Naw, its to confusing to read.....another idiot Dem

[HonestChieffan]

Another one to vote out asap


<object width="518" height="419"><param name="movie" value="http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/eyeblast.swf?v=GdkUaGkUkU" /><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" /><embed src="http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/eyeblast.swf?v=GdkUaGkUkU" allowfullscreen="true" width="518" height="419" /></object>

[Direckshun]

The committee puts together its bill in plain English, and to prepare it for a vote, they package it in legilsative language that's lawyerly and opaque. Carper's in the committee, he's helped sculpt the bill. He knows what's in it.

I'd still like him to read it, but let's not pretend that he's going into this blind, he knows what's in it.

That's really all I'm saying, but yeah he should even give the lawyerly version a shot.

[Direckshun]

That said, Carper just went through just about the worst description of "legislative language" I've ever heard.

Why does he even bother with these explanations, especially one this bad?

Why doesn't he labor through the legislative language? What's the worst that can happen? He can unequivocally say he's read it, he can already claim he knows what's in it, and maybe he can pick up some of the legislative mumbo-jumbo while doing it.

It can only help.

I swear to god some of these Democrats, for all their ideas, can be major putzes.

[ChiTown]

I appreciate his honesty, but geezuskrist, what a load of crap.

[KCWolfman]

We make it so difficult to read that even we can't read it.

[Direckshun]

We make it so difficult to read that even we can't read it.

We have to make it legally precise, as far as I understand it. And that legal preciseness can take a shitload of wording to get around to.

That said, I don't understand why he doesn't just slog through it over the weekend so we don't have to get retarded soundbites like this.