westslope wrote:

Additionally, that will continue as long as there is private money in the process.

 black321 wrote:

Perhaps fundamental constitutional change is required?   Otherwise the "broken partisan system" will not heal itself.

But as long as US voters see and understand politics through the lense of sporting competition with zero-sum outcomes, nothing will change and the US political system will remain broken.

 Red_Dragon wrote:
It is easy to understand why Arizona Sen. Kyrsten Sinema is popular with voters.

wish all politicians would announce their independence from the broken partisan system.

 Red_Dragon wrote: 
ohhh. ok. 

 oldviolin wrote:

She's bought and proud of it.

 Red_Dragon wrote: 
So, trying to understand here. Not really informed about this particular person. What makes her an asshole? Lack of lockstep? Having different opinions? Why are alternatives not a part of the debates? Just curious why some people believe that there is only one way to think?

I really hope this asshole doesn't get reelected.

 Bill_J wrote: 

"The Truth: Trump called my dad for months DEMANDING that he run," Christian Walker said.

"Everyone with a brain begged him: 'PLEASE DON'T DO THIS. This is too dirty, you have an insane past… PLEASE DONT DO THIS.' We got the middle finger. He ran."

 kcar wrote:
Oh, please. I'm having breakfast.

 Bill_J wrote:
Thank God we won't have to endure six years of Herschel Walker.

Someone needs to create a show on Twitter or YouTube about all the goofballs and losers in American life right now. Highlights of the show:

A storytelling contest between Kanye West, Herschel Walker and Trump: who can be the most incoherent and disconnected from reality?

A blind date/mud wrestling match between Rudy Giuliani and Marjorie Taylor Greene. 

Alex Jones vs. Ted Cruz vs. Matt Gaetz vs. a man-eating crocodile: Who's the Most Loathsome? The winner gets eaten by the crocodile.

A Great Race/Easter egg hunt for Lindsey Graham's balls.

 Bill_J wrote:

hallefuckinglujah

Congratulations Senator Warnock

2 substations damaged by gunfire in NC county where 40,000 customers lost power, fire official says

 kcar wrote: 
2.  I stand corrected.  A big fuss was made about limiting the protection to 10 years.  I do not remember anything about restoring the lifetime protection as evidently it was one of those things quietly changed or was attached to a huge bill and buried deep within.  I really do not know which it was.

1.  

As the respective leaders of their own Houses, Pelosi and Schumer control what comes to the floor for voting.  If the duties of the Capitol Police are to be altered, they are the ones who would do it by passing legislation to that effect.  What I posted is consistent with this.



Never said that they did.  I thought that I made that pretty clear with this statement and when I outlined what the duties of the Secret Service are.  That it is a part of the Executive Branch.

BTW, this is wrongly being referred to as an assault. The proper term is "assassination attempt."

 kurtster wrote:

I disagree with your your post on two matters.

1. Nancy and Chuck don't control who gets protection and how much. The Secret Service doesn't protect them. The Capitol Police provide protection for minority and majority leaders in both chambers as well as for legislative whips.

https://www.businessinsider.co...

US Capitol Police declined to comment when asked after the attack on Paul Pelosi whether they protect family members of Congressional leaders.

The Capitol Police are run by the Capitol Police Board and "has Congressional oversight by appropriations and authorizing committees from the U.S. House of Representatives and U.S. Senate."

https://www.uscp.gov/the-depar...

Nancy Pelosi did NOT refuse increased protection on Capitol Hill on January 6 2021 as some people have claimed. In fact, she did not have the power to do so.

https://www.usatoday.com/story...

Some members of Congress pay for security details, eg AOC.

2. Obama restored lifetime protection for former presidents and their spouses. I believe their children get Secret Service protection until they're 18.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/o...

 haresfur wrote: 
You seek logic, eh ?  Logic does not apply to government functions AFAICT.  At least not in this country.  What follows is not logic, just how things work here.

The Secret Service is part of the Treasury Department which is part of the Executive Branch of our government.  They are charged with protecting the present heads of the Executive Branch, the POTUS, VPOTUS and the integrity of our physical currency.  Former POTUS, VPOTUS get protection for a limited amount of time after leaving office.  Used to be for life.

Pelosi is part of the Legislative Branch and she and Schumer are in charge of the Legislative Branch and determine these protocols for their branch of government.  They choose what to protect and what not to protect.  If Pelosi wanted to extend government protection to her husband, she could do it if she wanted to.  It would not be the Secret Service though.  Who would provide that service and how is unknown to me.  But it is her call.  It would be hard to justify using taxpayer money to protect a multi - multi - multi millionaire who could easily afford any level of security desired.

I reckon that you should be glad you live someplace better than here and where evidently logic still works when applied to how your own government functions.  Otherwise you would not of had to ask your question.

 haresfur wrote:
The President and family are high(er/est) value targets. See the history of assassinations.

 Steely_D wrote:

That doesn't really answer the question of why the protection extends to adult children in one case but not spouse in another.