to be made all over the place if you want to be all exclusive and shit and take actual positions on things. But excuse me, your majesty, the Democratic Party doesn’t take positions on things because some people might get offended by those positions. What if David Koch needs to hire a 12 year old to wash his balls*? Does the Democratic Party really want to stand in his way and maybe make him mad? He might donate money to elect Republicans then, and I think we can all agree that would be bad, can’t we? After all, better to elect the party that stands for nothing than the one that stands for all that bad stuff, which I’m totally not saying that any of it really is bad just in case some of you might actually approve of some of it.

    *What? I meant his golf balls, you sickos.

  20. 20.

    New Yorker

    March 17, 2011 at 12:19 pm

    Or maybe it’s time to get the Northeast to secede. New England, New York, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, and DC. We’ll allow a plebiscite to see if Northern VA wants to join us, and the wingnut parts of PA can vote to leave that state before it joins us too.

  21. 21.

    Paul in KY

    March 17, 2011 at 12:20 pm

    @Zifnab: I’m thinking at the national level. You know how when one random commenter on a non-wingnut site says something hateful/stupid, the Repubs blow it up like it was Pres. Obama that wrote the comment.

    Give them a little of their own medicine. Act like Sen. Lee is the formost Republican spokesman on economic matters, the vanguard of Republican thinking on the ‘new economy and how average Americans are going to fare in it’.

  22. 22.

    Paul in KY

    March 17, 2011 at 12:21 pm

    @fasteddie9318: I’m guessing you must have a position at the DNC. If not, you’ve encapsulated their thinking. Kudos!

  23. 23.

    Comrade Dread

    March 17, 2011 at 12:23 pm

    Newly minted Republican Sen. Mike Lee of Utah said in a lecture posted to his YouTube channel that Congressional laws banning child labor are forbidden by the US Constitution.

    Well, since the GOP wants to get rid of public schools, they know that the poor and middle class kids are going to need something to do with their day or they’ll just spend their time figuring out how to rob their betters.

  24. 24.

    kay

    March 17, 2011 at 12:23 pm

    Everyone scoffs when I say conservatives are going after commerce clause jurisprudence, and that they fully intend to take us back to pre-1930, but, the fact is, they are and they do.

    They don’t want limited federal regulation. They want NO federal regulation.

    This isn’t a joke. I don’t know what they have to do, take out a full page ad? Run commercials?

    Every single progressive gain has to be protected, forever. They never, ever quit.

  25. 25.

    The Political Nihilist Formerly Known As Kryptik

    March 17, 2011 at 12:29 pm

    @dmsilev:

    Barring a later Supreme Court decision overturning that one, the state of affairs is that Congress indeed has the constitutional authority to pass the law that you apparently hate so much.

    Considering our current court, however, an overturning of the precedent is very depressingly possible.

  26. 26.

    Paul in KY

    March 17, 2011 at 12:31 pm

    @kay: Pre 1930 is OK for most tycoons. I think the rulers of Republand would really like for us to go back to 1890s (before that grandstanding Roosevelt got in after we parked him in a do-nothing VP slot).

    Them were the good ole days…

  27. 27.

    Villago Delenda Est

    March 17, 2011 at 12:32 pm

    The US Constitution also prohibits promoting the general welfare and the creation of a more perfect union.

    I’m sure that’s in there someplace.

  28. 28.

    Villago Delenda Est

    March 17, 2011 at 12:33 pm

    @Paul in KY:

    1890’s, my ass. Try 1390’s.

    These people want to bring back feudalism.

  29. 29.

    Poopyman

    March 17, 2011 at 12:34 pm

    @The Political Nihilist Formerly Known As Kryptik: There’s no doubt in my mind that a re-arguing of interstate commerce is one of the goals of the Republican Radical movement.

  30. 30.

    PeakVT

    March 17, 2011 at 12:36 pm

    Mike Lee of Utah said in a lecture posted to his YouTube channel that Congressional laws banning child labor are forbidden by the US Constitution.

    So he has a proposal to amend the Constitution to fix this problem, right?

    The truth is that the US Constitution needs an overhaul, but there’s no way I would trust this country right now to actually make it better. Instead, we would end up with a clause ordering all coffee to be served in styrofoam cups.

  31. 31.

    kay

    March 17, 2011 at 12:38 pm

    @dmsilev:

    Barring a later Supreme Court decision overturning that one, the state of affairs is that Congress indeed has the constitutional authority to pass the law that you apparently hate so much.

    Right. Unless you believe the constitution is “in exile”.

    What I love about conservative legal theory is what an absolute godamned disaster it was in practice. State regulation of labor practices didn’t work, because race to the bottom states brutally exploited workers, and more enlightened, less greed-driven states wouldn’t have been able to compete.

    Which, of course, is just a variation on what we see today.

    Is there some reason we have to roll out the retreads of failed conservative ideas and fight every battle over and over again? What level of failure might cause them to abandon these theories?

  32. 32.

    Brachiator

    March 17, 2011 at 12:38 pm

    @kay:

    Everyone scoffs when I say conservatives are going after commerce clause jurisprudence, and that they fully intend to take us back to pre-1930, but, the fact is, they are and they do.

    I don’t scoff. The Tea Party People seem attached to the notion that they need to return America to 1820 (more white people in charge, fewer immigrants, no unions) and life will be good.

    There is also here a psychological reaction to Obama as president. He is the personification of the federal government, so they have to create this vision of a severely limited Constitution in which all power belongs to the states, even if it means that they support crazy stuff like child labor.

    It’s sad, but the craziness is snowballing.

  33. 33.

    celticdragonchick

    March 17, 2011 at 12:39 pm

    @Poopyman:

    There’s no doubt in my mind that a re-arguing of interstate commerce is one of the goals of the Republican Radical movement.

    That, and also getting rid of Griswold V. Conn.

  34. 34.

    TRNC

    March 17, 2011 at 12:39 pm

    Notwithstanding the ignorance and lack of morals displayed, who in hell thinks the best solution to the unemployment problem is to make an additional demographic eligible to work?

  35. 35.

    Alex S.

    March 17, 2011 at 12:40 pm

    Life isn’t free. Kids should pay for being born. They should also pay for mother’s milk. And there should be a compensation payment for small body size and strength. They should never be able to free themselves from the debt because, after all, everything they can possibly achieve is only achievable because of someone else. I propose that future parents open up an account at their private financial institution of choice and borrow the money their child needs to pay them.

  36. 36.

    Omnes Omnibus

    March 17, 2011 at 12:44 pm

    @Alex S.:I think we could securitize those loans by dividing them into tranches based on probability of repayment. What could possibly go wrong?

  37. 37.

    The Political Nihilist Formerly Known As Kryptik

    March 17, 2011 at 12:45 pm

    @kay:

    The most infuriating thing isn’t so much that conservative ideas keep popping back up forcing us to retread the fight to debunk them.

    It’s the fact that, after a decade of putting them into practice proving said ideas and policies as failures, they’ve more ascendant than ever. Trickle-down failed in almost all avenues imaginable over the Bush Administration, and yet it’s THE only economic theory that’s even fucking allowed throughout our whole fucking national discourse. We’re being strangled by it, and yet it’s the single theory that all our economic policies are now crafted through, even on our side of the aisle.

  38. 38.

    Poopyman

    March 17, 2011 at 12:45 pm

    @celticdragonchick: Not sure they need to eliminate Griswold, now that they’ve hollowed it out so much. (Sigh.)

  39. 39.

    Stooleo

    March 17, 2011 at 12:45 pm

    Tools for tots! Coming next Christmas!

  40. 40.

    Stefan

    March 17, 2011 at 12:47 pm

    Or maybe it’s time to get the Northeast to secede. New England, New York, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, and DC.

    I say we join Canada. And we may as well take Washington and Oregon with us while we’re at it.

  41. 41.

    Stillwater

    March 17, 2011 at 12:48 pm

    @kay: Everyone scoffs when I say conservatives are going after commerce clause jurisprudence, and that they fully intend to take us back to pre-1930, but, the fact is, they are and they do.

    They hate liberals, so they hate liberal legislation, departments, programs, institutions. If they could just de-liberalize the country, everything would be alright. Their entire platform is simply to obstruct what liberals are doing, to undo what liberals have done.

  42. 42.

    Poopyman

    March 17, 2011 at 12:48 pm

    @TRNC: Because we’re currently at the point where 2 incomes per household let said household barely scrape by. The obvious next step is to increase the number of incomes per household.[1] Problem solved!

    [1] – Increasing the number of families per household would put an undue burden on developers. Can’t have that!

  43. 43.

    Suffern ACE

    March 17, 2011 at 12:51 pm

    @bkny: What the heck is a 45 car garage? Isn’t that known as a parking lot?

  44. 44.

    Woodrowfan

    March 17, 2011 at 12:51 pm

    and since Lee undoubtedly also knows about the 1941 decision, he’s also a bald-faced liar…

  45. 45.

    Hungry Joe

    March 17, 2011 at 12:51 pm

    Child labor laws looked pretty safe, but —

    Listen, and understand. They’re out there. They can’t be bargained with. They can’t be reasoned with. They don’t feel pity, or remorse … And they absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead.*

    *Adapted from “The Terminator.” It seemed like an amusing exaggeration when I typed it in, but …

  46. 46.

    Suffern ACE

    March 17, 2011 at 12:53 pm

    @The Political Nihilist Formerly Known As Kryptik: Maybe because it’s because that policy worked as intended, just not as advertised.

  47. 47.

    Woodrowfan

    March 17, 2011 at 12:53 pm

    @kay:

    What level of failure might cause them to abandon these theories?

    that’s like asking “how high is ‘up’?” or “How low is ‘down’?”

  48. 48.

    stuckinred

    March 17, 2011 at 12:53 pm

    @Suffern ACE: It’s a garage where I keep my car with the .45 colt under the seat.

  49. 49.

    Marc McKenzie

    March 17, 2011 at 12:54 pm

    To use a quote from one of my favorite films, John Carpenter’s remake of The Thing:

    “You’ve gotta be f**king kidding!”

    These guys are nuts–absolutely, completely, utterly insane.

    And yet there’s still the cry that there’s no difference between them and the Democrats.

    The mind reels….

  50. 50.

    Citizen_X

    March 17, 2011 at 1:01 pm

    The kids are going to be sorely disillusioned when they find out that Bob the Builder is a real dick of a boss.

  51. 51.

    Culture of Truth

    March 17, 2011 at 1:03 pm

    In that case, the Supreme Court acknowledged something very interesting

    No it wasn’t.

  52. 52.

    Hewer of Wood, Drawer of Water

    March 17, 2011 at 1:05 pm

    @Stefan: There will be a test for you. We have enough wanna-be teabaggers as it is up here

  53. 53.

    Culture of Truth

    March 17, 2011 at 1:05 pm

    “I’m not saying we should this reprehensible thing, no in fact I don’t think we should, I’m just saying it’s interesting that we could. If we wanted to. Not that I want to, but if we did. Just saying.”

  54. 54.

    Chad N Freude

    March 17, 2011 at 1:05 pm

    @Poopyman: That is abundantly clear.

    Lee said he was not opposed to laws regulating child labor, but merely insisted they be controlled by state governments, not Congress. The issue of states rights is particularly popular in Utah, widely known as America’s most conservative state.

    Any factory that doesn’t straddle a state line has nothing to do with interstate commerce.

  55. 55.

    Paul in KY

    March 17, 2011 at 1:06 pm

    @Villago Delenda Est: I wish I’d said that :-)

  56. 56.

    jibeaux

    March 17, 2011 at 1:06 pm

    Unless someone decides to pay to annoy the hell out of a dog or to leave dirty lunchboxes in bookbags, my kids are going to be complete crap in the new economy. But at least they won’t have to compete with Utah families, who can probably deliver twenty or so kids to the worksite just doing a sweep of their house.
    /dark humor
    / ring of truth tho

  57. 57.

    daveNYC

    March 17, 2011 at 1:07 pm

    Between the child labor stuff and their comments on the Texas gang rape, I say we just combine the two and say that the Republicans are pro child prostitution.

    And in all seriousness, I would not be shocked if the deep south states end up as hot destinations for sex tourists.

  58. 58.

    Poopyman

    March 17, 2011 at 1:07 pm

    Almost on-topic, now we can write off the next troll as a govt sockpuppet.

    The US military is developing software that will let it secretly manipulate social media sites such as Facebook and Twitter by using fake online personas to influence internet conversations and spread pro-American propaganda.

    (H/T Democratic Underground)

  59. 59.

    Paul in KY

    March 17, 2011 at 1:09 pm

    @Suffern ACE: It is also known as an ‘zeppelin hanger’.

  60. 60.

    Poopyman

    March 17, 2011 at 1:09 pm

    @jibeaux: Maybe you’d better welcome your new economic overlords, the Duggars.

  61. 61.

    Chad N Freude

    March 17, 2011 at 1:09 pm

    @daveNYC: And keep US dollars here at home where they belong instead of sending them to Thailand.

  62. 62.

    Poopyman

    March 17, 2011 at 1:13 pm

    @daveNYC:

    And in all seriousness, I would not be shocked if the deep south states end up as hot destinations for sex tourists.

    Like New Orleans? I mean, Florida is full of old people.

  63. 63.

    mac007

    March 17, 2011 at 1:13 pm

    That a United States Senator could be so poorly versed in the Constitution, its amendments, and settled Constitutional law should be shocking, but today nothing shocks me. But don’t blame Mike Lee, blame the voters in Utah who were too busy looking for an ‘R’ on the ballot.

  64. 64.

    Chad N Freude

    March 17, 2011 at 1:14 pm

    @Poopyman: Not impressed. This appears to be nothing more than partially automating the time-honored practice of manually posting social media comments under multiple false identities. The Pentagon had to pay a contractor to do it, since there are no high-school level programmers in the military.

  65. 65.

    Paul in KY

    March 17, 2011 at 1:15 pm

    @Poopyman: Will be interesting to know if the ‘manipulator’ of the sockpuppet will be a 44 year old LtCol/GS-13 trying to act young & hip or will they give this job to young enlisted types.

    Better yet, high paid contractors who happen to be the slacker kids of political pros.

    Certainly seems like a waste of money, on the surface.

  66. 66.

    stuckinred

    March 17, 2011 at 1:16 pm

    Here’s a gem

    The Congressional Research Service has reported that the Social Security Trust Funds could remain solvent for the next 75 years if all earnings were subject to payroll tax. But Ryan said he is not willing to raise taxes — or allow the Bush tax cuts to expire in 2012 — to protect Social Security and other entitlements.

    “Class warfare … is contrary to growth,” he said. “It might advance equality, but it doesn’t advance prosperity.”

  67. 67.

    jibeaux

    March 17, 2011 at 1:17 pm

    @Poopyman:
    No kidding. Not to mention that the oldest of the Duggar kids is now having kids. So there is an endless, seamless, stream of exponentially increasing labor without any hint of a gap. Man. Anyone need their dog annoyed? We work cheap.

  68. 68.

    Stillwater

    March 17, 2011 at 1:18 pm

    Just finally got to reading the article. He’s not arguing for child labor, he’s making a 10th amendment argument for limiting the powers of the federal government to determine what ought to be the provenance of the individual states, like (for example) whether a state ought to have the authority to permit (say) polygamy (hypothetically) as a cultural institution (for example).

  69. 69.

    The Political Nihilist Formerly Known As Kryptik

    March 17, 2011 at 1:21 pm

    @stuckinred:

    Which essentially means that, to the GOP, prosperity is only measured by how much the richest of us have, not how much we as a society have together as a whole.

    That’s not prosperity in my book. But then again, what the hell do I know, I’m a dirty fucking hippie and thus an enemy of the state.

  70. 70.

    Poopyman

    March 17, 2011 at 1:21 pm

    @Chad N Freude: @Paul in KY:

    Certainly seems like a waste of money, on the surface.

    Well of course it’s a waste of money. And probably doomed to failure, because I’m guessing they’d be fairly easy to spot. But I am disturbed that the govt apparently sees no problem in doing this, and especially in not being concerned that it be done in secret.

  71. 71.

    Judas Escargot (aka ninja fetus with a taste for bruschetta)

    March 17, 2011 at 1:23 pm

    @Suffern ACE:

    He’s not actually opposed to such laws – they’re just unconstitutional.

    Gotta love the fetishism: The Constitution doesn’t explicitly forbid X, therefore… X is okay!

    Suppose, for arguments sake, that laws against child labor really were unconstitutional. Wouldn’t the appropriate response then be “Eff the Constitution!”?

  72. 72.

    ppcli

    March 17, 2011 at 1:25 pm

    @kay:
    @Brachiator:

    Yes, this has to be repeated over and over again. We’ve gotten used to various loons making bad arguments about Roe v. Wade, and by implication Griswold vs. Connecticut. But really I don’t think the real powers in the Republican party ever wanted those rulings overturned. Too much political advantage to be had by whipping up the Christianist Forced-Birther base without worrying about the backlash that would ensue if these laws were actually passed and middle class types started finding it impossible to get abortions for daughters “in trouble”. But this wave is different. It is deadly serious, it is well-funded, and its not looking for compromise. There is a substantial bloc of Federalist society types who feel that the following cases were properly decided (among others):

    Lochner vs. New York, 198 U.S. 45 (1905)
    Coppage v. Kansas (1915)
    Adkins v. Children’s Hospital (1923)

    They now feel that they have secured their position to the point where they can begin to be open about it. Make no mistake, these are not just isolated kooks.

  73. 73.

    Yevgraf (fka Michael)

    March 17, 2011 at 1:27 pm

    @Poopyman:

    The US military is developing software that will let it secretly manipulate social media sites such as Facebook and Twitter by using fake online personas to influence internet conversations and spread pro-American propaganda.

    Shit, that’s going to severely impact txradioguy’s duty day on FR.

    Sgt Lardass generally posts thousands of times a month across several websites, all with the connivance and acquiescence of his chain of command up to O-6.

  74. 74.

    The Political Nihilist Formerly Known As Kryptik

    March 17, 2011 at 1:27 pm

    @ppcli:

    Not to mention that they’ve done a spectacular job of destroying the ability to get abortions on the state level without having to even touch either of those cases.

  75. 75.

    Paul in KY

    March 17, 2011 at 1:27 pm

    @Poopyman: I’m disturbed too. My flippant comments may not have conveyed that.

    Off to watch basketball. Go Cards & Cats!

  76. 76.

    Roger Moore

    March 17, 2011 at 1:29 pm

    @Paul in KY:

    I think the rulers of Republand would really like for us to go back to 1890s 1850s (before that grandstanding Roosevelt Lincoln got in after we parked him in a do-nothing VP slot split the vote three ways).

    FTFY.

  77. 77.

    DFH no.6

    March 17, 2011 at 1:30 pm

    And further irony (I know, not that conservatives grasp irony):

    Utah has the highest percentage of its population (i.e., the constituency who voted in Mike Lee) on welfare of any state in the union. Lotta polygamist families with lots of kids contributing to that.

    Maybe Mr. Lee is just looking for a way to get a bunch of those future celestial god-beings (that’s the Mormon afterlife) into some character-building earthly sweatshops, that would just happen to be owned and operated by the Mormon church (or at least run by Mormon bishops who tithe diligently to the church). Everybody wins!

    But, yeah, they’re all rock-ribbed rugged individualists who don’t need the federal government for anything, like all the conservatives who have made their own way with no help from anyone throughout my beloved and dusty West.

  78. 78.

    Brachiator

    March 17, 2011 at 1:30 pm

    @The Political Nihilist Formerly Known As Kryptik:

    Which essentially means that, to the GOP, prosperity is only measured by how much the richest of us have, not how much we as a society have together as a whole.

    Well, duh!

    There are Southern California radio talk show hosts who consistently push the line that since America is the land of free enterprise opportunity, anyone who is not prosperous is a lazy loser who is not doing it right, and if this person asks for any help or government social services, then he or she is obviously a parasite or leech.

  79. 79.

    Tsulagi

    March 17, 2011 at 1:31 pm

    Just when you think they’ve hit rock bottom, the GOPers dig to a new low:

    As with Peak Wingnut being constrained by a glass ceiling, it’s only glass holding up their Peak Bottom. Both are regularly cracked open.

  80. 80.

    jibeaux

    March 17, 2011 at 1:31 pm

    @Judas Escargot (aka ninja fetus with a taste for bruschetta):

    The argument is more like “the Constitution doesn’t expressly grant that power to the federal government, therefore it belongs to the state and the people.” Which, to the best of my knowledge, the Constitution doesn’t contain the words “Air Force” or “free health care for Congresscritters”….

  81. 81.

    Martin

    March 17, 2011 at 1:31 pm

    @Zifnab:

    How is it unconstitutional?

    If Jesus didn’t twitter it, it’s unconstitutional. That’s what the Founders said.

  82. 82.

    ThatLeftTurnInABQ

    March 17, 2011 at 1:32 pm

    @ppcli:

    They now feel that they have secured their position to the point where they can begin to be open about it.

    Agreed.

    The 2012 election results for both the WH and the Senate will be crucial in determining if they are correct or not. If they can defeat Obama and take the Senate in 2012, then given the age of the justices currently on the court the way will be clear to stacking SCOTUS with a Lochner-esque majority by 2016.

  83. 83.

    daveNYC

    March 17, 2011 at 1:32 pm

    @Poopyman: Naw, I don’t mean like hitting NOLA for a party weekend. I mean more like hitting podunk Alabama, where the unemployment is high and the locals are desperate enough to sell anything/anyone.

  84. 84.

    MikeJ

    March 17, 2011 at 1:34 pm

    @jibeaux: I’m all for disbanding the air farce. The Navy already does half of it, anything else they need to do can be rolled back into the army where it belongs.

  85. 85.

    Chad N Freude

    March 17, 2011 at 1:36 pm

    @Poopyman: The Guardian article says that this is for propagandizing outside the US in non-English languages.

  86. 86.

    New Yorker

    March 17, 2011 at 1:36 pm

    @The Political Nihilist Formerly Known As Kryptik:

    Yup. Your definition of prosperity is the same as mine. I dunno, somehow I get the feeling that life in Germany, where our ideas have the upper hand, is better than life in El Salvador, where wingnut ideas rule. I guess that makes me a Maoist.

  87. 87.

    ppcli

    March 17, 2011 at 1:38 pm

    @ThatLeftTurnInABQ: Yep. The wet dream is to replace Kennedy and Ginsburg with the reincarnated corpses of James McReynolds and Willis Van Devanter.

  88. 88.

    Joel

    March 17, 2011 at 1:43 pm

    @DFH no.6: And here I thought the Scientologists aspired to Mormonism. Looks like I got it backwards.

  89. 89.

    Chad N Freude

    March 17, 2011 at 1:43 pm

    I’m all for disbanding the air farce. The Navy already does half of it, anything else they need to do can be rolled back into the army where it belongs.

    I don’t want to get into an argument about this, but the Air Force is responsible for GPS and a bunch of other satellite communication systems. Why do these belong in the Army? And “rolling [them] back” would be a bit more complicated and expensive than changing nameplates on doors.

  90. 90.

    MikeJ

    March 17, 2011 at 1:50 pm

    @Chad N Freude: The army handled space stuff in the early days of rocketry. There’s no reason those things can’t be done by the army, and you’d have one fewer hungry bird demanding what they consider their fair share.

  91. 91.

    KG

    March 17, 2011 at 1:51 pm

    @Poopyman: as someone who attended quite a few Federalist Society events in law school and even after (easy CLE units), I can guaran-damn-tee you that reversing Lochner is on the agenda, and it’s damn high on the agenda. There will be a shit ton of amicus briefs before the appellate courts and the Supremes if/when the health care law goes up arguing just that.

    And in theory, I can sympathize with, the aggregation principle can get crazy. But applying the pre-Lochner rules to contemporary politics and economics would be an absolute nightmare. But at the end of the day, a lot of these folks are the philosophical descendants of the Anti-Federalists… except for the part about wanting strong protections like most of the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments.

  92. 92.

    ed drone

    March 17, 2011 at 1:55 pm

    @Woodrowfan:

    From Malvina Reynolds:

    Chorus:
    Do you think you’ve hit bottom?
    Do you think you’ve hit bottom?
    Oh, no.
    There’s a bottom below.

    There’s a low below the low you know.
    You can’t imagine how far you can go … down.

    (Chorus)

    Every once in a while you’ll rise and glow,
    But that’s only so they can let you go … down.

    (Chorus)

    You sit at a party and watch the fun,
    It don’t touch you none cause you’re off and gone … down.

    (Chorus)

    There’s the nightmare kind where you fall and fall,
    And you wake to find you haven’t been dreaming at all.

    (Chorus)

    There’s a low below the low you know.
    You can’t imagine how far you can go … down.

    (Chorus)

    . . . . . . .

    Ed

  93. 93.

    Stan of the Sawgrass

    March 17, 2011 at 1:55 pm

    Hey, this is actually the SECOND goper that thinks child labor laws are an undue burden on Free Enterprise. It was last week or so, and it was a state Reboob rep, but I was taking bets on how long it would take for another moran to champion it, so now I have my answer.
    I’ll google and see if I can find the culprit (think I saw it in In These Times.)
    PS– I’ve had trouble posting at BJ for a week or so, so if you’re not reading this, it probably didn’t post. If-a-tree-falls, etc.

  94. 94.

    Dennis SGMM

    March 17, 2011 at 1:57 pm

    It’s an indictment of the way that History is taught, or not taught, in this nation that little dicks like Sen. Mike Lee (And teabaggers in general) think that somehow they’ll come out on top after doing the will of big dicks like the Koch brothers. Once the little dicks have finished gutting everything worthwhile about this nation the big dicks will, legally at that point, have them put to sleep.

  95. 95.

    Ash Can

    March 17, 2011 at 1:57 pm

    @dmsilev: LOL! The poor dumb schmuck can’t even be controversial without fucking it up. And this is what Utah ditched Bob Bennett for.

  96. 96.

    Culture of Truth

    March 17, 2011 at 1:57 pm

    Suppose, for arguments sake, that laws against child labor really were unconstitutional. Wouldn’t the appropriate response then be “Eff the Constitution!”?

    Not necessarily, in the sense that are some limits to federal power, and most people would agree that’s appropriate.

    I’m certainly willing to entertain academic notions about what authorized federal powers are, but, to put it bluntly, I don’t trust these fucking Republicans any farther than I can throw them.

  97. 97.

    a hip hop artist from Idaho (fka Bella Q)

    March 17, 2011 at 2:02 pm

    @kay: Thank you kay. There is such denial about this going on; it confuses me. I say things similar to what you just posted, based on, well, things like what I’ve been seeing GOP types saying (and legislating) around the country for the last couple of years and intelligent people I respect chuckle and look at me like I have three heads. Repeatedly. So I figured perhaps I was overreacting, and quit saying them.

  98. 98.

    El Cid

    March 17, 2011 at 2:02 pm

    A century ago the whole family worked for the mills in the South.

    They lived in the company housing, went to company schools and company churches, and still considered it a better choice than scratching a few plants out of a tiny plot of dirt, which they were free to return to if they didn’t like it.

    The difference now is that the companies wouldn’t give a shit where the workers (families) lived or whether or not kids went to school.

    If kids went to school, it would be in hours off work, which suggests then that they could be working more hours.

    Lazy bums.

  99. 99.

    Mnemosyne

    March 17, 2011 at 2:02 pm

    @The Political Nihilist Formerly Known As Kryptik:

    Considering our current court, however, an overturning of the precedent is very depressingly possible.

    I will defend the current court on one point only: no matter what, there’s no way in hell they would allow child labor laws to be overturned. If Alito is disturbed enough by animal abuse videos that he’s the sole dissenter on the case, I seriously doubt he’s going to put 5-year-olds to work.

  100. 100.

    ThatLeftTurnInABQ

    March 17, 2011 at 2:06 pm

    @Culture of Truth:

    Not necessarily, in the sense that are some limits to federal power, and most people would agree that’s appropriate

    Conservatives are deluding themselves if they think that emasculating the federal govt would have prevented all of the liberal reforms ushered in by TR, FDR, LBJ, etc. On the other hand is possible to imagine a United States in which, in the absence of federal legislation most of the social reforms and govt activism of the last 110 years took place at the state level rather than coming from the federal govt. That is an alternative path which we didn’t pursue and the argument over which way to go was pretty much decided by 1865.

  101. 101.

    Dennis SGMM

    March 17, 2011 at 2:08 pm

    @Mnemosyne:
    Call me a cynic but, I think that you’re underestimating the power of the words “Business friendly,” and “globalization.”
    Not to mention the distinctly corporatist bent of the current SCOTUS. My take is that if the corps want kids the Supremes will not stand in their way.

  102. 102.

    Stan of the Sawgrass

    March 17, 2011 at 2:09 pm

    @Stan of the Sawgrass:
    Found it! Missouri state rep.

  103. 103.

    rumpole

    March 17, 2011 at 2:10 pm

    @dsnik
    But don’t you see? They got it WROOONG (along with Heart of Atlanta, Raich, Wickard).

  104. 104.

    Stan of the Sawgrass

    March 17, 2011 at 2:14 pm

    Damn that HTML!!
    This is the URL of the story about the Missouri state rep who first raised the idea of restoring the freedom of children to work in sweatshops:

    http://www.inthesetimes.com/working/entry/7002/missouri_legislator_wants_to_increase_child_labor/

  105. 105.

    Chad N Freude

    March 17, 2011 at 2:14 pm

    @MikeJ: The Army waged aerial warfare in WW II, and the AF was created because of the perception that aerial warfare was sufficiently specialized to require a dedicated force. Subsequently, the AF has been given (or taken, if that’s your POV) responsibility for anything military that isn’t tied to the surface of the planet. If I understand your logic, the Army could also take on the role of the Navy.

  106. 106.

    mclaren

    March 17, 2011 at 2:16 pm

    As I’ve been pointing out for 20 years, the implosion and collapse of the USSR pulled the moderator rods out of capitalism. With the final discrediting of communism as a viable alternative to capitalism, the full savage fury of laissez faire cannibalistic market economics has now been unleashed on the bottom 99% of the population.

    Don’t like it?

    Slit your throat. You can’t even emigrate to Russia anymore.

    This means that capitalism is rapidly moving back to the unlivable and unworkable brutality of the 1880s, when twelve-year-old girls were harnessed to coal carts and used to haul loads out of coal mines until they dropped dead from exhaustion, because a twelve-year-old girl was much cheaper to replace than a horse.

  107. 107.

    geg6

    March 17, 2011 at 2:17 pm

    @Stefan:

    I’ll make your lives miserable unless the Pittsburgh and Philly regions of PA get to join you.

  108. 108.

    pk

    March 17, 2011 at 2:18 pm

    Hand tools like these maybe.

    http://students.cis.uab.edu/archived/uvancha/Project%20Conclusion.html

  109. 109.

    Brachiator

    March 17, 2011 at 2:25 pm

    @mclaren:

    As I’ve been pointing out for 20 years, the implosion and collapse of the USSR pulled the moderator rods out of capitalism. With the final discrediting of communism as a viable alternative to capitalism, the full savage fury of laissez faire cannibalistic market economics has now been unleashed on the bottom 99% of the population.

    Unfortunately, communism was never a viable alternative to capitalism. And even China has quietly transformed itself into a capitalist totalitarian state. And as for Russia,

    The U.S. magazine “Forbes” says Russia now has more than 100 billionaires — and more billionaires live in Moscow than any other city in the world.
    __
    In its annual list of the world’s richest people, U.S.-based “Forbes” says the number of billionaires in Russia has grown to 101 — up from 62 Russian billionaires in last year’s list.
    __
    The magazine says Moscow is home to 79 of Russia’s billionaires.
    It adds that Russia now accounts for one-third of Europe’s 300 billionaires and 15 of the world’s 100 richest people.

    Leading the Russian billionaires list is steel baron Vladimir Lisin, with an estimated personal wealth of $24 billion. This puts him in 14th place among the world’s richest people.
    __
    Alongside Russia’s 101 billionaires, “Forbes” said China now has 115 billionaires — the first time any countries outside the United States had more than 100.
    __
    “Forbes” said the U.S. now has 413 billionaires.

    Oh, the irony.

  110. 110.

    liberal

    March 17, 2011 at 2:29 pm

    @stuckinred quoted:

    “Class warfare … is contrary to growth,” he said. “It might advance equality, but it doesn’t advance prosperity.”

    Actually, he’s completely correct, as long as you realize that SOMEHOW he dropped the first syllable of “ineqality.”

  111. 111.

    kay

    March 17, 2011 at 2:29 pm

    @a hip hop artist from Idaho (fka Bella Q):

    So I figured perhaps I was overreacting, and quit saying them.

    I think people want that to be true, that there is some “principled intellectual” faction in the GOP or conservative legal circles that will put the brakes on all this stuff. And there’s some logical justification to that, because they haven’t taken apart the protections grounded in the commerce clause YET.

    I just don’t believe that anymore. I think they’d do it, if they saw either a short-term political or long-term economic advantage.

    Look how fast the public debate on the legality of the mandate in the ACA changed. In six months it went from “this is a slam dunk under the commerce clause” to two federal judges ruling it unconstitutional. The law didn’t change in six months. Commerce clause jurisprudence didn’t change in that period. Conservatives managed to frame the question differently, and control the media dialogue. In six short months, it was all of a sudden a close question.

    I don’t know how you can look at what they’re doing w/the ACA and NOT think they’re aiming to narrow the commerce clause dramatically. How are 26 state attorneys general a joke or “fringe”? They’re not a joke to me.

  112. 112.

    geg6

    March 17, 2011 at 2:30 pm

    @mclaren:

    BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

    The idiot who took as gospel the Internet rantings of an MIT lecturer (or whatever he is) in Lean/Six Sigma procedures for MBA students as the best and latest word on an almost Level 7 nuclear accident expects us to take her seriously on any subject ever again?

    BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

  113. 113.

    ThatLeftTurnInABQ

    March 17, 2011 at 2:32 pm

    @Brachiator:

    Alongside Russia’s 101 billionaires, “Forbes” said China now has 115 billionaires—the first time any countries outside the United States had more than 100.
     
    “Forbes” said the U.S. now has 413 billionaires. Oh, the irony.

    Indeed, at this rate there is a dangerous possibility of those commies ganging up on us and a “billionaire gap” developing.

  114. 114.

    Tonal Crow

    March 17, 2011 at 2:37 pm

    See, you libtards, the so-called “Commerce Clause” means that the federal government CANNOT regulate commerce. It’s EXPLICITLY restricted to regulatin’ ‘bortion, homo “marriage”, and DRUGS. Oh, ‘cept the drugs that Rush takes, when Rush takes ’em. Not when YOU take ’em, you libtards.

    That clear?

    /wingnut

  115. 115.

    David Koch

    March 17, 2011 at 2:37 pm

    What’s wrong with puttin’ Trig Palin to work?

    Fredom isn’t fee.

  116. 116.

    Brachiator

    March 17, 2011 at 2:37 pm

    @ThatLeftTurnInABQ:

    Indeed, at this rate there is a dangerous possibility of those commies ganging up on us and a “billionaire gap” developing.

    According to the story, Europe has already been left behind:

    The magazine said that overall, the Asia-Pacific region now has 332 billionaires, surpassing Europe’s total for the first time.

    And of course, who’s Number 1? Not a gringo.

    “Forbes” said Mexican telecommunications tycoon Carlos Slim, with an estimated fortune of $74 billion, remains the world’s richest person, followed by Microsoft founder Bill Gates at $56 billion.

    Viva Mexico!

  117. 117.

    Redwood Rhiadra

    March 17, 2011 at 2:38 pm

    @Mnemosyne:

    The difference is Alito actually cares about dogs – post-born children, not so much.

  118. 118.

    New Yorker

    March 17, 2011 at 2:38 pm

    Just another thing to throw out there: doesn’t the fact that the framers of the Constitution added in the ability to amend the document make it abundantly clear that they had no intention of writing the values of 1790 into stone. Times change, people change, the nation changes, and the Constitution changes with it.

    James Madison and Co. had the prudence and foresight to not fetishize the America of 1790. It’s a pity that over 200 years later, we have lunatics who ARE fetishizing the America of 1790.

  119. 119.

    Poopyman

    March 17, 2011 at 2:39 pm

    @Brachiator: And how did they become billionaires? Their corrupt cronies in the government sold off the govt assets at pennies on the dollar.

    Irony, indeed.

  120. 120.

    Mnemosyne

    March 17, 2011 at 2:52 pm

    @Dennis SGMM:

    Notice that I said “the current court.” You only need one of the conservatives to switch to have a majority, and I would be honestly shocked if Alito and Kennedy (two name just two possibilities) both chose to re-institute child labor. Also, too, I suspect that John Roberts spends a lot of time thinking about his “legacy” as chief justice, and he’s not going to want that endangered by a stupid decision.

    If you get another couple of conservative justices on the court, though, all bets are off.

  121. 121.

    kay

    March 17, 2011 at 3:02 pm

    @a hip hop artist from Idaho (fka Bella Q):

    I just turn it around. Tea party types like to claim Obama has all these schemes up his sleeve. Guns. They thought he was going to take their guns. But he hadn’t done one thing to advance that imaginary goal.

    Conservatives have. They filed about 15 challenges to the commerce clause-based provision in the ACA.

    Why wouldn’t I think they want to narrow the commerce clause? Why would I ignore what they’re actually doing and rely instead on what they might or might not think?

    I even have a short-cut term I use when I think about “ignoring what they’re doing and insisting I know what they really think”.

    I call that an “Andrew Sullivan”. That’s what he does. He says “conservatives are…” or “conservatives will…” or “conservatives believe…” while completely ignoring what they do. I just think that’s crazy. How do I know they want to narrow the commerce clause? Because they’re trying to narrow the commerce clause! Now. Today. I don’t think it’s outlandish or a conspiracy theory if they’re actually saying AND doing it. I have to take them at their word, and DEEDS.

  122. 122.

    Captain Splendid

    March 17, 2011 at 3:04 pm

    @New Yorker

    James Madison and Co. had the prudence and foresight to not fetishize the America of 1790.

    Pity the barrier to amendment is so high. The Founders hedged too many bets, bless ’em.

  123. 123.

    DonkeyKong

    March 17, 2011 at 3:25 pm

    Another reason the 90’s were better.

    People don’t want handouts! People want hand jobs! – Connecticut governor William O’Neill at a 1998 political rally (His comment was followed by riotous applause.)

  124. 124.

    Omnes Omnibus

    March 17, 2011 at 3:43 pm

    @geg6: That is not atypical of mclaren’s style. She has also cited authority from employment law cases to support criminal law propositions. Her MO appears to be finding a piece of evidence that seems to support her POV and then presenting it with a flourish and a touch of righteous anger.

  125. 125.

    FormerSwingVoter

    March 17, 2011 at 3:48 pm

    @Suffern ACE:

    GLarlarglhlble1!!11one

    Why the FUCK don’t Republicans believe that the Commerce Clause is a thing that exists??? Jesus fuck, hasn’t a single goddamn one of them ever, and I mean ever read the fucking Constitution???

  126. 126.

    Ruckus

    March 17, 2011 at 4:02 pm

    @Paul in KY:
    Are your kids unruly? Do they demand food through out the day? Are you tired of picking up after them? Are their doctor bills driving you crazy? Are you wearing out your car driving them all over town to soccer practice, band practice and on and on?
    Send the down to the mines! Get their asses over to that old piece of swamp land were they can learn how to handle a shovel! Make them productive and have them bring home the bacon!
    Child labor can replace that 16 yr old babysitter that your lecherous husband is trying to bang.
    So go on, call a republican today and get child labor restored!

  127. 127.

    trollhattan

    March 17, 2011 at 4:08 pm

    A tiny bit ‘o good news, FDIC going after WaMu CEO/banksta’.

    http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2014523269_wamu18.html

  128. 128.

    El Cid

    March 17, 2011 at 4:09 pm

    Once again reality proves far more awful than I have thought at my most cynical.

    I really didn’t know that there are more than 400 billionaires in the US and over 300 in Asia, so on and so forth.

    We are so fucking stupid.

  129. 129.

    Villago Delenda Est

    March 17, 2011 at 4:34 pm

    @Chad N Freude:

    The best reason I can think of to dismantle the USAF is it’s the branch of service with the most serious Jeebofascist infestation.

  130. 130.

    Villago Delenda Est

    March 17, 2011 at 4:37 pm

    @FormerSwingVoter:

    Jesus fuck, hasn’t a single goddamn one of them ever, and I mean ever read the fucking Constitution???

    No.

    This has been today’s simple answer…

  131. 131.

    Ignatz

    March 17, 2011 at 4:57 pm

    @Stan of the Sawgrass: Yep, she’s the Missouri State Senator from Chesterfield, MO. Supposedly, MO’s labor laws prevent kids from mowing lawns or running lemonade stands, and that’s what she’s trying to correct. Never mind that there have been zero cases of closed-down lemonade stands.

  132. 132.

    Brachiator

    March 17, 2011 at 5:40 pm

    @Villago Delenda Est: RE: Jesus fuck, hasn’t a single goddamn one of them ever, and I mean ever read the fucking Constitution???

    No. This has been today’s simple answer…

    The sadder thing is that these goobers made a big show about reading the Constitution aloud at the start of this session of Congress.

    Apparently, reading and comprehension are utterly disconnected for this crew.

  133. 133.

    Ruckus

    March 17, 2011 at 6:58 pm

    @Brachiator:
    Reading they learned that in the 4th grade.
    Never did get no comprehension learning.

  134. 134.

    Tonal Crow

    March 17, 2011 at 7:53 pm

    @Brachiator:

    The sadder thing is that these goobers made a big show about reading the Constitution aloud at the start of this session of Congress. Apparently, reading and comprehension are utterly disconnected for this crew.

    When a Republican mentions the Constitution, it is always for the purpose of propagandizing his or her audience. I thought that was clear about a decade ago.

  135. 135.

    PanurgeATL

    March 17, 2011 at 8:51 pm

    @The Political Nihilist Formerly Known As Kryptik:

    Why do you think that? I thought they won because we stayed home. No–the country doesn’t want it; Wisconsin showed that. But they don’t know how to get things moving in another direction. They stopped it in 2006 and 2008, and TBH they’ll probably stop it in 2012. Part of it is spinning these things our way–or at least not spinning them their way.

  136. 136.

    Paul in KY

    March 18, 2011 at 8:28 am

    @MikeJ: Heck, just give us the ships & the tanks & you can disband the army/navy.

  137. 137.

    Paul in KY

    March 18, 2011 at 8:37 am

    @Ruckus: I think you have the makings of a radio ad, circa 2016.

    Imagine that voiced by that ex-homeless Ted Williams dude.

  138. 138.

    Paul in KY

    March 18, 2011 at 8:39 am

    @Villago Delenda Est: Wasn’t that way when I was in (mid 80s). Back then, no one gived a shit where you went to church or if you went to church. Everyone (even little old lady secretaries) swore like mule skinners, etc.

  139. 139.

    JRon

    March 18, 2011 at 10:16 am

    I haven’t subjected you guys to one of my lame comics in awhile, but I couldn’t resist this one:

    http://shallowsage.com/post/1115394928/and-he-did-it-with-no-help-from-anybody-west

    some bootstraps, anyway.

Comments are closed.

Primary Sidebar

Fundraising 2023-24

Wis*Dems Supreme Court + SD-8

Recent Comments

  • Geminid on No Cake for Me Today Open Thread (Mar 23, 2023 @ 8:19pm)
  • Brachiator on No Cake for Me Today Open Thread (Mar 23, 2023 @ 8:18pm)
  • MisterForkbeard on No Cake for Me Today Open Thread (Mar 23, 2023 @ 8:18pm)
  • UncleEbeneezer on No Cake for Me Today Open Thread (Mar 23, 2023 @ 8:17pm)
  • lowtechcyclist on No Cake for Me Today Open Thread (Mar 23, 2023 @ 8:16pm)

🎈Keep Balloon Juice Ad Free

Become a Balloon Juice Patreon
Donate with Venmo, Zelle or PayPal

Balloon Juice Posts

View by Topic
View by Author
View by Month & Year
View by Past Author

Featuring

Medium Cool
Artists in Our Midst
Authors in Our Midst
We All Need A Little Kindness
Classified Documents: A Primer
State & Local Elections Discussion

Calling All Jackals

Site Feedback
Nominate a Rotating Tag
Submit Photos to On the Road
Balloon Juice Mailing List Signup
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Links)
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Posts)

Twitter / Spoutible

Balloon Juice (Spoutible)
WaterGirl (Spoutible)
TaMara (Spoutible)
John Cole
DougJ (aka NYT Pitchbot)
Betty Cracker
Tom Levenson
TaMara
David Anderson
Major Major Major Major
ActualCitizensUnited

Join the Fight!

Join the Fight Signup Form
All Join the Fight Posts

Balloon Juice Events

5/14  The Apocalypse
5/20  Home Away from Home
5/29  We’re Back, Baby
7/21  Merging!

Balloon Juice for Ukraine

Donate

Site Footer

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Comment Policy
  • Our Authors
  • Blogroll
  • Our Artists
  • Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2023 Dev Balloon Juice · All Rights Reserved · Powered by BizBudding Inc

Share this ArticleLike this article? Email it to a friend!

Email sent!