If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Denver Post)   13 things that would have passed the Senate if there were no filibuster. [warning: picture of ugly turtle]   (denverpost.com) divider line 101
    More: Interesting, the warning, Senate, Capitol Hill in Washington, filibusters, turtles  
•       •       •

7202 clicks; posted to Politics » on 10 Nov 2012 at 6:55 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



101 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-11-10 04:09:16 PM
Ok, thanks for sharing.

/Making abortion illegal will allow the little baby Steve Jobs to live, but also allow the little baby Adolf Hitlers to live, too
 
2012-11-10 04:36:14 PM

cman: /Making abortion illegal will allow the little baby Steve Jobs to live, but also allow the little baby Adolf Hitlers to live, too


Someone will shiat on you, but your point is well made.
 
2012-11-10 04:44:38 PM
"a bill to end a provision in tax law that allows companies to deduct the cost of moving jobs overseas as a business expense. The bill would have given an additional tax credit for moving jobs back to the U.S."

NOW WHY would turtle-americans be against a bill like this?
Time to think about making turtle soup.
 
2012-11-10 04:48:03 PM
And this is the reason for which I am not the person who is the fan of the fillingbusters because these are all of the good suggestions if you do the asking of me.

Prevent the Environmental Protection Agency from regulating greenhouse gases

I believe this would be the important thing as the lactose intolerance should be up to the HHS department thereof and not the EPA department of protection because if we are talking about the gases then maybe we should call the chemist for doing this in the fusion chamber so I am not seeing why the EPA would do the regulation of this unless they are the medical professionals.
 
2012-11-10 04:57:27 PM
While, with a GOP House this issue is less practically relevant, the filibuster is and remains a travesty.
 
2012-11-10 05:16:44 PM

meow said the dog: And this is the reason for which I am not the person who is the fan of the fillingbusters because these are all of the good suggestions if you do the asking of me.


Dont get me started on obstructionism. The filibuster, preventing bills which would be passed?? sigh
The House has the strange reverse happening, where the majority prevents bills from being voted on, KNOWING that they would have to vote in favor of the bills or LOOK TERRIBLE.

Must really suck, KNOWING that the bills are righteous and should be passed and working so hard to prevent having to vote for the truth. or vote against something which is popular and looking foolish for doing so.

/I get that both houses get to make their own rules, but wouldnt it be nice if say, 30% could FORCE a floor vote???
/ HAHAHAHAHAH HAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
/sigh
 
2012-11-10 05:39:49 PM
Too bad these retards don't succumb to the intense laughter directed at their supudity

/apologies to any mentally disabled
 
2012-11-10 06:14:03 PM
Did anything get passed in the last 2 years?
 
2012-11-10 06:36:14 PM

antidisestablishmentarianism: Did anything get passed in the last 2 years?


Kidney stones.
 
2012-11-10 06:51:38 PM

RedPhoenix122: antidisestablishmentarianism: Did anything get passed in the last 2 years?

Kidney stones.


You owe me a new keyboard, and since this is a Mac wireless keyboard, thats about $70. Your humor cost you $70. Thats how funny you were.
 
2012-11-10 06:55:59 PM

kronicfeld: Someone will shiat on you, but your point is well made.


There is very rarely such a thing as a well made point involving Hitler. I don't know what was in the part you didn't quote, but there was no brilliant argument in the part you did.
 
2012-11-10 06:58:28 PM
McConnell will end his senate career when he's found dead in a rubber suit having suffocated on semen.
 
2012-11-10 07:00:29 PM
The U.S. Postal Service has faced mounting financial troubles because of increased use of the Internet.

Oh great, this bullshiat again.
 
2012-11-10 07:02:02 PM

HotIgneous Intruder: McConnell will end his senate career when he's found dead in a rubber suit having suffocated on semen.


He might have a tough time in 2014. Kentucky rejected his hand picked candidate in 2010 for farking Rand Paul. Could be the next Dick Lugar.
 
2012-11-10 07:02:21 PM

GAT_00: kronicfeld: Someone will shiat on you, but your point is well made.

There is very rarely such a thing as a well made point involving Hitler. I don't know what was in the part you didn't quote, but there was no brilliant argument in the part you did.


Ahh, GAT, the only one who I actually care about who put me on ignore.

I know you wont see this, and maybe if someone can quote me, you will be able to see this.

I was using the authors simplistic logic to show that the argument for abolishing the filibuster based upon things they liked that did not pass was a horrible argument because the author fails to remember the negative things that would have passed without the filibuster.

/Now, THAT is a run-on
 
2012-11-10 07:04:32 PM
The filibuster doesn't need to be struck down, just modified. Require they actually have to be physically present, reading the phone book or the Joy of Cooking, just like in the old days.

You could also lower the threshold of votes necessary to overcome the filibuster.

Has anyone heard any talk of this officially?
 
2012-11-10 07:04:51 PM

cman: I was using the authors simplistic logic to show that the argument for abolishing the filibuster based upon things they liked that did not pass was a horrible argument because the author fails to remember the negative things that would have passed without the filibuster.


Can you cite any examples?

Not meant to be rude, I actually would like to know. Personally I think the EPA unable to regulate greenhouse gasses would be a bad thing, but that's just me.
 
2012-11-10 07:05:25 PM

meow said the dog: And this is the reason for which I am not the person who is the fan of the fillingbusters because these are all of the good suggestions if you do the asking of me.

Prevent the Environmental Protection Agency from regulating greenhouse gases

I believe this would be the important thing as the lactose intolerance should be up to the HHS department thereof and not the EPA department of protection because if we are talking about the gases then maybe we should call the chemist for doing this in the fusion chamber so I am not seeing why the EPA would do the regulation of this unless they are the medical professionals.


I dunno what sort of 'erb you're working with but you need to a lot less of it. Or a whole lot more. What you're doing now ain't cuttin' it
 
2012-11-10 07:08:09 PM
Sen. Debbie Stabenow ... proposed a bill to end a provision in tax law that allows companies to deduct the cost of moving jobs overseas as a business expense.

B-b-but Romney said the idea that you get a break for shipping jobs overseas is simply not the case! Who am I to believe?
 
2012-11-10 07:08:49 PM

RedPhoenix122: cman: I was using the authors simplistic logic to show that the argument for abolishing the filibuster based upon things they liked that did not pass was a horrible argument because the author fails to remember the negative things that would have passed without the filibuster.

Can you cite any examples?

Not meant to be rude, I actually would like to know. Personally I think the EPA unable to regulate greenhouse gasses would be a bad thing, but that's just me.


I cannot remember any specific real life examples, but there was a movie that did show the positives of a filibuster: Mr. Smith Goes to Washington. I know using a movie is a cop out, a weak form, but it is the only thing that I can think of at the top of my mind.
 
2012-11-10 07:10:22 PM

cman: RedPhoenix122: cman: I was using the authors simplistic logic to show that the argument for abolishing the filibuster based upon things they liked that did not pass was a horrible argument because the author fails to remember the negative things that would have passed without the filibuster.

Can you cite any examples?

Not meant to be rude, I actually would like to know. Personally I think the EPA unable to regulate greenhouse gasses would be a bad thing, but that's just me.

I cannot remember any specific real life examples, but there was a movie that did show the positives of a filibuster: Mr. Smith Goes to Washington. I know using a movie is a cop out, a weak form, but it is the only thing that I can think of at the top of my mind.


Wait, I remember one.

In 2005, a group of Republican senators led by Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN), responding to the Democrats' threat to filibuster some judicial nominees of President George W. Bush to prevent a vote on the nominations, floated the idea of having Vice President Dick Cheney, as President of the Senate, rule from the chair that a filibuster on judicial nominees was inconsistent with the constitutional grant of power to the president to name judges with the advice and consent of the Senate (interpreting "consent of the Senate" to mean "consent of a simple majority of Senators," not "consent under the Senate rules").[32] Senator Trent Lott, the junior Republican senator from Mississippi, had named the plan the "nuclear option." Republican leaders preferred to use the term "constitutional option", although opponents and some supporters of the plan continued to use "nuclear option".
 
2012-11-10 07:10:33 PM
So, without the filibuster, basic, necessary legislation would have passed the Senate, along with a few moronic pieces of nonsense that could have been vetoed.

Fark the filibuster. There's no reason or excuse to give the minority absolute control over the government like that.
 
2012-11-10 07:11:20 PM

GAT_00: kronicfeld: Someone will shiat on you, but your point is well made.

There is very rarely such a thing as a well made point involving Hitler. I don't know what was in the part you didn't quote, but there was no brilliant argument in the part you did.


The part you didn't see was "Ok, thanks for sharing." That's it.

/the reason cman mentioned Hitler is because of the anti-abortion argument that if you're pregnant and get an abortion, there's a chance you would end up murdering the next Einstein (or Jobs), and the counter-argument that if you carry the child to term instead of getting an abortion there's a chance that the child would end up being the next Hitler
//sometimes you have to use a Godwin to counter absurd arguments like that. See also the people claiming that Obama didn't kill Bin Laden, the SEALs did -- and the counter-argument that Hitler didn't kill all those Jews, the Nazis did
 
2012-11-10 07:11:56 PM

cman: Making abortion illegal will allow the little baby Steve Jobs to live, but also allow the little baby Adolf Hitlers to live, too


Are you trying to say that all aborted babies would have been tyrants?
 
2012-11-10 07:11:57 PM
Keep the filibuster but go back to this

img69.imageshack.us


Phone books, dictionaries, piss buckets...

If it's important enough, you should be willing to suffer for it.
 
2012-11-10 07:12:07 PM
I love how two of those relate to raising taxes on oil companies.

You've got 90 billion dollars to piss away by throwing it at your friends in the non-existent green energy industry but you continue to bemoan and cry the oil companies?

President Obama's 2011 jobs proposal

More stimulus to be used on "shovel ready" projects and to pump up union supporters.

Raise tax rates on millionaires

Only a liberal could think "The private sector isn't doing so hot these days, let's take more money out of it and use it with all the efficiency and competence of the government" is actually a good idea.
 
2012-11-10 07:12:27 PM

namatad: "a bill to end a provision in tax law that allows companies to deduct the cost of moving jobs overseas as a business expense. The bill would have given an additional tax credit for moving jobs back to the U.S."

NOW WHY would turtle-americans be against a bill like this?
Time to think about making turtle soup.


THIS NEEDS TO BE REPEATED. ALWAYS.
 
2012-11-10 07:13:26 PM

iaazathot: The filibuster doesn't need to be struck down, just modified. Require they actually have to be physically present, reading the phone book or the Joy of Cooking, just like in the old days.

You could also lower the threshold of votes necessary to overcome the filibuster.

Has anyone heard any talk of this officially?


Of course not, because only liberals and only those liberals NOT holding office want to suggest it. Working for a living is hard, better to let the "filibuster" continue than have to actually stand up and Filibuster things.
 
2012-11-10 07:15:30 PM

cman: Ok, thanks for sharing.

/Making abortion illegal will allow the little baby Steve Jobs to live, but also allow the little baby Adolf Hitlers to live, too


If you want to use an example of a "good" person you could do a hell of a lot better then Steve Jobs. An insane thief was all he was.
 
2012-11-10 07:16:18 PM

King Something: GAT_00: kronicfeld: Someone will shiat on you, but your point is well made.

There is very rarely such a thing as a well made point involving Hitler. I don't know what was in the part you didn't quote, but there was no brilliant argument in the part you did.

The part you didn't see was "Ok, thanks for sharing." That's it.

/the reason cman mentioned Hitler is because of the anti-abortion argument that if you're pregnant and get an abortion, there's a chance you would end up murdering the next Einstein (or Jobs), and the counter-argument that if you carry the child to term instead of getting an abortion there's a chance that the child would end up being the next Hitler
//sometimes you have to use a Godwin to counter absurd arguments like that. See also the people claiming that Obama didn't kill Bin Laden, the SEALs did -- and the counter-argument that Hitler didn't kill all those Jews, the Nazis did


And the statistical improbabilities of any of those outcomes make the whole argument stupid. Extreme arguments such as those only serve to discredit the person making them.
 
2012-11-10 07:17:48 PM

randomjsa: I love how two of those relate to raising taxes on oil companies.

You've got 90 billion dollars to piss away by throwing it at your friends in the non-existent green energy industry but you continue to bemoan and cry the oil companies?

President Obama's 2011 jobs proposal

More stimulus to be used on "shovel ready" projects and to pump up union supporters.

Raise tax rates on millionaires

Only a liberal could think "The private sector isn't doing so hot these days, let's take more money out of it and use it with all the efficiency and competence of the government" is actually a good idea.


The top 1% are just sitting on their money. That's what always happens in a bad economy. Give it to the middle class and the poor, it'll work it's way up again, don't worry.
 
2012-11-10 07:20:01 PM

cman: cman: RedPhoenix122: cman: I was using the authors simplistic logic to show that the argument for abolishing the filibuster based upon things they liked that did not pass was a horrible argument because the author fails to remember the negative things that would have passed without the filibuster.

Can you cite any examples?

Not meant to be rude, I actually would like to know. Personally I think the EPA unable to regulate greenhouse gasses would be a bad thing, but that's just me.

I cannot remember any specific real life examples, but there was a movie that did show the positives of a filibuster: Mr. Smith Goes to Washington. I know using a movie is a cop out, a weak form, but it is the only thing that I can think of at the top of my mind.

Wait, I remember one.

In 2005, a group of Republican senators led by Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN), responding to the Democrats' threat to filibuster some judicial nominees of President George W. Bush to prevent a vote on the nominations, floated the idea of having Vice President Dick Cheney, as President of the Senate, rule from the chair that a filibuster on judicial nominees was inconsistent with the constitutional grant of power to the president to name judges with the advice and consent of the Senate (interpreting "consent of the Senate" to mean "consent of a simple majority of Senators," not "consent under the Senate rules").[32] Senator Trent Lott, the junior Republican senator from Mississippi, had named the plan the "nuclear option." Republican leaders preferred to use the term "constitutional option", although opponents and some supporters of the plan continued to use "nuclear option".


GAT you're making cman sad. stop it
 
2012-11-10 07:21:38 PM

cman: cman: RedPhoenix122: cman: I was using the authors simplistic logic to show that the argument for abolishing the filibuster based upon things they liked that did not pass was a horrible argument because the author fails to remember the negative things that would have passed without the filibuster.

Can you cite any examples?

Not meant to be rude, I actually would like to know. Personally I think the EPA unable to regulate greenhouse gasses would be a bad thing, but that's just me.

I cannot remember any specific real life examples, but there was a movie that did show the positives of a filibuster: Mr. Smith Goes to Washington. I know using a movie is a cop out, a weak form, but it is the only thing that I can think of at the top of my mind.

Wait, I remember one.

In 2005, a group of Republican senators led by Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN), responding to the Democrats' threat to filibuster some judicial nominees of President George W. Bush to prevent a vote on the nominations, floated the idea of having Vice President Dick Cheney, as President of the Senate, rule from the chair that a filibuster on judicial nominees was inconsistent with the constitutional grant of power to the president to name judges with the advice and consent of the Senate (interpreting "consent of the Senate" to mean "consent of a simple majority of Senators," not "consent under the Senate rules").[32] Senator Trent Lott, the junior Republican senator from Mississippi, had named the plan the "nuclear option." Republican leaders preferred to use the term "constitutional option", although opponents and some supporters of the plan continued to use "nuclear option".


That one seems kinda week, I'll stick with Mr. Smith.

The filibuster is important, because sometimes the majority IS a tyrant. But the current rules are bullshiat and need a-changin'.

This should have made an appearance by now.

i75.photobucket.com
 
2012-11-10 07:22:40 PM
All the good spying bills passed so we can be safe from the tarists.
 
2012-11-10 07:28:38 PM

Nome de Plume: All the good spying bills passed so we can be safe from the tarists.


Nobody wants to be seen as "weak" in The War on Terror/Crime/Drugs/Etc.
 
2012-11-10 07:33:55 PM

GAT_00: King Something: GAT_00: kronicfeld: Someone will shiat on you, but your point is well made.

There is very rarely such a thing as a well made point involving Hitler. I don't know what was in the part you didn't quote, but there was no brilliant argument in the part you did.

The part you didn't see was "Ok, thanks for sharing." That's it.

/the reason cman mentioned Hitler is because of the anti-abortion argument that if you're pregnant and get an abortion, there's a chance you would end up murdering the next Einstein (or Jobs), and the counter-argument that if you carry the child to term instead of getting an abortion there's a chance that the child would end up being the next Hitler
//sometimes you have to use a Godwin to counter absurd arguments like that. See also the people claiming that Obama didn't kill Bin Laden, the SEALs did -- and the counter-argument that Hitler didn't kill all those Jews, the Nazis did

And the statistical improbabilities of any of those outcomes make the whole argument stupid. Extreme arguments such as those only serve to discredit the person making them.


Hence the Hitler counter-argument -- its purpose is to discredit the person making the argument being countered.
 
2012-11-10 07:38:20 PM

randomjsa: I love how two of those relate to raising taxes on oil companies.

You've got 90 billion dollars to piss away by throwing it at your friends in the non-existent green energy industry but you continue to bemoan and cry the oil companies?

President Obama's 2011 jobs proposal

More stimulus to be used on "shovel ready" projects and to pump up union supporters.

Raise tax rates on millionaires

Only a liberal could think "The private sector isn't doing so hot these days, let's take more money out of it and use it with all the efficiency and competence of the government" is actually a good idea.


Why would the private sector make roads and bridges? Or do you think all roads should be toll roads?
 
2012-11-10 07:42:52 PM

TheBigJerk: cman: cman: RedPhoenix122: cman: I was using the authors simplistic logic to show that the argument for abolishing the filibuster based upon things they liked that did not pass was a horrible argument because the author fails to remember the negative things that would have passed without the filibuster.

Can you cite any examples?

Not meant to be rude, I actually would like to know. Personally I think the EPA unable to regulate greenhouse gasses would be a bad thing, but that's just me.

I cannot remember any specific real life examples, but there was a movie that did show the positives of a filibuster: Mr. Smith Goes to Washington. I know using a movie is a cop out, a weak form, but it is the only thing that I can think of at the top of my mind.

Wait, I remember one.

In 2005, a group of Republican senators led by Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN), responding to the Democrats' threat to filibuster some judicial nominees of President George W. Bush to prevent a vote on the nominations, floated the idea of having Vice President Dick Cheney, as President of the Senate, rule from the chair that a filibuster on judicial nominees was inconsistent with the constitutional grant of power to the president to name judges with the advice and consent of the Senate (interpreting "consent of the Senate" to mean "consent of a simple majority of Senators," not "consent under the Senate rules").[32] Senator Trent Lott, the junior Republican senator from Mississippi, had named the plan the "nuclear option." Republican leaders preferred to use the term "constitutional option", although opponents and some supporters of the plan continued to use "nuclear option".

That one seems kinda weekweak, I'll stick with Mr. Smith.

The filibuster is important, because sometimes the majority IS a tyrant. But the current rules are bullshiat and need a-changin'.

This should have made an appearance by now.

[i75.photobucket.com image 500x375]


*sigh*
 
2012-11-10 07:44:22 PM
The original point of the filibuster was to make sure everyone had time to read and think about the bill. Why not restore that? New rules are that any senator can call for the vote to be delayed, and the bill will be voted on in one weeks time. That way things aren't rammed through, but there is reasonable time to consider the bill and the minority party can't just shut congress down.
 
2012-11-10 07:46:10 PM

Snapper Carr: Keep the filibuster but go back to this

[img69.imageshack.us image 700x512]


Phone books, dictionaries, piss buckets...

If it's important enough, you should be willing to suffer for it.


I agree with this direction. Televising a bunch of senators reading the phone book might make the average person take an interest in the legislation being discussed and put pressure one way or the other.

That being said, Reid better enact some sort of filibuster reform or get rid of the means to do it because you know damn well if/when the GOP has a chance to use this loophole to their advantage they will do so in a second. The only suprising thing is that they didn't think of this when they had the opportunity.
 
2012-11-10 07:49:01 PM

randomjsa: I love how two of those relate to raising taxes on oil companies.

You've got 90 billion dollars to piss away by throwing it at your friends in the non-existent green energy industry but you continue to bemoan and cry the oil companies?

President Obama's 2011 jobs proposal

More stimulus to be used on "shovel ready" projects and to pump up union supporters.

Raise tax rates on millionaires

Only a liberal could think "The private sector isn't doing so hot these days, let's take more money out of it and use it with all the efficiency and competence of the government" is actually a good idea.


So, the problem with the economy is that the rich just don't have enough money?
 
2012-11-10 07:49:57 PM

fusillade762: The U.S. Postal Service has faced mounting financial troubles because of increased use of the Internet.

Oh great, this bullshiat again.


"Millennial" here,

numbers of important communications I sent/received before email was common: 7, in 13 years.
number of important communications I sent/received after email was common: eleventy billion in 15 years.
number of important communications I sent/received via snail mail after email common: probably about 500 in 15 years.
 
2012-11-10 07:50:31 PM

randomjsa: I love how two of those relate to raising taxes on oil companies.

You've got 90 billion dollars to piss away by throwing it at your friends in the non-existent green energy industry but you continue to bemoan and cry the oil companies?

President Obama's 2011 jobs proposal

More stimulus to be used on "shovel ready" projects and to pump up union supporters.

Raise tax rates on millionaires

Only a liberal could think "The private sector isn't doing so hot these days, let's take more money out of it and use it with all the efficiency and competence of the government" is actually a good idea.


i159.photobucket.com
 
2012-11-10 07:53:24 PM
My pet box turtle objects to people who compare her and her kind to Mitch McConnell.
 
2012-11-10 07:54:19 PM

Le Bomb Suprize: That being said, Reid better enact some sort of filibuster reform or get rid of the means to do it because you know damn well if/when the GOP has a chance to use this loophole to their advantage they will do so in a second. The only suprising thing is that they didn't think of this when they had the opportunity.


Wouldn't any Democratic effort to reform the filibuster be blocked by, well, Republican filibuster?
 
2012-11-10 08:07:34 PM
Seriously, if you're going to make such a list, why would you make your #1 not actually fit your list criteria?

Prevent the Environmental Protection Agency from regulating greenhouse gases

Failed: 50-50, April 6, 2011, Senate Roll Call No. 54, 112nd Congress, 1st Session

If it were subjected to a majority vote and tied at 50-50, however, Vice President Joe Biden would have been allowed to vote and he presumably would have voted against it.
 
2012-11-10 08:11:53 PM

Doc Daneeka: Le Bomb Suprize: That being said, Reid better enact some sort of filibuster reform or get rid of the means to do it because you know damn well if/when the GOP has a chance to use this loophole to their advantage they will do so in a second. The only suprising thing is that they didn't think of this when they had the opportunity.

Wouldn't any Democratic effort to reform the filibuster be blocked by, well, Republican filibuster?


Because the change would be done during the rules vote session where a simple majority of 50 is the only thing required. Harry Reid recently said that he is going to go after filibuster reform in the next rules session.
 
2012-11-10 08:11:54 PM

Xetal: The original point of the filibuster was to make sure everyone had time to read and think about the bill. Why not restore that? New rules are that any senator can call for the vote to be delayed, and the bill will be voted on in one weeks time. That way things aren't rammed through, but there is reasonable time to consider the bill and the minority party can't just shut congress down.


Good points all. I think if the last 4 years (especially the last two) have taught us anything it's how often the filibuster rules are being abused and how badly in need of reform they are.
 
2012-11-10 08:13:05 PM

Bhruic: Seriously, if you're going to make such a list, why would you make your #1 not actually fit your list criteria?

Prevent the Environmental Protection Agency from regulating greenhouse gases

Failed: 50-50, April 6, 2011, Senate Roll Call No. 54, 112nd Congress, 1st Session

If it were subjected to a majority vote and tied at 50-50, however, Vice President Joe Biden would have been allowed to vote and he presumably would have voted against it.


But you see, that was all speculation, and it fits the criteria, because it never had a chance to be voted on.
 
2012-11-10 08:13:52 PM

Britney Spear's Speculum: fusillade762: The U.S. Postal Service has faced mounting financial troubles because of increased use of the Internet.

Oh great, this bullshiat again.

"Millennial" here,

numbers of important communications I sent/received before email was common: 7, in 13 years.
number of important communications I sent/received after email was common: eleventy billion in 15 years.
number of important communications I sent/received via snail mail after email common: probably about 500 in 15 years.


The USPS was doing just fine until the Republicans forced them (in 2005?) to fund their pension fund 75 YEARS in advance. That was the OP's point.
 
Displayed 50 of 101 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »





Report