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.

(Las Vegas Sun)   Nevada lawmaker says he'd vote for slavery if his constituents wanted him to   (lasvegassun.com) divider line 140
    More: Asinine, Nevada Legislature  
•       •       •

3522 clicks; posted to Politics » on 28 Oct 2013 at 8:18 PM (43 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-10-28 07:44:40 PM
Well... he has a point.  Assuming he would listen to the majority of his constituents and not the three percent of whack jobs that are usually the most vocal about stuff, isn't that what our elected representatives are supposed to do?  Represent the people?

Of course, it could just be a way for him to take some insane position that he actually believes in and then blame it on his constituents when he gets called out on it.  Seems more likely.
 
2013-10-28 07:46:13 PM
Jim Wheeler, a Republican from Gardnerville...

u.kanobu.ru
 
2013-10-28 07:49:59 PM
All slavery isn't illegal per se in the US. Read that 14th amendment again.
 
2013-10-28 07:52:43 PM
I mean I get what he's trying to say. Probably could've picked something less monumentally stupid as your example (like outlawing chewing gum), but I get it.

Or it could very well be what The Onion is Prophetic said. I can also see that.
 
NFA [TotalFark]
2013-10-28 07:55:24 PM
www.troll.me
 
2013-10-28 08:00:20 PM
Hint, hint.
 
2013-10-28 08:08:25 PM
Sounds like someone missed the point of representative democracy.
 
2013-10-28 08:11:25 PM
He's just trying to create 2/3rds of a Job for people.
 
2013-10-28 08:19:12 PM
"Your representative owes you, not his industry only, but his judgment; and he betrays, instead of serving you, if he sacrifices it to your opinion."  -Edmund Burke
 
2013-10-28 08:20:07 PM

hardinparamedic: He's just trying to create 2/3rds of a Job for people.


I think you mean 3/5ths of a job.
 
2013-10-28 08:22:56 PM
Mmmmm, I see Jim Wheeler has three children: Dana, Nick, Charlee. I'll buy Dana and Charlee off him for "breeding purposes." If they're too old, how about his grandkids?
 
2013-10-28 08:23:25 PM

foo monkey: hardinparamedic: He's just trying to create 2/3rds of a Job for people.

I think you mean 3/5ths of a job.


Hey now. Times have changed. He's willing to give an additional 6%.
 
2013-10-28 08:23:44 PM
And to think, Republicans used to criticize Democrats for enacting legistlation based on poll results.
 
2013-10-28 08:24:04 PM

BiblioTech: "Your representative owes you, not his industry only, but his judgment; and he betrays, instead of serving you, if he sacrifices it to your opinion."  -Edmund Burke


A conservative political philosopher disagreeing with the current Republican Party. Imagine that.
 
2013-10-28 08:25:46 PM
But the real question remains: how many legislative efforts to repeal Obamacare are too many?
 
2013-10-28 08:26:13 PM

Satanic_Hamster: And to think, Republicans used to criticize Democrats for enacting legistlation based on poll results.


Used to?
 
2013-10-28 08:26:20 PM

scottydoesntknow: I mean I get what he's trying to say. Probably could've picked something less monumentally stupid as your example (like outlawing chewing gum), but I get it.

Or it could very well be what The Onion is Prophetic said. I can also see that.


Yeah, I'm sure he was just expressing his eagerness to represent his constituents. That's all.  He's not a racist dickbag.  Just a good old-fashioned statesman.

That's why he would also vote in favor of gay marriage, immigration reform, and carbon caps if his constituents wanted him to.

Sure.
 
2013-10-28 08:27:26 PM
FTFA: Jim Wheeler, a Republican from Gardnerville, was talking to a crowd of Storey County Republicans in August he when said "yeah I would" vote for slavery if that's what his constituents wanted.
"If that's what they wanted, I'd have to hold my nose, I'd have to bite my tongue and they'd probably have to hold a gun to my head, but yeah, if that's what the citizens of the, if that's what the constituency wants that elected me, that's what they elected me for," he said. "That's what a republic is about. You elected a person for your district to do your wants and wishes, not the wants and wishes of a special interest, not his own wants and wishes, yours."
...
"I don't care if every constituent in (Assembly) District 39 wanted slavery, I wouldn't vote for it. That's ridiculous."


Nice flip-flops and hat you got there, cowboy.
 
2013-10-28 08:30:28 PM
Like a lot of pols, I suspect that when he says 'constituents,' he is thinking solely of 'large donors,'  and we already know they want this.
 
2013-10-28 08:30:31 PM

doglover: All slavery isn't illegal per se in the US. Read that 14th amendment again.


It's just a goddamn piece of paper
 
2013-10-28 08:32:13 PM
Harry Reid, is that you?
 
2013-10-28 08:33:52 PM

doglover: All slavery isn't illegal per se in the US. Read that 1413th amendment again.


FTFY.

13th Abolished slavery.  14th guarantees equal rights under the law regardless of race.
 
2013-10-28 08:34:07 PM
Say hello to a nearing 2014
 
2013-10-28 08:34:35 PM
i'm as liberal as they come and seriously hate racist fark bags, but this guy is simply having his words taken out of context.

I won't participate in that.

His argument though is moronic.  A representative shouldn't blindly follow the will of his constituents 100% of the time, especially when they want him to do something as egregiously wrong as reinstitute slavery.  "Following orders" doesn't redeem you from crimes against humanity whether the orders come from above or below.  His JOB is to thoughtfully make decisions, if he's not going to do that, why the fark is he there?

Of course when questioned he came out with the real reason he said any of that: He was pandering to his constituency.
 
2013-10-28 08:35:29 PM
So, if his constituents overwhelmingly supported gay marriage and/or abortion rights, what then?
 
2013-10-28 08:35:54 PM
"If that's what they wanted, I'd have to hold my nose, I'd have to bite my tongue and they'd probably have to hold a gun to my head, but yeah, if that's what the citizens of the, if that's what the constituency wants that elected me, that's what they elected me for," he said. "That's what a republic is about. You elected a person for your district to do your wants and wishes, not the wants and wishes of a special interest, not his own wants and wishes, yours."

That's actually the opposite of what a republic is about.....
 
2013-10-28 08:37:51 PM

The Onion is prophetic: Well... he has a point.  Assuming he would listen to the majority of his constituents and not the three percent of whack jobs that are usually the most vocal about stuff, isn't that what our elected representatives are supposed to do?  Represent the people?

Of course, it could just be a way for him to take some insane position that he actually believes in and then blame it on his constituents when he gets called out on it.  Seems more likely.


225 years ago, Edmund Burke argued that a representative should be more than just a mouthpiece, that they should represent the interests of their constituents, but not their  desires.

Essentially, if your only role as an elected official is to cast a vote in favor of whatever the majority in your district wants, then you could replace all politicians with a machine that sent out polls, and then you don't have a republic anymore, you have a direct democracy.
 
2013-10-28 08:40:26 PM

The Onion is prophetic: Well... he has a point.  Assuming he would listen to the majority of his constituents and not the three percent of whack jobs that are usually the most vocal about stuff, isn't that what our elected representatives are supposed to do?  Represent the people?

Of course, it could just be a way for him to take some insane position that he actually believes in and then blame it on his constituents when he gets called out on it.  Seems more likely.


Er... no. Inalienable human rights and all.
 
2013-10-28 08:41:34 PM
We still have wage slavery

Now go polish your job creator's boots knave
 
2013-10-28 08:42:29 PM
While I'm sure he's reprehensible, being that he's an elected Republican, I think he was exaggerating and I don't think he should be tarred and feathered for it. However, as Fark It said, he's shown that he doesn't understand what a republic is, and he should be run out of town for that.
 
2013-10-28 08:43:44 PM

pueblonative: doglover: All slavery isn't illegal per se in the US. Read that 1413th amendment again.

FTFY.

13th Abolished slavery.  14th guarantees equal rights under the law regardless of race.


Whatever. The slavery one only abolishes owning and selling people. You can still be enslaved by due process. Why chain gangs can exist.
 
2013-10-28 08:48:26 PM
Of course he would. It isn't like you have to worry about slaves voting against you.
 
2013-10-28 08:51:12 PM

doglover: All slavery isn't illegal per se in the US. Read that 14th amendment again.


Jury duty?

I can't wait for National Service.
 
2013-10-28 08:53:43 PM

The Onion is prophetic: Assuming he would listen to the majority of his constituents and not the three percent of whack jobs that are usually the most vocal about stuff, isn't that what our elected representatives are supposed to do? Represent the people?


No, if you're going to just do everything the majority says then just get rid of all the reps and rule by referendum.

For instance, there are less farmers than city people simply because of density, so the city people would win every majority call by sheer numbers. But that doesn't mean the farmer's concerns should be passed over just because there are less of them in a given area.

This is a good example, but not the only one, of what the representation needs to accommodate.
 
2013-10-28 08:58:25 PM
"If that's what they wanted, I'd have to hold my nose, I'd have to bite my tongue and they'd probably have to hold a gun to my head, but yeah, if that's what the citizens of the, if that's what the constituency wants that elected me, that's what they elected me for," he said. "That's what a republic is about. You elected a person for your district to do your wants and wishes, not the wants and wishes of a special interest, not his own wants and wishes, yours."

What's so asinine about that, Subby? A representative who would actually represent his people? God forbid.
 
2013-10-28 08:59:03 PM

The Onion is prophetic: Well... he has a point.  Assuming he would listen to the majority of his constituents and not the three percent of whack jobs that are usually the most vocal about stuff, isn't that what our elected representatives are supposed to do?  Represent the people?

Of course, it could just be a way for him to take some insane position that he actually believes in and then blame it on his constituents when he gets called out on it.  Seems more likely.


Part oc the job of an elected official is that the constituency relies on the good judgment of that representative. If a representative democracy just wanted a representative who rubberstamps whatever their district wants, what the hell is the point of the representative? Wouldn't a series of referendums or scientific polls be just as good?
 
2013-10-28 08:59:57 PM
But don't you dare call him racist
 
2013-10-28 09:02:11 PM
In hindsight, yeah it's probably not the best way to say it.  But his hearts in the right place, even if his head's up his ass.
 
2013-10-28 09:05:25 PM
"I would vote for slavery, gang rape, pedophilia, you name it, if that's what my constituents want."

What a refreshing change, a politician who is responsive to his constituents!  Typical lamestream media twists his words.

"I would vote for health insurance reform."

BURN THE WITCH.  BURN IT.  Typical lamestream media won't tell you that he actually wants UN gangs to impose Sharia soshulizm.
 
2013-10-28 09:10:17 PM
"If a politician found he had cannibals among his constituents, he would promise them missionaries for dinner." - H. L. Mencken
 
2013-10-28 09:10:32 PM
Storey County.

Oh, yes, they'd want him to vote for slavery in a heartbeat. Also to legalize meth manufacture, polygamous incest, and lynching anyone darker than a moderate tan.
 
2013-10-28 09:16:23 PM

dionysusaur: Like a lot of pols, I suspect that when he says 'constituents,' he is thinking solely of 'large donors,'  and we already know they want this.


As long as it's just rich people owning poor people.


InteriorDesignNinja: But don't you dare call him racist


To be fair he didn't specify what color the slaves would be.
 
2013-10-28 09:18:57 PM

Fark It: "If that's what they wanted, I'd have to hold my nose, I'd have to bite my tongue and they'd probably have to hold a gun to my head, but yeah, if that's what the citizens of the, if that's what the constituency wants that elected me, that's what they elected me for," he said. "That's what a republic is about. You elected a person for your district to do your wants and wishes, not the wants and wishes of a special interest, not his own wants and wishes, yours."

That's actually the opposite of what a republic is about.....


Maybe not the opposite, exactly, but it's more what a democracy is about. And that is why the founding fathers chose to go with a republic instead.
 
2013-10-28 09:19:02 PM
The Founders were really big on the whole mob rules thing.
 
2013-10-28 09:20:25 PM
A representative is supposed to listen to his constituents, but shouldn't blindly follow their demands.  Otherwise we might as well go with a "pure democracy", which is one of the most frightening systems of government imaginable.

Just because the majority wants something doesn't mean the majority should get it.  All too often the majority is morally and ethically completely farking wrong.
 
2013-10-28 09:24:54 PM

Solon Isonomia: Sounds like someone missed the point of representative democracy.


That we don't have to spend all our time voting on shiat and instead have representatives which represent our interests? I think his hyperbole makes it pretty clear he gets the point
 
2013-10-28 09:27:04 PM
'i am stupid enough to pass laws that clearly violate the constitution and won't hold up to court scrutiny, ultimately accomplishing nothing outside of violating freedoms and wasting billions of dollars'

Ya, that is what you want from an elected official. Stick to shutting everything down, guys.
 
2013-10-28 09:28:56 PM
I just think it's funny how all these same people who complain about Fartbongo not being a leader or leading from behind constantly talk about how their job is to do what their constituents want them to do. I don't see how that's leadership.
 
2013-10-28 09:29:13 PM

doglover: pueblonative: doglover: All slavery isn't illegal per se in the US. Read that 1413th amendment again.

FTFY.

13th Abolished slavery.  14th guarantees equal rights under the law regardless of race.

Whatever. The slavery one only abolishes owning and selling people. You can still be enslaved by due process. Why chain gangs can exist.


This is actually a very valid point, and one that a lot of folks have talked about. It's important to point out and thank you for doing so.
 
2013-10-28 09:30:50 PM
"Your representative owes you, not his industry only, but his judgment; and he betrays instead of serving you if he sacrifices it to your opinion."

--Some dirty hippie
 
Displayed 50 of 140 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report