Ted Kennedy Does Something Right - Believe It Or Not!
Heaven knows Ted Kennedy cannot be described as a friend of firearms owners and believers in the Second Amendment. Even so, hard to believe as it may be, the senior senator from Massachusetts sponsored a bill that actually protects our rights.
Not our gun rights; that would be too much to hope for. But he did help write a bill and did sponsor it, that goes to protect our privacy. The bill, which is supported by Bush and passed without dissent in the Senate, will prevent insurance companies and employers from discriminating against us based on genetic predisposition to diseases or illnesses.
He did something to benefit all the people of America. Amazing, isn't it? a senator actually doing what the people elected him to do: look out for their best interests. Too bad neither of his fellow senators that want his brother's old job can put together as useful a bill as that one.
Heaven knows Ted Kennedy cannot be described as a friend of firearms owners and believers in the Second Amendment. Even so, hard to believe as it may be, the senior senator from Massachusetts sponsored a bill that actually protects our rights.
Not our gun rights; that would be too much to hope for. But he did help write a bill and did sponsor it, that goes to protect our privacy. The bill, which is supported by Bush and passed without dissent in the Senate, will prevent insurance companies and employers from discriminating against us based on genetic predisposition to diseases or illnesses.
He did something to benefit all the people of America. Amazing, isn't it? a senator actually doing what the people elected him to do: look out for their best interests. Too bad neither of his fellow senators that want his brother's old job can put together as useful a bill as that one.
Probably just the bourbon getting to him. Likely will fight it to the bitter end if and when he sobers up.
Just don't hitch a ride with Ted 'til he gets through the 12 step program.
So there's a Bill that prevents them from doing it. The hard part, proving they did. That's where people will lose. They normally don't and generally won't have the money to fight to begin with...
People already aren't suppose to discriminate against race, obesity, gender, pre-existing conditions to name a few, but again, they do. And again, proving it is generally the hard part and in the end, the cost of proving it general and normally ends it before it can even begin. MHO that is...
__________________ "My next door neighbors two dogs have created more shovel ready jobs then Obama has." - Gary Johnson
So there's a Bill that prevents them from doing it. The hard part, proving they did. That's where people will lose. They normally don't and generally won't have the money to fight to begin with...
People already aren't suppose to discriminate against race, obesity, gender, pre-existing conditions to name a few, but again, they do. And again, proving it is generally the hard part and in the end, the cost of proving it general and normally ends it before it can even begin. MHO that is...
Just forbidding them to require that you give them that information when you apply should help a lot, I'd say.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mitch_mckee
Probably just the bourbon getting to him. Likely will fight it to the bitter end if and when he sobers up.
Just don't hitch a ride with Ted 'til he gets through the 12 step program.
That's certainly a relevant, helpful contribution to the discussion...
Last edited by troy2000; 04-25-2008 at 02:58 AM.
Reason: Automerged Doublepost
If that's aimed at me, I think I may be less dimwitted than some on this forum. And you'll have to look far and hard before you find a post where I slam a politician or candidate for anything but the issues. I don't normally rip into them for their looks, personal habits, wives, children, race, income, or sex life (unless its relevant to their public hypocrisy); I don't accuse them of being traitors or hating America just because I disagree with them.
If it's aimed at Kennedy and Democrats in general, you might want to prove someday that you're an Independent in fact instead of just in name, by laying off the incessant name-calling and partisan attacks.
If that's aimed at me, I think I may be less dimwitted than some on this forum. And you'll have to look far and hard before you find a post where I slam a politician or candidate for anything but the issues. I don't normally rip into them for their looks, personal habits, wives, children, race, income, or sex life (unless its relevant to their public hypocrisy); I don't accuse them of being traitors or hating America just because I disagree with them.
If it's aimed at Kennedy and Democrats in general, you might want to prove someday that you're an Independent in fact instead of just in name, by laying off the incessant name-calling and partisan attacks.
i would agree....except for the fact that he was driving drunk in his younger years (1969) and killed a girl, who was pregnant, with his kid (supposedly), and instead of trying to help her he swam to the other side of the river
lake chappidoquick, or some crap like that, look it up, im sure you know about this already
in fact, the entire kennedy legacy kinda, suck, maybe i just hate all the kennedys for one reason or another
Perhaps he takes personal exception to this, as Alcoholism has been proven to be somewhat genetic, at least having a predisposition anyway.
Alcoholism may have been proved as genetic, I agree there. My concern is that a Senator, who killed Mary Jo Kopechne in an automobile wreck into the Chappaquiddick River, used his political connections to get his own arse out of the boiling water. One would think ... rationally, that a person, especially a Senator, would learn from that accident and experience... then learn to cut back on the bourbon.
Frankly, I just don't see that he has. Everyone knows he is still quite the alcoholic.
This is no tall tale, it is fact.
__________________ You don't scare me! Work on it!
Alcoholism may have been proved as genetic, I agree there. My concern is that a Senator, who killed Mary Jo Kopechne in an automobile wreck into the Chappaquiddick River, used his political connections to get his own arse out of the boiling water. One would think ... rationally, that a person, especially a Senator, would learn from that accident and experience... then learn to cut back on the bourbon.
Frankly, I just don't see that he has. Everyone knows he is still quite the alcoholic.
Alcoholism may have been proved as genetic, I agree there. My concern is that a Senator, who killed Mary Jo Kopechne in an automobile wreck into the Chappaquiddick River, used his political connections to get his own arse out of the boiling water. One would think ... rationally, that a person, especially a Senator, would learn from that accident and experience... then learn to cut back on the bourbon.
Frankly, I just don't see that he has. Everyone knows he is still quite the alcoholic.
This is no tall tale, it is fact.
I didn't say what he did was ok, or it should not go unpunished. I think the guy is a goofball, personally. I was just giving an opinion on why he may have pushed this through.
__________________
Don't let their ignorance and hate intimidate.
I didn't say what he did was ok, or it should not go unpunished. I think the guy is a goofball, personally. I was just giving an opinion on why he may have pushed this through.
Okay, Ivan. I'm a little slow this morning, but I finally understood what you were saying: that Kennedy has a personal interest in this bill because of his alcoholism, which may be at least partly genetic.
Interesting take on the story. I don't know whether it's true or not, but it shows some thought.
Now if only they would change the drug testing policy unless they have probable cause, like if the guy runs over someone with a forklift. Here comes the onslaut look out.
__________________
For info purposes only, use it at your own risk. JFKimmons and G&G aren't liable for it's misuse.
Now if only they would change the drug testing policy unless they have probable cause, like if the guy runs over someone with a forklift. Here comes the onslaut look out.
No argument from me on that one. I think preemptive, random drug testing is a crock. Unless a person is is showing signs of being under the influence at work, or like you say is involved in an incident, they have no business screwing with him, in my opinion.
Alcoholism may have been proved as genetic, I agree there. My concern is that a Senator, who killed Mary Jo Kopechne in an automobile wreck into the Chappaquiddick River, used his political connections to get his own arse out of the boiling water. One would think ... rationally, that a person, especially a Senator, would learn from that accident and experience... then learn to cut back on the bourbon.
Frankly, I just don't see that he has. Everyone knows he is still quite the alcoholic.
This is no tall tale, it is fact.
What p.o.'s me about Kennedy is that, had I driven drunk and killed someone, I'd have paid the price in jail time.
I think it is the true face of the Democrat party that when they do something as atrocious as this, they reward them with a lifetime in office.
At least the Repubs put their miscreants out to pasture.
What p.o.'s me about Kennedy is that, had I driven drunk and killed someone, I'd have paid the price in jail time.
I think it is the true face of the Democrat party that when they do something as atrocious as this, they reward them with a lifetime in office.
At least the Repubs put their miscreants out to pasture.
nevermind getting one of their family members elected by splitting the oppositions vote count by paying some random guy to run on the same ballot with the exact same name as an independent
