This thread’s for intelligent people only

What difference does it make? If she was speaking to a saint or a sinner, isn’t her comment pretty fucking retarded, either way.
Depends on the context, as with every thing said...

But as far as creating an everlasting meme by her comment, it's been epic! She should have known better, in this world of politics!!!
 
Depends on the context, as with every thing said...

But as far as creating an everlasting meme by her comment, it's been epic! She should have known better, in this world of politics!!!
Oh come on. Yes, context often means a lot.

But not always.

In any event, it was a properly mocked comment which the idiot woman made when some monstrously-sized bill was up for a vote with little to no time for anyone to read it much less digest it. You know it. You love it: ObamaCare.

And what the then merely elderly bag said was, “But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of the controversy.” See: Nancy Pelosi on Health Care: "We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it."

No, Nancy. You could read it BEFORE you vote on it (but after you discuss what’s in the then PROPOSED law).
 
Oh come on. Yes, context often means a lot.

But not always.

In any event, it was a properly mocked comment which the idiot woman made when some monstrously-sized bill was up for a vote with little to no time for anyone to read it much less digest it. You know it. You love it: ObamaCare.

And what the then merely elderly bag said was, “But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of the controversy.” See: Nancy Pelosi on Health Care: "We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it."

No, Nancy. You could read it BEFORE you vote on it (but after you discuss what’s in the then PROPOSED law).
They had months to keep up and read the bill....we had NEVER ENDING NEWS STORIES by Republicans telling us all the measures in the bill they did not like...there was like 160 amendments brought up and voted on by Repubs and dems for the bill.

They may have had only days to read any last minute additions or changes, but the rest of the whole bill had been debated on the floor for 6 plus months, and amendments were even introduced by republicans prior to the final vote.
 
Apologies I don't understand your post.
China axed a billion $$ worth of pork imports from the US, according to your post #52. The world's largest pork producer, Smithfield Farms, is Chinese owned. Seems that would have the effect of lowering the cost of domestic pork as there would be a glut and a Chinese-owned company would be hurt. Is that a bit clearer?
 
China axed a billion $$ worth of pork imports from the US, according to your post #52. The world's largest pork producer, Smithfield Farms, is Chinese owned. Seems that would have the effect of lowering the cost of domestic pork as there would be a glut and a Chinese-owned company would be hurt. Is that a bit clearer?
Yes.
The Chinese government does not care.
 
But how could the bill have well over 100 amendment introduced and voted on, before the final vote, if the bill was not out there to read?
You can’t be serious.

The house passed it. It went to the senate. The senate passed it with an amendment in late December of 2009.

The House then had to pass it again as amended by the Senate. They did that in March of 2010. That was less than theee months later during the Christmas holidays.

The legislation was over 10,000 pages.

Other Amendments affecting the bill were added to a different bill (the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010).

Nobody read that entire bill. Staffers read portions of it and summarized it. Who knows? Maybe even with some accuracy. But nobody could read that massive bill and comprehend what they were doing before they passed it. The bill was passed because the representatives were told how to vote and did as they were told.

Thus, Pelousy’s idiotic comment.
 
Back
Top Bottom