ADVERTISEMENT

Texas Congresswoman Kay Granger MIA

SamSwimmer

Platinum Buffalo
Aug 16, 2015
6,038
4,661
113
Roughly a year & a half ago, Texas Congresswoman Kay Granger announced her retirement. Due to health issues, she hasn't voted since July of this year. Turns out, her health issues were related to dementia. And it's come out she's living in an assisted living facility. Listen, I am not without sympathy for the poor woman. But the second she was diagnosed with dementia, she should have stepped down. She has a staff of 20+ folks - whoever knew is complicit in fraud, I don't care if she was voting or not.

The fact our actual politicians don't seem to matter should concern people. The more that's come out about how insular Biden has made the job, it makes sense they wanted Kamala. A cheerleader rather someone who would get in the way.
 
Government officials who have mental difficulties but choose to continue in their positions are now known as having Biden Syndrome.
Bs GIF by Jeopardy!
 

"The Pew Research Center study also found that term limits are almost equally popular among both Republicans and Democrats. Among those who were surveyed, 90% of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents said they supported them. Democrats and Democrat-leaning voters largely agreed, with 86% giving the nod to limits on how long a lawmaker can serve in either body of Congress."

"Shortly after the measure was introduced in January 2023, it was referred to the House Judiciary Committee. It wasn't until eight months later, in September 2023, that the bill was considered by the committee and shot down by four Republicans and all Democrats who served on the committee. In total, the measure received 17 "ayes" and 19 "nays"."
 
To be fair, I wouldn't support such a bill either. Why? Because legally it would take an amendment to the Constitution to implement Congressional term limits.

It's just dumb shit so certain people can say they voted for something and others didn't, that's just silly games.
 
To be fair, I wouldn't support such a bill either. Why? Because legally it would take an amendment to the Constitution to implement Congressional term limits.

It's just dumb shit so certain people can say they voted for something and others didn't, that's just silly games.

You wouldn't support term limits?

So you feel the McConnells of Congress should still be part of leading our country?

These idiots get elected and become millionaires. How? A cocktail waitress is now a millionaire.

If not term limits, then at least be mentally and physically fit, subject to annual testing.

And cocktail waitresses suddenly becoming millionaires, be investigated.

All members being accountable and constantly under the microscope.

The bullshit of obvious insider trading being investigated. Guilty? You're fired, fined and jailed just like pedestrians would be.

Above the law? Yes! They are ALL above the law and it should stop. No? Then we need term limits!
 
  • Like
Reactions: herdfan06
To be fair, I wouldn't support such a bill either. Why? Because legally it would take an amendment to the Constitution to implement Congressional term limits.

It's just dumb shit so certain people can say they voted for something and others didn't, that's just silly games.

I see the "libertarian" in you is again supporting and defending the actions of Democrat politicians voting against the will of 90% of all Americans... How democratic of them and how libertarian of you...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 30CAT
I would support a bill to deport anyone with poor logic or reading comprehension skills.

Hmmm.... I know a good place to start...


"The report, Through an Immigrant Lens: PIAAC Assessment of the Competencies of Adults in the United States, finds that immigrants are over-represented among low-skilled adults: accounting for 33 percent of U.S. adults with low literacy skills and 24 percent with low numeracy skills even as they are 15 percent of the U.S. adult population (ages 16 – 65). Roughly 40 percent of immigrant adults lacked basic English literacy and 48 percent lacked basic numeracy."


We all know politicians are so honest and open about their financial disclosures...
 
Term limits happen every two years for congressional races.

In theory yes but in practice not really and most people realize that.

Incumbents have significant advantages to assist in ensuring their reelection including combining campaign trips with "official" business, name recognition with a seemingly less engaged electorate, franking mailing privileges and financial assistance from party committees, special interest groups, etc.

The days of citizen legislators have mainly gone by the wayside leading to the calls for term limits. Congress time served keeps increasing...


priorService.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: 30CAT
In theory yes but in practice not really and most people realize that.

Incumbents have significant advantages to assist in ensuring their reelection including combining campaign trips with "official" business, name recognition with a seemingly less engaged electorate, franking mailing privileges and financial assistance from party committees, special interest groups, etc.

The days of citizen legislators have mainly gone by the wayside leading to the calls for term limits. Congress time served keeps increasing...


priorService.png

And it's scary
 
People serving long consecutive terms is not new.

Explain the increase then. Average of 12 years means the average member of congress is currently serving their 7th term...

priorService.png



Term limits just empowers a permanent class of unelected bureaucrats.

Hmmm... Not having term limits has given us a permanent class of unelected bureaucrats... But having term limits empowers them???
 
I see the "libertarian" in you is again supporting and defending the actions of Democrat politicians voting against the will of 90% of all Americans
I see the dipshit in you is again being a dipshit.

The Constitution sets the qualifications for members of Congress. There are no terms limits in these qualifications.

Enacting term limits for Congress will require a Constitutional amendment.

Voting for an unconstitutional bill is voting for wasting time and money. It is simply voting for a stunt. I will mark you down as a supporter of wasting our tax dollars arguing for a law that if passed and signed would certainly be struck down in the courts.

The need for a Constitutional amendment for Congressional term limits should be obvious. After all, it took a Constitutional amendment, the 22nd, to enact Presidential term limits.

And you so-called conservatives support conservative justices that believe in the original intent of the Framers. Well, let's consider their intent. The Articles of Confederation, our failed first attempt at a government, included term limits for Congressional delegates. Obviously, this was an idea the Framers were aware of. And it's an issue they debated! James Madison's Virginia Plan limited Congress Critters to one term. Obviously this was rejected.

Im summary, I wasn't saying I would not support term limits, you moron. I was saying I don't support unconstitutional bills.
 
  • Like
Reactions: wvkeeper(HN)
I see the dipshit in you is again being a dipshit.

The Constitution sets the qualifications for members of Congress. There are no terms limits in these qualifications.

Enacting term limits for Congress will require a Constitutional amendment.

Voting for an unconstitutional bill is voting for wasting time and money. It is simply voting for a stunt. I will mark you down as a supporter of wasting our tax dollars arguing for a law that if passed and signed would certainly be struck down in the courts.

The need for a Constitutional amendment for Congressional term limits should be obvious. After all, it took a Constitutional amendment, the 22nd, to enact Presidential term limits.

And you so-called conservatives support conservative justices that believe in the original intent of the Framers. Well, let's consider their intent. The Articles of Confederation, our failed first attempt at a government, included term limits for Congressional delegates. Obviously, this was an idea the Framers were aware of. And it's an issue they debated! James Madison's Virginia Plan limited Congress Critters to one term. Obviously this was rejected.

Im summary, I wasn't saying I would not support term limits, you moron. I was saying I don't support unconstitutional bills.

Wow... That's a riflesque novella there with about the same lack of intelligence and effectiveness...

You, as usual, are overthinking everything while running cover for the champions of "democracy", the current Democrat Party.

The overwhelming will of the people (approximately 90%) is for term limits. It takes 67% of congress to pass a Constitutional Amendment. Congress is not listening to their constituents which is exactly what I said but in your denseness you overthought it and have to be a sm@rt@$$ but in reality just shows that you're a dumb@$$.
 
What group do you belong to that is over-represented in the other 67%? Inbreds? Kentuckians? Both?

Speaking of overrepresented...

accounting for 33 percent of U.S. adults with low literacy skills and 24 percent with low numeracy skills even as they are 15 percent of the U.S. adult population

15% accounting for 33% is overrepresented...

85% accounting for 67% in underrepresented...

Your basic math skills are about on par with rifle's...

But keep trying. This is fun!
 
We have "sitting" members of Congress on both sides who have serious degenerative mental conditions who are committing fraud by remaining in their positions & any staff that knowingly go along with it are also culpable. I would post pictures of Strom, Feinstein, McConnell, etc... but honestly, they're heartbreaking & we don't need to end the year on a downer. (*I know I listed members not in office any longer but did so as examples of the problem)

The following is the oath member of Congress take:
"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God."​

The, "without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion" is part one here. If you are an originalist, you could argue that purely means you'll mount a defense of our Constitution without any reluctance. If you have all your faculties, I actually fall on that side. However, once an elected official is confirmed to have a degenerative mental condition, unfortunately any decisions they make, even ones that are correct, warrant scrutiny. Did they make the decision or is there a Wizard of Oz going on.

Secondly, & most importantly, "and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties". The first point was open to some interpretation but I don't believe this one is. Especially if you give any weight to the first point.

If you're unable to do the job but your staff is hiding you while still collecting pay & benefits, that's fraud.
 
Last edited:
I would post pictures of Strom, Feinstein, McConnell, etc... but honestly, they're heartbreaking & we don't need to end the year on a downer. (*I know I listed members not in office any longer but did so as examples of the problem)
Strom is only 46 years old, Feinstein died over a year ago, and McConnell is a brain buffer away from going BSOD.
 
a Constitutional Amendment
A bill isn't a proposal to amend the Constitution. That would take a House Joint Resolution.

If it were a HJR, take it up with Fux News for saying "bill".

Either way, I don't click on Kitty Litter's Fux links because I am not signing up for Fux. Same as I refuse to sign up for CNN now that they are doing the same shit.
 
If you are an originalist, you could argue that purely means you'll mount a defense of our Constitution without any reluctance
That is what it means.
However, once an elected official is confirmed to have a degenerative mental condition,
It's hard to get Grandma to give up her car keys....because Grandma doesn't realize she can't drive worth a shit anymore, even though she's had three wrecks in a month.
 
A bill isn't a proposal to amend the Constitution. That would take a House Joint Resolution.

If it were a HJR, take it up with Fux News for saying "bill".

Either way, I don't click on Kitty Litter's Fux links because I am not signing up for Fux. Same as I refuse to sign up for CNN now that they are doing the same shit.
I think CNN told everyone else to hold their beer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Raoul Duke MU
Wow... That's a riflesque novella there with about the same lack of intelligence and effectiveness...

You, as usual, are overthinking everything while running cover for the champions of "democracy", the current Democrat Party.

The overwhelming will of the people (approximately 90%) is for term limits. It takes 67% of congress to pass a Constitutional Amendment. Congress is not listening to their constituents which is exactly what I said but in your denseness you overthought it and have to be a sm@rt@$$ but in reality just shows that you're a dumb@$$.
You didn't go far enough. Even if Congress passes a term limit amendment, doesn't it go to the states for ultimate ratification?
 
You didn't go far enough. Even if Congress passes a term limit amendment, doesn't it go to the states for ultimate ratification?

Yes but the discussion was about Congressional votes. Democrats won't even bring it to the floor.
 
It's hard to get Grandma to give up her car keys....because Grandma doesn't realize she can't drive worth a shit anymore, even though she's had three wrecks in a month.

Grandma's in the House or Senate??? Or 4 years in the White House???
 
  • Like
Reactions: 30CAT
You didn't go far enough. Even if Congress passes a term limit amendment, doesn't it go to the states for ultimate ratification?
Correct.

And do you think people may very well want to advance the big leagues are going to vote for that? Unlikely.

Also because their constituents are going to start asking if it's good for Congress, shouldn't these legislatures have the same standard?

My take: it would be useless without restricting lobbying. And the Roberts court is NOT going to allow that. You think lobbyists hold a lot of sway now, wait until every single person in the House is a noob every two years...there's no way on Earth to be knowledgeable on every subject that comes before Congress without any experience...or experience, but you do learn a few things over many years.
Grandma's in the House or Senate??? Or 4 years in the White House???
Trump is a grandfather. Maybe he should give up the keys too.

The point is once your cognitive abilities decrease it is very likely your ability to honestly assess yourself also diminishes. And no one can make a Congress Critter retire but themselves....or the voters. I don't think being diminished is grounds for impeachment, and even if it were no one is getting out the knife that may come for them one day.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT