Do you have adblock enabled?
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.

(Washington Post)   Someone once compared getting consensus in Congress to herding cats. The analogy still holds but now you'll have to imagine that the cats are angry and brain damaged   (washingtonpost.com) divider line 136
    More: Obvious, Boehner, White House, GOP, republican house leaders, Republican Study Committee, Americans for Tax Reform, analogy, congresses  
•       •       •

5146 clicks; posted to Politics » on 20 Dec 2012 at 7:06 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-12-20 10:06:06 AM  

dittybopper: born_yesterday: But if they don't toe tow the party line,

/Pet Peave.


Actually. no.

From The Grammarist:
The idiom is toe the line, not tow the line. The phrase derives from track-and-field events in which athletes are required to place a foot on a starting line and wait for the signal to go. Race officials used to shout "Toe the line!" where now they shout "On your marks!" Since entering the language, the idiom has developed to mean do what is expected or act according to someone else's rules or expectations.

/pet peeve

//oh, wait.....
 
2012-12-20 10:08:53 AM  

mytdawg: Real Women Drink Akvavit: mytdawg: Detroit Dog Rescue has pulled dogs out of the worst possible environments and some of the stories about the dogs ability to recover and be lovable are just astounding.

 
[sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net image 403x403]
 
Dammit, you're costing me money. I may look scary and slightly freakish to others, but I've got a tender heart. Especially when it comes to animals. I will donate at the drop of a hat to an animal cause.
 
/never shoulda started watching those videos
//poor goggies!

 
My apologies. It was meant for the blind Golden thread. DDR has a really good videographer it seems though. The videos are heart wrenching but extremely well done. Ought to put those people in charge of Congress although that may be a crappier job than they are doing now.
 
It's for a very good cause though, so no real harm, no foul. Besides, I've got about a six month reserve left, so I'm good. The foul is on the people who left animals in such deplorable conditions. 
 
/unemployed for a while now, but it's totally chill so far
 
2012-12-20 10:11:49 AM  

mod3072: "We are the party that says you should not raise taxes."

That is the most retarded political ideology I've ever heard, and I say that as a conservative. I can understand and support the Republicans being the party that fights to keep taxes and expenditures as low as possible while continuing to maintain our fiscal responsibilities and vital infrastructures. To simply say "Taxes never, ever go up for any reason, period!", especially during a period when taxes are near historical lows, is almost comically stupid. Not only is it horrible fiscal policy, it puts you into a position that allows no room whatsoever for debate and compromise. That's a huge problem in a democracy. You are virtually guaranteeing perpetual gridlock, standing firm to your misguided ideals while your country burns around you. I guess it fits nicely on a bumper sticker though, and it's simple enough for your brain-dead constituents to understand.

Look, Republicans: I realize that in Republican fantasy land we can simply de-fund NPR and Planned Parenthood, kick the blacks off of "welfare", increase military spending and lower taxes and somehow the budget will miraculously be balanced. That's all well and good. Unfortunately we live in a place that I like to call "reality". Get your pants off of your head, your mouth off of Grover's cock, and help us come up with a plan to get this country back on track. Your ridiculous posturing and mindless absolutism accomplishes nothing and threatens to destroy your country from within. Congratulations, assholes. You're trying to put us on a path to become a 3rd-world country, but at least the billionaires can keep an extra 3% in their offshore bank accounts, so I guess it's all good.


Welcome to Greenland. Maybe red actually...
 
2012-12-20 10:19:17 AM  

pissedoffmick: These are the very same folks that spent a bazillion dollars running ads every 2 minutes for months and months touting how effective they would ineffective and rabid their opponent would be once elected, right?


FTFY. "Attack" ads have gained much more favor than "Promise" ads, it seems to me.
 
2012-12-20 10:21:45 AM  
Never had a problem herding my cats. The congress-critters, on the other hand, are just too expensive.
 
2012-12-20 10:35:22 AM  

Real Women Drink Akvavit: It never ceases to amaze me how short sighted some of these alleged people can be. I actually went to live in Norway with some of my family members for a short while. Their tax rates are very high, yet they are one of the wealthiest nations on Earth, with well kept roads, good public education, universal health care, an awesome naval force, etc. Probably a lot of things I don't know about as well.

Here in Cali, we've got potholes in our roads, a large homeless population, neighborhoods you'd never want to walk through, surly police and other shenanigans that are very unsavory. I guess if you want something done right, just go ask the nearest Norwegian. They seem to have it down to an art.



Norway has oil, though. Denmark is a better example.

/ 50% of GDP in taxes?
// 60% marginal tax rate, plus 25% VAT?
/// It's more likely than you think... to lead to a below-EU-average unemployment rate with positive trade balance (and top-notch public services)!
 
2012-12-20 10:35:26 AM  
Isn't welfare something you have to pay back nowadays? I heard Clinton  passed that law. If that is true, I don't get what the big deal is about someone being on welfare for a while so the recipient doesn't end up homeless. I've never had to be on it, but I've known people who did have to go on the dole. The welfare department here in Cali put so many "you must do this, you must do that with us, you must attend this class" on them that it was actually hard for them to go look for work. It's part of the reason I built up such a healthy reserve in my savings in the first place. I never want to have to go through that. Then having to pay it back would suck even more. Dudes. Not cool. Not cool at all. 
 
Look out for your own, and your own is your fellow countrymen.  It starts with your family and spirals outwards into the wider community, then to the rest of the nation, if necessary. 
 
Oh, and if someone is a billionaire, they certainly don't need my help by having a lower tax rate than many/most middle class types. Sell your wife's Prada collection if you start running low on cash, jackass. Too bad that won't fit on a bumper sticker.
 
2012-12-20 10:36:45 AM  
theinspirationroom.com

theinspirationroom.com

www.jugglingcats.com

3.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-12-20 10:41:03 AM  

ghare: IamKaiserSoze!!!:
As long as people cling to the belief it's the other teams fault we as a nation are screwed....

Except that, objectively speaking, it really IS the Republican party's fault. That doesn't make the Democrats perfect bay any means, but by any objective assessment, the Democrats are more in tune with reality.


And by objective you mean what you read in HuffPo or watch on MSNBC.
 
The Democrats have promised that this entire mess can be fixed by only making 1% of the population endure some pain. That's reality?
 
I'm making less than $250k.
 
I'm willing to;
 
Pay more taxes
Put off Mcare and SS a year or two
See across the board spending cuts in all federal programs of 2-5%
Have a comprehensive review of all current and proposed federal regulations to assess effectiveness
 
What would you personally be willing to endure?
 
2012-12-20 10:44:21 AM  

IamKaiserSoze!!!: ghare: IamKaiserSoze!!!:
As long as people cling to the belief it's the other teams fault we as a nation are screwed....

Except that, objectively speaking, it really IS the Republican party's fault. That doesn't make the Democrats perfect bay any means, but by any objective assessment, the Democrats are more in tune with reality.

And by objective you mean what you read in HuffPo or watch on MSNBC.

The Democrats have promised that this entire mess can be fixed by only making 1% of the population endure some pain. That's reality?

I'm making less than $250k.

I'm willing to;

Pay more taxes
Put off Mcare and SS a year or two
See across the board spending cuts in all federal programs of 2-5%
Have a comprehensive review of all current and proposed federal regulations to assess effectiveness

What would you personally be willing to endure?


Citation please.

btw I agree with the rest of your points. Maybe you should consider dropping the bullshait talking points and start acting like the reasonable human being that you apparently are.
 
2012-12-20 10:47:20 AM  

mod3072: Look, Republicans: I realize that in Republican fantasy land we can simply de-fund NPR and Planned Parenthood, kick the blacks off of "welfare", increase military spending and lower taxes and somehow the budget will miraculously be balanced. That's all well and good. Unfortunately we live in a place that I like to call "reality". Get your pants off of your head, your mouth off of Grover's cock, and help us come up with a plan to get this country back on track. Your ridiculous posturing and mindless absolutism accomplishes nothing and threatens to destroy your country from within. Congratulations, assholes. You're trying to put us on a path to become a 3rd-world country, but at least the billionaires can keep an extra 3% in their offshore bank accounts, so I guess it's all good.


Would you like to hug or make out?
 
2012-12-20 10:52:57 AM  
The analogy still holds but now you'll have to imagine that the cats are angry and brain damaged...
because of in-breeding.
 
2012-12-20 10:54:21 AM  

urbangirl: dittybopper: born_yesterday: But if they don't toe tow the party line,

/Pet Peave.

Actually. no.

From The Grammarist:
The idiom is toe the line, not tow the line. The phrase derives from track-and-field events in which athletes are required to place a foot on a starting line and wait for the signal to go. Race officials used to shout "Toe the line!" where now they shout "On your marks!" Since entering the language, the idiom has developed to mean do what is expected or act according to someone else's rules or expectations.

/pet peeve

//oh, wait.....


Are you not familiar with the Farkism known as the "Rotsky"?
 
2012-12-20 10:56:45 AM  

BizarreMan: dittybopper: edmo: So they're feral now?

Feral Congress would be an excellent band name.

When you think about one of the other definitions of Congress as sexual relations that is even cooler.


Oh, I was well aware of that connotation.
 
2012-12-20 11:05:59 AM  

wambu: The kind of kitty we need to spend time herding instead.
[i.imgur.com image 850x1231]


So, which porn star is that? Also, why aren't there more "kitties" in this thread?
 
2012-12-20 11:12:23 AM  
The House is completely illegitimate. It's the one and only body of the federal government that is supposed to directly represent popular opinion. There should never, EVER be an instance where one party clearly wins a majority of the national popular vote in the House, and yet the other party walks away with a massive majority of elected representatives.

F*ck gerrymandering. Obama should make a stink about it in front of cameras. Why hasn't he done so? He is entitled to have a blue Senate and House for the next two years. He is goddamn entitled to it.
 
2012-12-20 11:24:45 AM  

Tommy Moo: The House is completely illegitimate. It's the one and only body of the federal government that is supposed to directly represent popular opinion. There should never, EVER be an instance where one party clearly wins a majority of the national popular vote in the House, and yet the other party walks away with a massive majority of elected representatives.

F*ck gerrymandering. Obama should make a stink about it in front of cameras. Why hasn't he done so? He is entitled to have a blue Senate and House for the next two years. He is goddamn entitled to it.


Reach across that aisle and slap the shiat out of supposed adults acting like petulant 2 year olds...
 
2012-12-20 11:28:49 AM  

Tommy Moo: There should never, EVER be an instance where one party clearly wins a majority of the national popular vote in the House, and yet the other party walks away with a massive majority of elected representatives.


That's like saying that the World Series should be decided not by which team wins the most games, but by which team makes the most runs. Which is stupid.
 
2012-12-20 11:33:30 AM  

blue_2501: wambu: The kind of kitty we need to spend time herding instead.
[i.imgur.com image 850x1231]

So, which porn star is that? Also, why aren't there more "kitties" in this thread?


Anna Song Link is NSFW
 
2012-12-20 11:33:43 AM  

phyrkrakr: Lost Thought 00: And yet they will take control of the Senate in 2014

Not to start talking election stuff already, but the D-R split is 55-45 at present. What six (D) seats are the Republicans going to win? It's way too early to start polling, or thinking about how the Senate is going to be perceived by the public, but just looking at demographics, that's a big chunk of races to win.


Assuming they don't lose Kerry's seat - Arkansas, Loiusiana, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Oregon, Alaska, Colorado, Minnisota

All those were 2008 pickups that were by the skin of their teeth even with the Obama bump.
 
2012-12-20 11:42:02 AM  

trivial use of my dark powers: Cats generally aren't as vocal as Congress critters. It's more like trying to fight your way free of a pack of drunken, rabid howler monkeys without getting bitten or sexually assaulted.

 
I dunno...cats with Siamese in their bloodlines can get pretty mouthy...and they can be very opinionated little bastids too.
 
For the record...the proper term for a bunch of domestic cats is a clowder.
Cats aren't wired for herding. They are predators and herding is a safety-increasing behavior of non-predatory critters.
 
 
You can LEAD cats, however.  
First, the cats have to like you...or at least not consider you a threat.  Then you have to have something that they want...and you have to let them see/smell or otherwise know that you have it.
Start walkin', and you will have a furry escort.  
Just step carefully.  A lot of cats do the 'following from the front' thing and can trip you up in nothing flat.
 
/ Actually, I like mouthy, opinionated Siamese-descended cats...
// Even if they do tend to lack volume control...
 
2012-12-20 11:49:08 AM  

Real Women Drink Akvavit: Philbb: Obligatory.

I love that commercial! It was an old Superbowl commercial, wasn't it? I forgot all about it until you posted the link.
 
/starts day with a happy smile


Yeah...THIS
 
Hi RWDA!
 
2012-12-20 11:58:18 AM  

syzygy whizz: Real Women Drink Akvavit: Philbb: Obligatory.

 
I love that commercial! It was an old Superbowl commercial, wasn't it? I forgot all about it until you posted the link.
 
/starts day with a happy smile

 
Yeah...THIS
 
Hi RWDA!

 
HI! 
 
*dances about for both of us*
 
2012-12-20 12:30:14 PM  
Come on, people! More cat pictures!!
 
2012-12-20 12:47:01 PM  

Tsukue: Come on, people! More cat pictures!!


i.chzbgr.com
 
2012-12-20 01:00:53 PM  

The Irresponsible Captain: Never had a problem herding my cats. The congress-critters, on the other hand, are just too expensive.


perhaps shock collars would help?
 
2012-12-20 01:01:53 PM  

dittybopper: Tommy Moo: There should never, EVER be an instance where one party clearly wins a majority of the national popular vote in the House, and yet the other party walks away with a massive majority of elected representatives.

That's like saying that the World Series should be decided not by which team wins the most games, but by which team makes the most runs. Which is stupid.


No, it's like saying that the makeup of the House should be decided by which party has the most popular support, which is exactly what the House was designed to be.
 
2012-12-20 01:07:41 PM  
I'm sick of politics, but the headline made me laugh. So in the spirit of the thread, here's my "elected representative" after a hard day negotiating with Congress

lh5.googleusercontent.com

It's not a drinking problem. He can stop anytime he wants.
 
2012-12-20 01:18:42 PM  
Democrats - The solution is new revenue or taxes! Taking more of what individuals and businesses earn is the answer! If a business used to make $100 and now makes $97 because taxes went up, they either spend $3 less so they can continue to make the same amount or they take the hit and make less so are worth less as a business. One impacts spending the other impacts savings but either way, our private economy is now worth $3 less and our government economy is worth $3 more. Same logic for individuals and same result.

Republicans - The solution is for the government to spend less! Taking less of what individuals and businesses earn is the answer! The businesses and individuals keep making the same $100 and get to decide how to spend or save that $3. Our private economy continues to be worth the $3 while the government economy is left to decide 1) borrow to keep spending up today leveraging future spending power or 2) spend $3 less. Either way the government economy is worth $3 less.

Will the interests of the majority (government) or the interests of the individual (people and businesses) prevail? So now that the derp's out of it, which side are you on?
 
2012-12-20 01:20:07 PM  
i.chzbgr.com
 
2012-12-20 01:41:01 PM  
They have no trouble at all coming together when their wealthy donor friends interests require it, or to destroy the concept of Civil Liberties.

Protecting the Banks from prosecution for Fraud? Bipartisan support

Endless highly profitable War? Bipartisan support

War on Drugs / For profit prisons? Bipartisan support

Free Trade Agreements that allow America's manufacturing jobs to be shipped out of the nation, without any sort of protective tariffs when those products are brought back in? Bipartisan support

Patriot Act? Bipartisan support

Throwing Americans into Military Prisons without a Trial? Bipartisan support

Hell, right now, the Senate is trying to sneak through an extension of the "temporary" FISA Amendments that legalized Bush style warrantless spying on Americans. Without any sort of debate or publicity.

Just like the last Patriot Act extension was snuck through with as little debate and publicity as possible.

It's not that they don't know what Americans want. It's that they want to fark us over without our noticing.

dl.dropbox.com
 
2012-12-20 02:08:04 PM  
i.chzbgr.com
 
2012-12-20 03:44:38 PM  

Tommy Moo: dittybopper: Tommy Moo: There should never, EVER be an instance where one party clearly wins a majority of the national popular vote in the House, and yet the other party walks away with a massive majority of elected representatives.

That's like saying that the World Series should be decided not by which team wins the most games, but by which team makes the most runs. Which is stupid.

No, it's like saying that the makeup of the House should be decided by which party has the most popular support, which is exactly what the House was designed to be.


Which is why my analogy is correct:

Imagine this World Series between team A and team B:

Game 1: A 12, B 3
Game 2: A 4, B 5
Game 3: A 5, B 3
Game 4: A 3, B 4
Game 5: A 7, B 9
Game 6: A 5, B 6

Team A managed to get more runs in the series, 36 vs. 30 for team B, but they still lost the series because they lost 4 out of the 7 potential games.

That's how this sort of thing works. If you look at the popular vote, Barack Obama has no mandate: He won a bare 51% of the vote. The state split was close too: 26 to 24. But because President Obama carried states with higher electoral college votes, he actually won the election by a much wider margin, 332 to 206.

The nice thing about the House, though, is that a Republican or Democrat enclave inside a state that swings the opposite way can still get someone to represent them. Why would anyone be opposed to that?
 
2012-12-20 04:41:16 PM  
Getting consensus in Congress is as easy as highiering an army of Lobbyists.
 
2012-12-20 04:55:38 PM  

Philbb: Obligatory.


I remember that commercial and I remember liking it and I remember thinking to myself "Who the fark is EDS?"

Now when I watch it again, I think to myself "Who the fark is/was EDS?"
 
2012-12-20 05:55:16 PM  

dittybopper: Tommy Moo: dittybopper: Tommy Moo: There should never, EVER be an instance where one party clearly wins a majority of the national popular vote in the House, and yet the other party walks away with a massive majority of elected representatives.

That's like saying that the World Series should be decided not by which team wins the most games, but by which team makes the most runs. Which is stupid.

No, it's like saying that the makeup of the House should be decided by which party has the most popular support, which is exactly what the House was designed to be.

Which is why my analogy is correct:

Imagine this World Series between team A and team B:

Game 1: A 12, B 3
Game 2: A 4, B 5
Game 3: A 5, B 3
Game 4: A 3, B 4
Game 5: A 7, B 9
Game 6: A 5, B 6

Team A managed to get more runs in the series, 36 vs. 30 for team B, but they still lost the series because they lost 4 out of the 7 potential games.

That's how this sort of thing works. If you look at the popular vote, Barack Obama has no mandate: He won a bare 51% of the vote. The state split was close too: 26 to 24. But because President Obama carried states with higher electoral college votes, he actually won the election by a much wider margin, 332 to 206.

The nice thing about the House, though, is that a Republican or Democrat enclave inside a state that swings the opposite way can still get someone to represent them. Why would anyone be opposed to that?


It wouldn't be a problem if it were random, as happens in baseball. But there is a systemic bias toward one party. Because Republicans control more state legislatures, they are able to make it so there is always a bias toward the GOP in the house.
 
Displayed 36 of 136 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 »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report