I think Keith and I were both talking about the socialist bullshit you seem 
to be in favor of anymore.

On Tuesday, August 9, 2016 at 6:08:31 PM UTC-4, plainolamerican wrote:
>
> we needed to have a Congress focused strictly on repealing laws, not 
> creating new ones
> ---
> yeah, the blue laws, homophobic, and pro-xian laws have got to go.
>
> On Tuesday, August 9, 2016 at 2:27:01 PM UTC-5, KeithInTampa wrote:
>>
>> Hey Perp!
>>
>> I agree with you;  and for years I was pretty much advocating what you 
>> are suggesting; that we needed to have a Congress focused strictly on 
>> repealing laws, not creating new ones, and the only "New" government agency 
>> created should be one for placing terminated government agents back into 
>> the private sector.  
>>
>> I still feel that way.
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 1:09 PM, 'Perplexed' via PoliticalForum <
>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Well I can't disagree with you there. But IMO, to only vote "nay" 
>>> against the nutjob left isn't enough. They need to aggressively be passing 
>>> legislation to roll back the crap the nutjob left is doing and has done. A 
>>> prime example would be how they did essentially nothing to repeal and 
>>> replace Obamacare (hell, the republicans didn't even put pen to paper and 
>>> come up with an alternative until this year)! Same with sitting idly by and 
>>> doing nothing as the POS in Chief used his pen and his phone to shit all 
>>> over the Constitution and pass his own immigration laws.
>>>
>>> And don't even get me started on the Legislative Branch's TOTAL AND 
>>> COMPLETE failure to exercise proper oversight of government agencies. We 
>>> never hear about the crap these agencies do until it blows up. If they were 
>>> doing their job and reigning in the excesses of government, they'd be 
>>> passing laws to restrict what these non-elected bureaucrats can do with 
>>> taxpayer dollars.
>>>
>>> They have a duty and an obligation to keep the other branches of 
>>> government in check, and quite frankly, have failed MISERABLY at doing so.
>>>
>>> I also wouldn't mind seeing them checking the power of the Supreme Court 
>>> as well, considering the diarrhea that recently flowed freely from the 
>>> mouth of the SC's biggest leftloon hack, Ruth Bader Ginsburg! She should 
>>> have been censured at the very least IMO.
>>>
>>> On Tuesday, August 9, 2016 at 11:41:23 AM UTC-4, KeithInTampa wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I'm not sure I agree with the criteria used to judge 
>>>> "effectiveness.....To me, anyone who votes "Nay" for anything even looked 
>>>> at or brought up by a Democrat is effective to me.
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 12:17 AM, 'Perplexed' via PoliticalForum <
>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 2.5 to 1, in fact. See if yours made the list...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> http://members-of-congress.insidegov.com/stories/5278/least-effective-members-congress?utm_medium=cm&utm_source=outbrain&utm_campaign=rt.cm.ob.dt.5278#1-Sen-Robert-P-Casey-Jr
>>>>>
>>>>> I can almost understand the newbies who have only been there 3 years 
>>>>> and haven't purchased enough influence, but look at how many of these 
>>>>> have 
>>>>> been there for YEARS without sponsoring even a single bill that ever made 
>>>>> it through committee!
>>>>>
>>>>> You have to wonder about the abject stupidity of a constituency that 
>>>>> would continue re-electing such failures. :(
>>>>>
>>>>> -- 
>>>>> -- 
>>>>> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
>>>>> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>>>>>  
>>>>> * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ 
>>>>> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
>>>>> * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>>>>>
>>>>> --- 
>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
>>>>> Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send 
>>>>> an email to [email protected].
>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -- 
>>> -- 
>>> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
>>> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>>>  
>>> * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ 
>>> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
>>> * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>>>
>>> --- 
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
>>> Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send 
>>> an email to [email protected].
>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>
>>
>>

-- 
-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to