(March 4, 2021 at 8:09 pm)Rev. Rye Wrote: At this point, I’m suspecting the name “The We The People Act” might be what disturbs him, that it doesn’t say what exactly is in the Bill, even though the contents and summaries thereof are readily available online. And it’s worth noting that of what I’ve found, the most substantive criticism against it is the fact that its voting provisions threaten to end any hope of Republican dominance because if not for voter suppression laws, there’d be no chance they’d get anywhere. And they’ve flat-out admitted this BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT A COUPLE DAYS AGO.

Then again, I wouldn’t be surprised if the mere fact that it is proposed legislation at all is what’s perturbing him. Not even anything in it. He’s demonstrated his views are getting that far off the grid.

At this point you might re- read the OP...

The.pandering name IS my point.....

And you’re basing your conclusions on the name and NOT what’s actually in the Bill. Or even the many summaries I’ve been able to find just by googling “We The People Act.” And it’s not like we don’t know what’s in it. The full text and a summary of it are readily available on Congress’ official website. And they tried to put the same Bill into Congress in the last term. If there were anything truly sinister in it, you’d think there’d be better criticisms than “if we actually let everybody vote, Republicans wouldn’t win elections anymore.”

Quote:At this point you might re- read the OP...

The.pandering name IS my point.....

So despite having no clue what's in the bill your bitching because it has a pretentious name...... alright then 

---

(March 4, 2021 at 8:39 pm)Rev. Rye Wrote: And you’re basing your conclusions on the name and NOT what’s actually in the Bill. Or even the many summaries I’ve been able to find just by googling “We The People Act.” And it’s not like we don’t know what’s in it. The full text and a summary of it are readily available on Congress’ official website. If there were anything truly sinister in it, you’d think there’d be better criticisms than “if we actually let everybody vote, Republicans wouldn’t win any elections.”

Indeed pretty mundane stuff .

Quote:This bill addresses voter access, election integrity and security, campaign finance, and ethics for the three branches of government.
Specifically, the bill expands voter registration (e.g., automatic and same-day registration) and voting access (e.g., vote-by-mail and early voting). It also limits removing voters from voter rolls.

Seems pretty innocent.

Quote:The bill requires states to establish independent redistricting commissions to carry out congressional redistricting.
Additionally, the bill sets forth provisions related to election security, including sharing intelligence information with state election officials, supporting states in securing their election systems, developing a national strategy to protect U.S. democratic institutions, establishing in the legislative branch the National Commission to Protect United States Democratic Institutions, and other provisions to improve the cybersecurity of election systems.

Why would anyone have an issue with this?

Quote:Further, the bill addresses campaign finance, including by expanding the prohibition on campaign spending by foreign nationals, requiring additional disclosure of campaign-related fundraising and spending, requiring additional disclaimers regarding certain political advertising, and establishing an alternative campaign funding system for certain federal offices.

Less corruption is generally a good thing.

Quote:The bill addresses ethics in all three branches of government, including by requiring a code of conduct for Supreme Court Justices, prohibiting Members of the House from serving on the board of a for-profit entity, and establishing additional conflict-of-interest and ethics provisions for federal employees and the White House.

Same as above 

Quote:The bill requires the President, the Vice President, and certain candidates for those offices to disclose 10 years of tax returns.

Consider the last 4 years this seems like a good idea.

(March 4, 2021 at 8:29 pm)onlinebiker Wrote:

(March 4, 2021 at 8:09 pm)Rev. Rye Wrote: At this point, I’m suspecting the name “The We The People Act” might be what disturbs him, that it doesn’t say what exactly is in the Bill, even though the contents and summaries thereof are readily available online. And it’s worth noting that of what I’ve found, the most substantive criticism against it is the fact that its voting provisions threaten to end any hope of Republican dominance because if not for voter suppression laws, there’d be no chance they’d get anywhere. And they’ve flat-out admitted this BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT A COUPLE DAYS AGO.

Then again, I wouldn’t be surprised if the mere fact that it is proposed legislation at all is what’s perturbing him. Not even anything in it. He’s demonstrated his views are getting that far off the grid.

At this point you might re- read the OP...

The.pandering name IS my point.....

But that’s just silly. The Patriot Act set off alarm bells because of the content, not the name.  The We The People act is pretty innocuous, both in content and intent.

Boru

(March 4, 2021 at 9:32 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: ...The We The People act is pretty innocuous, both in content and intent.

Boru

Well, those kind of words are generally put on the paperwork before most revolutions... Oh, wait. Didn't a certain bunch of 'New World' colonies do that already?

(March 4, 2021 at 9:39 pm)Peebo-Thuhlu Wrote:

(March 4, 2021 at 9:32 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: ...The We The People act is pretty innocuous, both in content and intent.

Boru

 Well, those kind of words are generally put on the paperwork before most revolutions...  Oh, wait. Didn't a certain bunch of 'New World' colonies do that already?

 

What an insidious-looking cabal. Look at all those powdered wigs and receding hairlines

You know the government is doing a good job when people complain about the name of a bill.

(March 4, 2021 at 11:21 pm)Divinity Wrote: You know the government is doing a good job when people complain about the name of a bill.

So your idea of a good job is obfuscation and selling you a bill of goods?


...

I prefer truth in advertizing.


...

"The Patriot Act" allowed your government to skip the first and fourth ammendments at their convenience...Nothing patriotic about that in my book...


So you'll fotgive me for see such salesmanship as troubling...


You can feel free to jump on whatever bandwagon you like..

So, what would you name it?

Quote:So your idea of a good job is obfuscation and selling you a bill of goods?

How the hell is it obfuscation

Quote:I prefer truth in advertizing.

And what truth was not denied 

Quote:"The Patriot Act" allowed your government to skip the first and fourth ammendments at their convenience...Nothing patriotic about that in my book...

And this is nothing like that act 

Quote:So you'll fotgive me for see such salesmanship as troubling...

Jesus christ man get over yourself 

Quote:You can feel free to jump on whatever bandwagon you like..

The bandwagon of judging a bill by its content rather than its name.

---

(March 4, 2021 at 11:21 pm)Divinity Wrote: You know the government is doing a good job when people complain about the name of a bill.

Some people just need some reason to be miserable