Alaska Darin Posted January 10, 2006 Share Posted January 10, 2006 Foxnews Reports... I didn't have time to Snopes the whole thing but if even half are true... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Like A Mofo Posted January 10, 2006 Share Posted January 10, 2006 —In their never-ending quest to niggle in every last facet of our lives, lawmakers will begin to monitor online dating services, insisting that government has an obligation to protect people from "heartache." More proof that a bigger government is a worse govermnent. —In the name of public safety, some small town will install cameras on its streets that nab motorists who speed, then send them a ticket in the mail. But in a thinly disguised move to generate more revenue, said town will lower the speed limits after installing the cameras, in effect entrapping motorists into fines they don't deserve. Are they kidding me? What if they get the addresses wrong when sendng the ticket? Now we have to go the EXACT speed limit? Disgusting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRC Posted January 10, 2006 Share Posted January 10, 2006 A debate will break out on whether or not members of Congress should actually read the laws they pass before voting on them. Congress will refuse to adopt the measure. Actually, a bill has already been sent to Congress for this exact purpose. No sponsors yet (shockingly ). It is designed to make every Senator/Representative sign a sworn affidavit (under penalty of purgury) stating that they have read every word of the bill they are voting on, or every word of the legislation being modified. The theory is that it will reduce the number of bills and/or reduce the complexity of the bills. This bill will never make it to the floor. Hell, it may never receive a sponsor, unless they don't read the bill before sponsoring it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RkFast Posted January 10, 2006 Share Posted January 10, 2006 Whats absolutely chilling about the red light program is that the company that provided the cameras is splitting the ticket revenue with the city. There is NO WAY that can be legal is there? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted January 10, 2006 Share Posted January 10, 2006 Are they kidding me? What if they get the addresses wrong when sendng the ticket? Now we have to go the EXACT speed limit? Disgusting. 560714[/snapback] They do this in Germany already. Have been for many, many years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted January 10, 2006 Share Posted January 10, 2006 In their never-ending quest to niggle in every last facet of our lives, lawmakers will begin to monitor online dating services, insisting that government has an obligation to protect people from "heartache." protecting people from "heartache" Ladies and gentlemen of the supposed jury, i present you with further evidence of Motherment Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted January 10, 2006 Author Share Posted January 10, 2006 Actually, a bill has already been sent to Congress for this exact purpose. No sponsors yet (shockingly ). It is designed to make every Senator/Representative sign a sworn affidavit (under penalty of purgury) stating that they have read every word of the bill they are voting on, or every word of the legislation being modified. The theory is that it will reduce the number of bills and/or reduce the complexity of the bills. This bill will never make it to the floor. Hell, it may never receive a sponsor, unless they don't read the bill before sponsoring it. 560725[/snapback] If you read all the way to the bottom you'll find that everything in that column has already happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted January 10, 2006 Share Posted January 10, 2006 protecting people from "heartache" Ladies and gentlemen of the supposed jury, i present you with further evidence of Motherment 560794[/snapback] As if we didn't have to put enough work into getting laid already! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted January 10, 2006 Share Posted January 10, 2006 Whats absolutely chilling about the red light program is that the company that provided the cameras is splitting the ticket revenue with the city. There is NO WAY that can be legal is there? 560726[/snapback] It's "legal"...but last I heard if you challenge a red-light camera ticket in DC, it gets thrown out automatically, since they don't want on record the fact that the company running the cameras gets 40%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRC Posted January 10, 2006 Share Posted January 10, 2006 If you read all the way to the bottom you'll find that everything in that column has already happened. 560816[/snapback] Yeah, the "As you may have guessed (or discovered by clicking the links), farfetched as some of these predictions may sound, they aren't really predictions at all. All of the above actually happened in 2005" part kinda tipped me off. I was referring to a recent bill (not the blog entry linked in the article) being shopped around Washington. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted January 10, 2006 Author Share Posted January 10, 2006 Yeah, the "As you may have guessed (or discovered by clicking the links), farfetched as some of these predictions may sound, they aren't really predictions at all. All of the above actually happened in 2005" part kinda tipped me off. I was referring to a recent bill (not the blog entry linked in the article) being shopped around Washington. 560871[/snapback] Sorry. Figured you just skimmed it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gavin in Va Beach Posted January 10, 2006 Share Posted January 10, 2006 http://www.yesalbum.com/v001/ap3blog/crying.jpg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts