Our Government at Work, Ladies and Gentlemen

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7727886/

This thread, though, is more about how governments spend time on... well, unimportant issues. Like sexy cheerleading.

How much sense does it make to actually debate things like this on the floors of our local goverments and in Congress? Take the steroid issue in sports, for example. Is it really something that should be taking up so much of Washington's time?

I'm sure there're plenty of other examples, but I just can't think of anything at the moment. Do you agree with the government's meddling with small fry issues, or should they stick with trying to cut down on crime, fixing whatever deficits there happens to be right now and acheving world peace?

An incompetant person in power can spend their time on minor issues so as to not have to deal with those that matter.

The steroids-in-baseball thing is a different matter, because the government favors the industry--we suspended a few of our anti-trust laws so that anybody with a little money or enough charm to gather a few investors can't throw a team together until we have one per ZIP code. So if we're going to be helping them out, we get a little oversight.

However, the big thing involved is that these projects cost money, and somebody's asking for them. Al Edwards may indeed be an idiot, but come re-election, there are going to be a lot of wierd folks with an axe to grind and bitter women who didn't make the cheerleading squad when they were in high school remembering that this guy gave them (or tried to give them) what they want--and if someday it passes then there are going to be folks on whatever task force is put together to oversee this that are going to remember they owe a government job (which, in most instances is horridly easy and disgustingly overpaid--there's a reason folks used to refer to government employment as "Irish Welfare") to Mr. Edwards. You get enough projects like that goin' and you're guaranteed to be back in congress next term.

It's a huge problem, and pork-barrel spending is where most of the government's wasted money and unauthorized power goes to and comes from respectively. And it'll continue until we get rid of this "living Constitution" crap and read the thing instead of "interpreting" it to grant people rights that never existed and the government the power to see to them.

God, lord... Do they not have enough to do in Texas? Because where i live i still see homeless people, high gas prices, and potholes, yet there it must be perfect harmony if they can waste their time in this crap.

Quote:

---

God, lord... Do they not have enough to do in Texas? Because where i live i still see homeless people, high gas prices, and potholes, yet there it must be perfect harmony if they can waste their time in this crap.

---

Actually, you see this kind of legislation in all states, it's pathetic really.

it's a diversion tactic

http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/Health/story?id=708780

other things are going on that they dont want you seeing

next time you see a special about how dog fur treatment is affecting lawn care, think again


edit:

ok just read the actual thing...
maybe it's just cuz the governemnt are a bunch of uptight people in their 60's.

I figure the more time the government wastes on stupid crap, the less time they can spend actually putting policies in place that will screw us over and put us even more in debt. Our government has proven mostly incapable (or at least disinterested) in improving life for most people anyway.

Quote:

---

it's a diversion tactic

http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/Health/story?id=708780

other things are going on that they dont want you seeing

next time you see a special about how dog fur treatment is affecting lawn care, think again


edit:

ok just read the actual thing...
maybe it's just cuz the governemnt are a bunch of uptight people in their 60's.

---

I actually have heard of that program, and I do know it went on but was covered up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eestlinc

Our government has proven mostly incapable (or at least disinterested) in improving life for most people anyway.

---

If that's the case, then why don't we oust more of our politicians?

Oh, wait, I know. Most of us are too apathetic about the whole thing.

I....I'm not sure wether to laugh, or cry, or both at this. It's like something you'd read in The Onion....but real. =/

When I think about all the starving homeless people and see this crap...I start thinking not very nice things.

Quote:

---

And it'll continue until we get rid of this "living Constitution" crap and read the thing instead of "interpreting" it to grant people rights that never existed and the government the power to see to them.

---

Okay, so we still have slavery, women can't vote and are the property of their husbands, blacks cant go to school with whites, 18 year olds can't vote, due process is pretty much shot to hell, and, oh yeah, poll taxes. And no term limits for presidents. Oh, yeah, that's what we all need. (sarcasm).

Quote:

---

And it'll continue until we get rid of this "living Constitution" crap and read the thing instead of "interpreting" it to grant people rights that never existed and the government the power to see to them.

Okay, so we still have slavery, women can't vote and are the property of their husbands, blacks cant go to school with whites, 18 year olds can't vote, due process is pretty much shot to hell, and, oh yeah, poll taxes. And no term limits for presidents. Oh, yeah, that's what we all need. (sarcasm).

---

Actually, those changes are in the Constitution--amendment process, and all. In other words, reading rights in the Constitution that do exist isn't the problem, but thanks for the sarcasm. It usually makes my day when someone mixes being rather rude with being incredibly wrong--that's what we all need.

So if amendments are possible, and the Constitution can therefore grow, how is it not "living?"

The Constitution, like any other written document, has loopholes. It is the job of a neutral, rational party(the judicial branch) to interpret it and rationally judge on it - if not, people could claim that the First Amendment "right to free speech" allowed them to run into a Church in the middle of a ceremony and cuss out God and everybody in it. That's not protected speech - that's a public disruption, but if you translate the Constitution literally, it can be read that way.

As time changes, so do current situations. It's 2005, not 1787.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CloudSquallandZidane

God, lord... Do they not have enough to do in Texas? Because where i live i still see homeless people, high gas prices, and potholes, yet there it must be perfect harmony if they can waste their time in this crap.

---

there are a lot of poor neiborhoods in texas that has open sewer systems and the residents there are mostly sick with something due to the sewage in the air all the time.

Voters and i think citizens int eh USA the majority of us have put too much damn trust in politicians.Which is always always a bad thing to do.Or we get crap like this.And I bet there ar epeople in texas cheering for this Bill.Hopefully it dies and maybe we can do something aobut real problems such as homelessness and sstarving citizens,better veterans benefits and a constitution tha makes sure that veterans pay is never ever cut!Thats what we need to fix.Social Security and not going by Bush's plan for private accounts and really only the "know it all" college students are liking the private account idea. but it doesn't apeal to me.But instead we are thrown this garbage.Banning gay marriage,banning cheerleaders for doing "sexy"routines.Oh yeah thats what we really need to be focussing on.

Quote:

---

Hopefully it dies and maybe we can do something aobut real problems such as homelessness and sstarving citizens,better veterans benefits and a constitution tha makes sure that veterans pay is never ever cut!Thats what we need to fix.

---

Unfortunately the government doesn't really care about people. If they cared, there would be no starving citizens, no homeless, and the veterans would NEVER be betrayed by those who send them off to die.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Redneck

Actually, those changes are in the Constitution--amendment process, and all. In other words, reading rights in the Constitution that do exist isn't the problem, but thanks for the sarcasm. It usually makes my day when someone mixes being rather rude with being incredibly wrong--that's what we all need.

---

What i gather from his statement is if the constitution was never allowed to be amended, then none of those changes would ever have taken place. That is why we must leave the option to change the constitution unblocked, or else, God knows what we will need to make sure all states abide by next...???

Quote:

---

Actually, those changes are in the Constitution--amendment process, and all.

---

Yes, but not when it was writen.

Quote:

---

What i gather from his statement is if the constitution was never allowed to be amended, then none of those changes would ever have taken place. That is why we must leave the option to change the constitution unblocked, or else, God knows what we will need to make sure all states abide by next...???

---

Exactly. Thanks for backing me up.