George Santos - Page 10

dann · 20th January 2023, 08:39 PM

Originally Posted by mgidm86

Fraudsters deceive people all the time. They don't get a pass because "the people should have known better". They go to jail! The people they conned do not go to jail. They are called victims.

If I applied for any job and it was immediately discovered that I'd lied about my education, my arrest record, and/or my experience, I would be fired immediately. And if I wasn't I definitely could be.

I think we need to start holding the people running the country to at least that standard. Do you?

You don't seem to understand the difference between "any job" and the 'job' of being an elected representative.

Skeptic Ginger · 20th January 2023, 08:51 PM

Originally Posted by I Am The Scum

Apparently there's video now

What am I, chopped liver?

It's only a couple of posts up that I posted this.

acbytesla · 20th January 2023, 09:18 PM

Originally Posted by dann

Saying. Handwaving. Empty gestures. It's his right to be a member of Congress. He was elected, and that's what electing is all about.

Was he? I thought his district elected a graduate from Baruch University with a degree in economics and finance. Not a high school dropout. Silly me.

I Am The Scum · 20th January 2023, 10:00 PM

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

What am I, chopped liver?

It's only a couple of posts up that I posted this.

George Santos gave me his word that no one else had posted it.

Ladewig · 20th January 2023, 10:26 PM

The problem with making telling the truth a requirement for taking office is where does one draw the line.

If Santos told one less lie should he be booted without a 2/3 vote from the House.
What about 3 fewer lies?
10 fewer lies?

Or is the requirement going to be not a single solitary lie?

Skeptic Ginger · 20th January 2023, 10:28 PM

Originally Posted by I Am The Scum

George Santos gave me his word that no one else had posted it.

Skeptic Ginger · 20th January 2023, 10:30 PM

Originally Posted by Ladewig

The problem with making telling the truth a requirement for taking office is where does one draw the line.

If Santos told one less lie should he be booted without a 2/3 vote from the House.
What about 3 fewer lies?
10 fewer lies?

Or is the requirement going to be not a single solitary lie?

You seem to be missing the issue of scale here in your effort to basque in the glow of false equivalences.

acbytesla · 20th January 2023, 10:38 PM

Originally Posted by Ladewig

The problem with making telling the truth a requirement for taking office is where does one draw the line.

If Santos told one less lie should he be booted without a 2/3 vote from the House.
What about 3 fewer lies?
10 fewer lies?

Or is the requirement going to be not a single solitary lie?

Why not a minimum of honesty? With this guys background, he isn't qualified for the bare minimum of tech or finance jobs. Yet it's ok for him to be a US Congressman sitting on the Science committee?

I think if you post information about yourself on your campaign bio and it's demonstrably false you should be ineligible for the office you're seeking. PERIOD.

Stacyhs · 21st January 2023, 01:57 AM

Originally Posted by Stacyhs

Quote:

Originally Posted by dann View Post
Do you expect him to resign just because you say so?

What kind of silly question is that?

Originally Posted by dann

Originally Posted by Stacyhs

What kind of silly question is that?

Saying. Handwaving. Empty gestures. It's his right to be a member of Congress. He was elected, and that's what electing is all about.

Ask a silly question, get a silly answer.

SteveAitch · 21st January 2023, 02:42 AM

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

You seem to be missing the issue of scale here in your effort to basque in the glow of false equivalences.

What Ladewig wears while posting is none of our business. Probably.

dann · 21st January 2023, 03:07 AM

Originally Posted by acbytesla

Originally Posted by dann

Saying. Handwaving. Empty gestures. It's his right to be a member of Congress. He was elected, and that's what electing is all about.

Was he? I thought his district elected a graduate from Baruch University with a degree in economics and finance. Not a high school dropout. Silly me.

Yes, he was elected! He was elected by lying to his constituents (to his party, too, but they were well aware what he was up to and approved), he managed to make them elect him. They gave him the power to make decisions on their behalf.

Why is it so difficult for you to understand this principle?! The voters gave him the right, and now he doesn't have to concern himself with their wishes or needs for the next couple of years and he is (more or less) free to sell his decision-making powers to the highest bidder. That's representative democracy!

His own conscience and "Providence, for the abuse of which he is deeply answerable," are all that matters. He just has to convince them, not people who voted for him, that he is doing the right thing, and we all know how easy it is to convince those entities ...

Parsman · 21st January 2023, 03:20 AM

Originally Posted by dann

Yes, he was elected! He was elected by lying to his constituents (to his party, too, but they were well aware what he was up to and approved), he managed to make them elect him. They gave him the power to make decisions on their behalf.

Why is it so difficult for you to understand this principle?! The voters gave him the right, and now he doesn't have to concern himself with their wishes or needs for the next couple of years and he is (more or less) free to sell his decision-making powers to the highest bidder. That's representative democracy!

His own conscience and "Providence, for the abuse of which he is deeply answerable," are all that matters. He just has to convince them, not people who voted for him, that he is doing the right thing, and we all know how easy it is to convince those entities ...

So, if he got the position of a bank president, voted on by the board with a contract lasting 2 years, he shouldn't face any repercussions if it is found that 99% of his resume was false? I find the defence "but he was elected" to be puerile. An entity with the name George Santos was elected under false pretences, now that they know the truth a majority of his electorate are calling for him to go but your response is "tough - caveat emptor". That isn't democracy, that is fraud on a grand scale and there should be repercussions for it.

dann · 21st January 2023, 03:20 AM

Originally Posted by acbytesla

Why not a minimum of honesty? With this guys background, he isn't qualified for the bare minimum of tech or finance jobs. Yet it's ok for him to be a US Congressman sitting on the Science committee?

Yes, apparently! And your first question answers itself: Honesty wouldn't get him elected!

Quote:

I think if you post information about yourself on your campaign bio and it's demonstrably false you should be ineligible for the office you're seeking. PERIOD.

But reality tells you that what you think is wrong. It is obvious that lying doesn't make you ineligible for the office you're seeking! (Unless you are lying about being born in the USA.) On the contrary, it gets you elected. You can lie to your constituents, and you can make promises that you never in a million years intend to keep. That's representative democracy.

Darat · 21st January 2023, 03:21 AM

I do think a good "democratic" governance system will have a mechanism for their constituents to recall them.

Stacyhs · 21st January 2023, 03:24 AM

Originally Posted by Parsman

So, if he got the position of a bank president, voted on by the board with a contract lasting 2 years, he shouldn't face any repercussions if it is found that 99% of his resume was false? I find the defence "but he was elected" to be puerile. An entity with the name George Santos was elected under false pretences, now that they know the truth a majority of his electorate are calling for him to go but your response is "tough - caveat emptor". That isn't democracy, that is fraud on a grand scale and there should be repercussions for it.

Originally Posted by Darat

I do think a good "democratic" governance system will have a mechanism for their constituents to recall them.

I agree with both of you.

Norman Alexander · 21st January 2023, 03:31 AM

Originally Posted by dann

Yes, apparently! And your first question answers itself: Honesty wouldn't get him elected!

But reality tells you that what you think is wrong. It is obvious that lying doesn't make you ineligible for the office you're seeking! (Unless you are lying about being born in the USA.) On the contrary, it gets you elected. You can lie to your constituents, and you can make promises that you never in a million years intend to keep. That's representative democracy.

The main problem is that some guy called George Santos was elected to US Congress by the good folks of Long Island, but this compulsive liar named Anthony Devolder has taken his place in the House and is pretending to be him. If that's not voter fraud then I don't know what is!

Then again, it's no problem for the GOP, who let some piss-weak lying asshat called Donald Trump pretend to be US President for four years.

Skeptic Ginger · 21st January 2023, 03:32 AM

Originally Posted by SteveAitch

What Ladewig wears while posting is none of our business. Probably.

I am on occasion vocabulary-challenged.

dann · 21st January 2023, 03:35 AM

Originally Posted by Parsman

So, if he got the position of a bank president, voted on by the board with a contract lasting 2 years, he shouldn't face any repercussions if it is found that 99% of his resume was false? I find the defence "but he was elected" to be puerile. An entity with the name George Santos was elected under false pretences, now that they know the truth a majority of his electorate are calling for him to go but your response is "tough - caveat emptor". That isn't democracy, that is fraud on a grand scale and there should be repercussions for it.

Why do you guys keep bringing other jobs into this. He didn't get the position of bank president, did he?

You completely misunderstand what I am writing if you think that it's a "defence" of anything. Do you actually think that representative democracy is a good thing? Honorable and dignified and worth defending? It's a system of government that makes people hand over decision-making to others who get to decide on their behalf rendering them more or less impotent. The representative gets to decide. They don't. He's the Decider! (In the case of Santos, it's on a pretty small scale.)

And the constituents now know the truth about George Santos, but they obviously don't know the truth about how representative democracy works. Neither do you, apparently.

Norman Alexander · 21st January 2023, 03:40 AM

Originally Posted by dann

Why do you guys keep bringing other jobs into this. He didn't get the position of bank president, did he?

You completely misunderstand what I am writing if you think that it's a "defence" of anything. Do you actually think that representative democracy is a good thing? Honorable and dignified and worth defending? It's a system of government that makes people hand over decision-making to others who get to decide on their behalf rendering them more or less impotent. The representative gets to decide. They don't. He's the Decider! (In the case of Santos, it's on a pretty small scale.)

And the constituents now know the truth about George Santos, but they obviously don't know the truth about how representative democracy works. Neither do you, apparently.

As I explained above, they are not actually getting the representative, and the representation, they thought they were getting and voted for in good faith. THAT'S the problem.

dann · 21st January 2023, 04:08 AM

Originally Posted by Darat

I do think a good "democratic" governance system will have a mechanism for their constituents to recall them.

Why do you think that representative democray makes such a big deal out of separating people from power, of making them hand over decision-making to representatives?

In my own country:

Quote:

§ 56 Folketingsmedlemmerne er ene bundet ved deres overbevisning og ikke ved nogen forskrift af deres vælgere.
Paragraph 56 of the Danish constitution (Folketinget - the Danish parliament)

Translation: The members of Folketinget are bound only by their convictions and not by any directions from their constituents.

There's a new war on the horizon? Or a pandemic? Climate change? Sick leave?
Sorry, but you don't have a say in this. It's all up to your elected representatives, and you don't get to tell them what to do. You have left it to George Santos to decide.

dann · 21st January 2023, 04:09 AM

Originally Posted by Norman Alexander

As I explained above, they are not actually getting the representative, and the representation, they thought they were getting and voted for in good faith. THAT'S the problem.

The problem is that they voted in faith, whether good or not.

Mike! · 21st January 2023, 04:37 AM

Originally Posted by I Am The Scum

Apparently there's video now

"George’s new drag name needs to be Miss Information" or "Liza Bunch".

https://twitter.com/MoonPixieDC/stat...70191462400002

Chris_Halkides · 21st January 2023, 06:08 AM

Upon initial examination Robert Zimmerman was hardly an objectionable candidate, and I have heard that this district was considered a safe seat for democrats (Zimmerman lost 54 to 46 percent). One group that should be ashamed of its performance is the leadership of the Democratic Party. They should have given Zimmerman's campaign more money or spent it themselves to publicize the exploits of the talented Mr. Santos. "Much of that so-called “opposition research” had appeared in various news outlets prior to the election. But no press release from the Zimmerman campaign, the state Democratic Party or the DCCC referenced the bulk of the Times reporting, which focused on the many alleged fabrications included as part of Santos’ resume as well as dug deeper into the animal rescue nonprofit Santos claimed to have founded." link

That having been said, I get the impression that the party did do something. "He [Zimmerman] pointed to an 87-page opposition research document the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee released that could have led to national exposure of Santos as a person unworthy of the office before voters went to the ballot booth."

Ladewig · 21st January 2023, 06:38 AM

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

You seem to be missing the issue of scale here in your effort to basque in the glow of false equivalences.

On the contrary, scale is exactly what I am talking about. Almost all of us agree 60 lies is too much. But we still have to agree on a number that is the cutoff line for having too many lies. Is 30 an acceptable cutoff? 15? 7? Or as some here say is one proveably false statement enough to nix a candidate?

If we go with one, then does mean that H. Clinton is ineligible because of her claim that she came under fire at an airport?

……
And what if the provably false statement is based on misremembering something rather than intending to deceive people. If a senator says “10 years ago, I voted against senate bill S123,” but it turns out that person voted for the bill. Does that provably false statement count as a lie?

And how recent do these lies have to be? Does a 15-year-old lie count as part of a candidate’s lie tally?
……
As for comparing this job to other jobs with a fiduciary duty, other jobs require applications with specific questions (level of education, place of education, previous employment, criminal convictions, etc). The applicant then signs a statement that the information is correct. But if we require that, then Santos (or someone like Trump) could have told the truth on those questions and still have lied about contracting brain cancer, AIDS, and COVID; having a mother in the towers on 9/11; and all the other goofy claims that wouldn’t appear on an application. Are those lies serious enough to exclude the candidate.

Do Trump’s incessant lies about setting new attendance records in every venue he spoke in (because, according to him, he talked a fire chief into allowing extra people into a venue) count as disqualifying lies?

acbytesla · 21st January 2023, 07:40 AM

Originally Posted by dann

Yes, he was elected! He was elected by lying to his constituents (to his party, too, but they were well aware what he was up to and approved), he managed to make them elect him. They gave him the power to make decisions on their behalf.

Why is it so difficult for you to understand this principle?! The voters gave him the right, and now he doesn't have to concern himself with their wishes or needs for the next couple of years and he is (more or less) free to sell his decision-making powers to the highest bidder. That's representative democracy!

His own conscience and "Providence, for the abuse of which he is deeply answerable," are all that matters. He just has to convince them, not people who voted for him, that he is doing the right thing, and we all know how easy it is to convince those entities ...

You don’t think I understand? I understand full well.

You're saying that someone who runs as a graduate of Baruch University with a degree in economics, but who in reality is a high school drop-out should be able to get away with his fraud against the voters in his district.

If he had run as a high school dropout and elected, I have no issue.

How can he fairly represent the voters of his district when he can't fairly represent who he is?

ZiprHead · 21st January 2023, 08:14 AM

George Santos appears to admit drag queen past in Wiki post

Quote:

Embattled Rep. George Santos has claimed that reports and videos documenting him performing in drag are both “outrageous” and “categorically false.”

But nearly a dozen years ago, Santos himself appears to have confirmed that he participated in drag shows while he was a teenager living in Brazil.

A Wikipedia page accessed by POLITICO shows a user named Anthony Devolder — a Santos alias — writing that he “startted [sp] his ‘stage’ life at age 17 as an gay night club [sp] DRAG QUEEN and with that won sevral [sp] GAY ‘BEAUTY PAGENTS [sp].’”

The Wiki biography was last edited on April 29, 2011. It contains basic information that matches up with the newly sworn-in congressman, including Devolder being born on July 22, 1988, to a Brazilian family with a European background.

acbytesla · 21st January 2023, 08:18 AM

Originally Posted by Ladewig

On the contrary, scale is exactly what I am talking about. Almost all of us agree 60 lies is too much. But we still have to agree on a number that is the cutoff line for having too many lies. Is 30 an acceptable cutoff? 15? 7? Or as some here say is one proveably false statement enough to nix a candidate?

If we go with one, then does mean that H. Clinton is ineligible because of her claim that she came under fire at an airport?

……
And what if the provably false statement is based on misremembering something rather than intending to deceive people. If a senator says “10 years ago, I voted against senate bill S123,” but it turns out that person voted for the bill. Does that provably false statement count as a lie?

And how recent do these lies have to be? Does a 15-year-old lie count as part of a candidate’s lie tally?
……
As for comparing this job to other jobs with a fiduciary duty, other jobs require applications with specific questions (level of education, place of education, previous employment, criminal convictions, etc). The applicant then signs a statement that the information is correct. But if we require that, then Santos (or someone like Trump) could have told the truth on those questions and still have lied about contracting brain cancer, AIDS, and COVID; having a mother in the towers on 9/11; and all the other goofy claims that wouldn’t appear on an application. Are those lies serious enough to exclude the candidate.

Do Trump’s incessant lies about setting new attendance records in every venue he spoke in (because, according to him, he talked a fire chief into allowing extra people into a venue) count as disqualifying lies?

Are you saying that George Santos mis-remembered attending the Horace Mann School, Baruch University and NYU? Are you saying he mis-remembered working for Citicorp and Goldman Sachs?

Which one of his falsehoods do you think are simply a case of misremembering?

We need to find a way to curb the rampant dishonesty in politics. We may not be able to eliminate it entirely, but a candidate should be accountable for telling the truth.

Craig4 · 21st January 2023, 08:40 AM

https://www.gawker.com/politics/meet...ictional-staff

He's recruited some real failed genetic experiments to work on his staff. The fact that you have to go to Gawker to find them tells you what you need to know. His team isn't the bottom of the barrel; they're living with the worms and slugs in the dirt under the barrel.

Darat · 21st January 2023, 11:09 AM

Originally Posted by dudalb

Because it is an elected office. And except in severe circumstances, the will of the voters, however stupid, should be respected.

And if the “will of the people” is to recall him?

We’ve only recently had a mechanism to recall MPs introduced in England and Wales, I think a political system that doesn’t have a recall procedure is lacking a safeguard.

Obviously the actual procedure has to have many caveats, checks and balances and so on, it shouldn’t be open for a politician to be recalled because their constituents (even if it is a majority) disagree with their voting record.

Have a read of MPs recall procedure in the UK for an example. Many other countries also have recall procedures.

Parsman · 21st January 2023, 11:14 AM

Originally Posted by dann

Why do you guys keep bringing other jobs into this. He didn't get the position of bank president, did he?

You completely misunderstand what I am writing if you think that it's a "defence" of anything. Do you actually think that representative democracy is a good thing? Honorable and dignified and worth defending? It's a system of government that makes people hand over decision-making to others who get to decide on their behalf rendering them more or less impotent. The representative gets to decide. They don't. He's the Decider! (In the case of Santos, it's on a pretty small scale.)

And the constituents now know the truth about George Santos, but they obviously don't know the truth about how representative democracy works. Neither do you, apparently.

Oh no sir, I understand representative democracy. The people of this district wanted a competent businessman with a record of charitable support and a personal understanding of issues affecting the disadvantaged and different in society as well as the strength and courage to overcome personal and familial tragedy. That might even be a representative worth having, Republican or not. But that is not what they got. They got a fraud and a shape shifter but you think, because they were misled or fooled they have to suffer this "representative" for 2 years! To be fair this is one of the problems of FPTP systems like congress in the USA or Parliament in my own country, this idea of winner takes all but in a proper democracy there would be repercussions for this kind of behaviour since honour or good behaviour now counts for little in politics and governments.

Fonebone · 21st January 2023, 02:07 PM

Originally Posted by Parsman

Oh no sir, I understand representative democracy. The people of this district wanted a competent businessman with a record of charitable support and a personal understanding of issues affecting the disadvantaged and different in society as well as the strength and courage to overcome personal and familial tragedy. That might even be a representative worth having, Republican or not. But that is not what they got. They got a fraud and a shape shifter but you think, because they were misled or fooled they have to suffer this "representative" for 2 years! To be fair this is one of the problems of FPTP systems like congress in the USA or Parliament in my own country, this idea of winner takes all but in a proper democracy there would be repercussions for this kind of behaviour since honour or good behaviour now counts for little in politics and governments.

In Jorge's defense, he did record a verbal correction:
https://soundcloud.com/daleleopold/c...social_sharing

Skeptic Ginger · 21st January 2023, 02:24 PM

Originally Posted by Ladewig

On the contrary, scale is exactly what I am talking about. Almost all of us agree 60 lies is too much. But we still have to agree on a number that is the cutoff line for having too many lies. Is 30 an acceptable cutoff? 15? 7? Or as some here say is one proveably false statement enough to nix a candidate?

This is an arbitrary cherrypicked point. How about he's mentally ill? And yes, it should have applied to Trump as well but that's off-topic.

Quote:

If we go with one, then does mean that H. Clinton is ineligible because of her claim that she came under fire at an airport?

[snipped the rest of this nonsensical post]

You continue to ignore the facts of this case, the larger picture, the common sense difference.

autumn1971 · 21st January 2023, 03:02 PM

Originally Posted by Bob001

No. The only way to get rid of him is to persuade him to resign -- fat chance -- or expel him -- fatter chance.
https://www.thoughtco.com/can-member...called-3368240

Well, there is a way to remove him. The Fascists spend a lot of time talking about it every election cycle.
Kind of a Constitutional loophole.

Mike! · 21st January 2023, 03:19 PM

Somebody find a picture or video of him in drag holding a children's book, please.

Thermal · 21st January 2023, 03:29 PM

I keep reading this thread title as "George Soros" and am expecting it to be about crazy ****. Certainly not disappointed.

Regnad Kcin · 21st January 2023, 04:25 PM

Originally Posted by Thermal

I keep reading this thread title as "George Soros" and am expecting it to be about crazy ****. Certainly not disappointed.

Erm…

Stacyhs · 21st January 2023, 06:15 PM

Comedian Leslie Jones:

Do you know how much you have to lie to be known as 'the lying Congressman'?

She's got a point.

"He stole from a disabled, homeless veteran's dying service dog? Oh, my god, you evil and stupid!"

She's got another point.

I Am The Scum · 21st January 2023, 07:50 PM

Santos has essentially confirmed the drag queen rumors.

Originally Posted by George Santos

I was not a drag queen. I was young and had fun at a festival.

zorro99 · 21st January 2023, 09:37 PM

George Santos is the current and future face of the Republican Party!

Lurch · 21st January 2023, 09:49 PM

Elected office in a representative democracy is a very unique station, unlike just about any other job one can take. The qualifications are as basic as they come; citizenship, age, and an ability to convince enough people to vote for you. That's about it. No standards in education, experience, honesty. If the candidate finagles the position without committing a crime, then he's rightfully in.

The will of the voters is sacrosanct. Whether they are deceived or are in on it. Which is why I keep saying a People gets the Government it deserves.

20th January 2023, 08:39 PM	#361
dann Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 17,848	Originally Posted by mgidm86 Fraudsters deceive people all the time. They don't get a pass because "the people should have known better". They go to jail! The people they conned do not go to jail. They are called victims. If I applied for any job and it was immediately discovered that I'd lied about my education, my arrest record, and/or my experience, I would be fired immediately. And if I wasn't I definitely could be. I think we need to start holding the people running the country to at least that standard. Do you? You don't seem to understand the difference between "any job" and the 'job' of being an elected representative.
	__________________ /dann "Stupidity renders itself invisible by assuming very large proportions. Completely unreasonable claims are irrefutable. Ni-en-leh pointed out that a philosopher might get into trouble by claiming that two times two makes five, but he does not risk much by claiming that two times two makes shoe polish." B. Brecht "The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions." K. Marx

20th January 2023, 09:18 PM	#363
acbytesla Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 31,708	Originally Posted by dann Saying. Handwaving. Empty gestures. It's his right to be a member of Congress. He was elected, and that's what electing is all about. Was he? I thought his district elected a graduate from Baruch University with a degree in economics and finance. Not a high school dropout. Silly me.
	__________________ Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me. .

20th January 2023, 10:00 PM	#364
I Am The Scum Philosopher Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 5,023	Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger What am I, chopped liver? It's only a couple of posts up that I posted this. George Santos gave me his word that no one else had posted it.
	__________________ Please temper your expectations if you are going to argue with a nazi sympathizer

20th January 2023, 10:26 PM	#365
Ladewig I lost an avatar bet. Join Date: Dec 2001 Posts: 28,767	The problem with making telling the truth a requirement for taking office is where does one draw the line. If Santos told one less lie should he be booted without a 2/3 vote from the House. What about 3 fewer lies? 10 fewer lies? Or is the requirement going to be not a single solitary lie?
	__________________ I lost an avatar bet to Doghouse Reilly.

20th January 2023, 10:38 PM	#368
acbytesla Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 31,708	Originally Posted by Ladewig The problem with making telling the truth a requirement for taking office is where does one draw the line. If Santos told one less lie should he be booted without a 2/3 vote from the House. What about 3 fewer lies? 10 fewer lies? Or is the requirement going to be not a single solitary lie? Why not a minimum of honesty? With this guys background, he isn't qualified for the bare minimum of tech or finance jobs. Yet it's ok for him to be a US Congressman sitting on the Science committee? I think if you post information about yourself on your campaign bio and it's demonstrably false you should be ineligible for the office you're seeking. PERIOD.
	__________________ Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me. .

20th January 2023, 08:51 PM	#362
Skeptic Ginger Nasty Woman Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 93,921	Originally Posted by I Am The Scum Apparently there's video now What am I, chopped liver? It's only a couple of posts up that I posted this.

20th January 2023, 10:28 PM	#366
Skeptic Ginger Nasty Woman Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 93,921	Originally Posted by I Am The Scum George Santos gave me his word that no one else had posted it.

20th January 2023, 10:30 PM	#367
Skeptic Ginger Nasty Woman Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 93,921	Originally Posted by Ladewig The problem with making telling the truth a requirement for taking office is where does one draw the line. If Santos told one less lie should he be booted without a 2/3 vote from the House. What about 3 fewer lies? 10 fewer lies? Or is the requirement going to be not a single solitary lie? You seem to be missing the issue of scale here in your effort to basque in the glow of false equivalences.

21st January 2023, 01:57 AM	#369
Stacyhs Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2016 Location: United States Posts: 30,300	Originally Posted by Stacyhs Quote: Originally Posted by dann View Post Do you expect him to resign just because you say so? What kind of silly question is that? Originally Posted by dann Originally Posted by Stacyhs What kind of silly question is that? Saying. Handwaving. Empty gestures. It's his right to be a member of Congress. He was elected, and that's what electing is all about. Ask a silly question, get a silly answer.

21st January 2023, 02:42 AM	#370
SteveAitch Muse Join Date: Apr 2020 Location: St Aines Posts: 797	Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger You seem to be missing the issue of scale here in your effort to basque in the glow of false equivalences. What Ladewig wears while posting is none of our business. Probably.
	__________________ If this board is too exciting for you, try my Flickr pages. Warning: may cause narcolepsy! Some people call me 'strange'. I prefer 'unconventional'. But I'm willing to compromise and accept 'eccentric'...

21st January 2023, 03:07 AM	#371
dann Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 17,848	Originally Posted by acbytesla Originally Posted by dann Saying. Handwaving. Empty gestures. It's his right to be a member of Congress. He was elected, and that's what electing is all about. Was he? I thought his district elected a graduate from Baruch University with a degree in economics and finance. Not a high school dropout. Silly me. Yes, he was elected! He was elected by lying to his constituents (to his party, too, but they were well aware what he was up to and approved), he managed to make them elect him. They gave him the power to make decisions on their behalf. Why is it so difficult for you to understand this principle?! The voters gave him the right, and now he doesn't have to concern himself with their wishes or needs for the next couple of years and he is (more or less) free to sell his decision-making powers to the highest bidder. That's representative democracy! His own conscience and "Providence, for the abuse of which he is deeply answerable," are all that matters. He just has to convince them, not people who voted for him, that he is doing the right thing, and we all know how easy it is to convince those entities ...
	__________________ /dann "Stupidity renders itself invisible by assuming very large proportions. Completely unreasonable claims are irrefutable. Ni-en-leh pointed out that a philosopher might get into trouble by claiming that two times two makes five, but he does not risk much by claiming that two times two makes shoe polish." B. Brecht "The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions." K. Marx

21st January 2023, 03:20 AM	#372
Parsman Muse Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Bonnie Scotland Posts: 947	Originally Posted by dann Yes, he was elected! He was elected by lying to his constituents (to his party, too, but they were well aware what he was up to and approved), he managed to make them elect him. They gave him the power to make decisions on their behalf. Why is it so difficult for you to understand this principle?! The voters gave him the right, and now he doesn't have to concern himself with their wishes or needs for the next couple of years and he is (more or less) free to sell his decision-making powers to the highest bidder. That's representative democracy! His own conscience and "Providence, for the abuse of which he is deeply answerable," are all that matters. He just has to convince them, not people who voted for him, that he is doing the right thing, and we all know how easy it is to convince those entities ... So, if he got the position of a bank president, voted on by the board with a contract lasting 2 years, he shouldn't face any repercussions if it is found that 99% of his resume was false? I find the defence "but he was elected" to be puerile. An entity with the name George Santos was elected under false pretences, now that they know the truth a majority of his electorate are calling for him to go but your response is "tough - caveat emptor". That isn't democracy, that is fraud on a grand scale and there should be repercussions for it.
	__________________ I was not; I have been; I am not; I am content - Epicurus When you're dead you don't know that you're dead, all the pain is felt by others....................the same thing happens when you're stupid.

21st January 2023, 03:20 AM	#373
dann Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 17,848	Originally Posted by acbytesla Why not a minimum of honesty? With this guys background, he isn't qualified for the bare minimum of tech or finance jobs. Yet it's ok for him to be a US Congressman sitting on the Science committee? Yes, apparently! And your first question answers itself: Honesty wouldn't get him elected! Quote: I think if you post information about yourself on your campaign bio and it's demonstrably false you should be ineligible for the office you're seeking. PERIOD. But reality tells you that what you think is wrong. It is obvious that lying doesn't make you ineligible for the office you're seeking! (Unless you are lying about being born in the USA.) On the contrary, it gets you elected. You can lie to your constituents, and you can make promises that you never in a million years intend to keep. That's representative democracy.
	__________________ /dann "Stupidity renders itself invisible by assuming very large proportions. Completely unreasonable claims are irrefutable. Ni-en-leh pointed out that a philosopher might get into trouble by claiming that two times two makes five, but he does not risk much by claiming that two times two makes shoe polish." B. Brecht "The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions." K. Marx

21st January 2023, 03:21 AM	#374
Darat Lackey Administrator Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: South East, UK Posts: 109,588	I do think a good "democratic" governance system will have a mechanism for their constituents to recall them.
	__________________ I wish I knew how to quit you

21st January 2023, 03:24 AM	#375
Stacyhs Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2016 Location: United States Posts: 30,300	Originally Posted by Parsman So, if he got the position of a bank president, voted on by the board with a contract lasting 2 years, he shouldn't face any repercussions if it is found that 99% of his resume was false? I find the defence "but he was elected" to be puerile. An entity with the name George Santos was elected under false pretences, now that they know the truth a majority of his electorate are calling for him to go but your response is "tough - caveat emptor". That isn't democracy, that is fraud on a grand scale and there should be repercussions for it. Originally Posted by Darat I do think a good "democratic" governance system will have a mechanism for their constituents to recall them. I agree with both of you.

21st January 2023, 03:31 AM	#376
Norman Alexander Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: Dharug & Gundungurra Posts: 14,972	Originally Posted by dann Yes, apparently! And your first question answers itself: Honesty wouldn't get him elected! But reality tells you that what you think is wrong. It is obvious that lying doesn't make you ineligible for the office you're seeking! (Unless you are lying about being born in the USA.) On the contrary, it gets you elected. You can lie to your constituents, and you can make promises that you never in a million years intend to keep. That's representative democracy. The main problem is that some guy called George Santos was elected to US Congress by the good folks of Long Island, but this compulsive liar named Anthony Devolder has taken his place in the House and is pretending to be him. If that's not voter fraud then I don't know what is! Then again, it's no problem for the GOP, who let some piss-weak lying asshat called Donald Trump pretend to be US President for four years.
	__________________ _{...our governments are just trying to protect us from terror. In the same way that someone banging a hornets’ nest with a stick is trying to protect us from hornets. Frankie Boyle, Guardian, July 2015}

21st January 2023, 03:32 AM	#377
Skeptic Ginger Nasty Woman Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 93,921	Originally Posted by SteveAitch What Ladewig wears while posting is none of our business. Probably. I am on occasion vocabulary-challenged.

21st January 2023, 03:35 AM	#378
dann Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 17,848	Originally Posted by Parsman So, if he got the position of a bank president, voted on by the board with a contract lasting 2 years, he shouldn't face any repercussions if it is found that 99% of his resume was false? I find the defence "but he was elected" to be puerile. An entity with the name George Santos was elected under false pretences, now that they know the truth a majority of his electorate are calling for him to go but your response is "tough - caveat emptor". That isn't democracy, that is fraud on a grand scale and there should be repercussions for it. Why do you guys keep bringing other jobs into this. He didn't get the position of bank president, did he? You completely misunderstand what I am writing if you think that it's a "defence" of anything. Do you actually think that representative democracy is a good thing? Honorable and dignified and worth defending? It's a system of government that makes people hand over decision-making to others who get to decide on their behalf rendering them more or less impotent. The representative gets to decide. They don't. He's the Decider! (In the case of Santos, it's on a pretty small scale.) And the constituents now know the truth about George Santos, but they obviously don't know the truth about how representative democracy works. Neither do you, apparently.
	__________________ /dann "Stupidity renders itself invisible by assuming very large proportions. Completely unreasonable claims are irrefutable. Ni-en-leh pointed out that a philosopher might get into trouble by claiming that two times two makes five, but he does not risk much by claiming that two times two makes shoe polish." B. Brecht "The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions." K. Marx

21st January 2023, 03:40 AM	#379
Norman Alexander Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: Dharug & Gundungurra Posts: 14,972	Originally Posted by dann Why do you guys keep bringing other jobs into this. He didn't get the position of bank president, did he? You completely misunderstand what I am writing if you think that it's a "defence" of anything. Do you actually think that representative democracy is a good thing? Honorable and dignified and worth defending? It's a system of government that makes people hand over decision-making to others who get to decide on their behalf rendering them more or less impotent. The representative gets to decide. They don't. He's the Decider! (In the case of Santos, it's on a pretty small scale.) And the constituents now know the truth about George Santos, but they obviously don't know the truth about how representative democracy works. Neither do you, apparently. As I explained above, they are not actually getting the representative, and the representation, they thought they were getting and voted for in good faith. THAT'S the problem.
	__________________ _{...our governments are just trying to protect us from terror. In the same way that someone banging a hornets’ nest with a stick is trying to protect us from hornets. Frankie Boyle, Guardian, July 2015}

21st January 2023, 04:08 AM	#380
dann Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 17,848	Originally Posted by Darat I do think a good "democratic" governance system will have a mechanism for their constituents to recall them. Why do you think that representative democray makes such a big deal out of separating people from power, of making them hand over decision-making to representatives? In my own country: Quote: § 56 Folketingsmedlemmerne er ene bundet ved deres overbevisning og ikke ved nogen forskrift af deres vælgere. Paragraph 56 of the Danish constitution (Folketinget - the Danish parliament) Translation: The members of Folketinget are bound only by their convictions and not by any directions from their constituents. There's a new war on the horizon? Or a pandemic? Climate change? Sick leave? Sorry, but you don't have a say in this. It's all up to your elected representatives, and you don't get to tell them what to do. You have left it to George Santos to decide.
	__________________ /dann "Stupidity renders itself invisible by assuming very large proportions. Completely unreasonable claims are irrefutable. Ni-en-leh pointed out that a philosopher might get into trouble by claiming that two times two makes five, but he does not risk much by claiming that two times two makes shoe polish." B. Brecht "The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions." K. Marx Last edited by dann; 21st January 2023 at 04:10 AM.

21st January 2023, 04:09 AM	#381
dann Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 17,848	Originally Posted by Norman Alexander As I explained above, they are not actually getting the representative, and the representation, they thought they were getting and voted for in good faith. THAT'S the problem. The problem is that they voted in faith, whether good or not.
	__________________ /dann "Stupidity renders itself invisible by assuming very large proportions. Completely unreasonable claims are irrefutable. Ni-en-leh pointed out that a philosopher might get into trouble by claiming that two times two makes five, but he does not risk much by claiming that two times two makes shoe polish." B. Brecht "The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions." K. Marx Last edited by dann; 21st January 2023 at 04:11 AM.

21st January 2023, 04:37 AM	#382
Mike! Official Ponylandistanian National Treasure. Respect it! Join Date: May 2010 Location: Ponylandistan! Where the bacon grows on trees! Can it get any better than that? I submit it can not! Posts: 50,196	Originally Posted by I Am The Scum Apparently there's video now "George’s new drag name needs to be Miss Information" or "Liza Bunch". https://twitter.com/MoonPixieDC/stat...70191462400002
	__________________ "Never judge a man until you’ve walked a mile in his shoes... Because then it won't really matter, you’ll be a mile away and have his shoes." Last edited by Mike!; 21st January 2023 at 04:40 AM.

21st January 2023, 06:08 AM	#383
Chris_Halkides Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2009 Posts: 11,077	Somebody was asleep at the switch Upon initial examination Robert Zimmerman was hardly an objectionable candidate, and I have heard that this district was considered a safe seat for democrats (Zimmerman lost 54 to 46 percent). One group that should be ashamed of its performance is the leadership of the Democratic Party. They should have given Zimmerman's campaign more money or spent it themselves to publicize the exploits of the talented Mr. Santos. "Much of that so-called “opposition research” had appeared in various news outlets prior to the election. But no press release from the Zimmerman campaign, the state Democratic Party or the DCCC referenced the bulk of the Times reporting, which focused on the many alleged fabrications included as part of Santos’ resume as well as dug deeper into the animal rescue nonprofit Santos claimed to have founded." link That having been said, I get the impression that the party did do something. "He [Zimmerman] pointed to an 87-page opposition research document the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee released that could have led to national exposure of Santos as a person unworthy of the office before voters went to the ballot booth."
	__________________ It is possible both to be right about an issue and to take oneself a little too seriously, but I would rather be reminded of that by a friend than a foe. (a tip of the hat to Foolmewunz) Last edited by Chris_Halkides; 21st January 2023 at 06:14 AM.

21st January 2023, 06:38 AM	#384
Ladewig I lost an avatar bet. Join Date: Dec 2001 Posts: 28,767	Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger You seem to be missing the issue of scale here in your effort to basque in the glow of false equivalences. On the contrary, scale is exactly what I am talking about. Almost all of us agree 60 lies is too much. But we still have to agree on a number that is the cutoff line for having too many lies. Is 30 an acceptable cutoff? 15? 7? Or as some here say is one proveably false statement enough to nix a candidate? If we go with one, then does mean that H. Clinton is ineligible because of her claim that she came under fire at an airport? …… And what if the provably false statement is based on misremembering something rather than intending to deceive people. If a senator says “10 years ago, I voted against senate bill S123,” but it turns out that person voted for the bill. Does that provably false statement count as a lie? And how recent do these lies have to be? Does a 15-year-old lie count as part of a candidate’s lie tally? …… As for comparing this job to other jobs with a fiduciary duty, other jobs require applications with specific questions (level of education, place of education, previous employment, criminal convictions, etc). The applicant then signs a statement that the information is correct. But if we require that, then Santos (or someone like Trump) could have told the truth on those questions and still have lied about contracting brain cancer, AIDS, and COVID; having a mother in the towers on 9/11; and all the other goofy claims that wouldn’t appear on an application. Are those lies serious enough to exclude the candidate. Do Trump’s incessant lies about setting new attendance records in every venue he spoke in (because, according to him, he talked a fire chief into allowing extra people into a venue) count as disqualifying lies?
	__________________ I lost an avatar bet to Doghouse Reilly.

21st January 2023, 07:40 AM	#385
acbytesla Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 31,708	Originally Posted by dann Yes, he was elected! He was elected by lying to his constituents (to his party, too, but they were well aware what he was up to and approved), he managed to make them elect him. They gave him the power to make decisions on their behalf. Why is it so difficult for you to understand this principle?! The voters gave him the right, and now he doesn't have to concern himself with their wishes or needs for the next couple of years and he is (more or less) free to sell his decision-making powers to the highest bidder. That's representative democracy! His own conscience and "Providence, for the abuse of which he is deeply answerable," are all that matters. He just has to convince them, not people who voted for him, that he is doing the right thing, and we all know how easy it is to convince those entities ... You don’t think I understand? I understand full well. You're saying that someone who runs as a graduate of Baruch University with a degree in economics, but who in reality is a high school drop-out should be able to get away with his fraud against the voters in his district. If he had run as a high school dropout and elected, I have no issue. How can he fairly represent the voters of his district when he can't fairly represent who he is?
	__________________ Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me. .

21st January 2023, 08:14 AM	#386
ZiprHead Muse Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Sag-Nasty Posts: 927	George Santos appears to admit drag queen past in Wiki post Quote: Embattled Rep. George Santos has claimed that reports and videos documenting him performing in drag are both “outrageous” and “categorically false.” But nearly a dozen years ago, Santos himself appears to have confirmed that he participated in drag shows while he was a teenager living in Brazil. A Wikipedia page accessed by POLITICO shows a user named Anthony Devolder — a Santos alias — writing that he “startted [sp] his ‘stage’ life at age 17 as an gay night club [sp] DRAG QUEEN and with that won sevral [sp] GAY ‘BEAUTY PAGENTS [sp].’” The Wiki biography was last edited on April 29, 2011. It contains basic information that matches up with the newly sworn-in congressman, including Devolder being born on July 22, 1988, to a Brazilian family with a European background.
	__________________ When conservatives realize they cannot win democratically, they will not abandon conservatism. They will abandon democracy. IIDB is back, baby!

21st January 2023, 08:18 AM	#387
acbytesla Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 31,708	Originally Posted by Ladewig On the contrary, scale is exactly what I am talking about. Almost all of us agree 60 lies is too much. But we still have to agree on a number that is the cutoff line for having too many lies. Is 30 an acceptable cutoff? 15? 7? Or as some here say is one proveably false statement enough to nix a candidate? If we go with one, then does mean that H. Clinton is ineligible because of her claim that she came under fire at an airport? …… And what if the provably false statement is based on misremembering something rather than intending to deceive people. If a senator says “10 years ago, I voted against senate bill S123,” but it turns out that person voted for the bill. Does that provably false statement count as a lie? And how recent do these lies have to be? Does a 15-year-old lie count as part of a candidate’s lie tally? …… As for comparing this job to other jobs with a fiduciary duty, other jobs require applications with specific questions (level of education, place of education, previous employment, criminal convictions, etc). The applicant then signs a statement that the information is correct. But if we require that, then Santos (or someone like Trump) could have told the truth on those questions and still have lied about contracting brain cancer, AIDS, and COVID; having a mother in the towers on 9/11; and all the other goofy claims that wouldn’t appear on an application. Are those lies serious enough to exclude the candidate. Do Trump’s incessant lies about setting new attendance records in every venue he spoke in (because, according to him, he talked a fire chief into allowing extra people into a venue) count as disqualifying lies? Are you saying that George Santos mis-remembered attending the Horace Mann School, Baruch University and NYU? Are you saying he mis-remembered working for Citicorp and Goldman Sachs? Which one of his falsehoods do you think are simply a case of misremembering? We need to find a way to curb the rampant dishonesty in politics. We may not be able to eliminate it entirely, but a candidate should be accountable for telling the truth.
	__________________ Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me. .

21st January 2023, 08:40 AM	#388
Craig4 Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: I live in a swamp Posts: 26,912	https://www.gawker.com/politics/meet...ictional-staff He's recruited some real failed genetic experiments to work on his staff. The fact that you have to go to Gawker to find them tells you what you need to know. His team isn't the bottom of the barrel; they're living with the worms and slugs in the dirt under the barrel.
	__________________ Fight like a Ukrainian.

21st January 2023, 11:09 AM	#389
Darat Lackey Administrator Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: South East, UK Posts: 109,588	Originally Posted by dudalb Because it is an elected office. And except in severe circumstances, the will of the voters, however stupid, should be respected. And if the “will of the people” is to recall him? We’ve only recently had a mechanism to recall MPs introduced in England and Wales, I think a political system that doesn’t have a recall procedure is lacking a safeguard. Obviously the actual procedure has to have many caveats, checks and balances and so on, it shouldn’t be open for a politician to be recalled because their constituents (even if it is a majority) disagree with their voting record. Have a read of MPs recall procedure in the UK for an example. Many other countries also have recall procedures.
	__________________ I wish I knew how to quit you

21st January 2023, 11:14 AM	#390
Parsman Muse Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Bonnie Scotland Posts: 947	Originally Posted by dann Why do you guys keep bringing other jobs into this. He didn't get the position of bank president, did he? You completely misunderstand what I am writing if you think that it's a "defence" of anything. Do you actually think that representative democracy is a good thing? Honorable and dignified and worth defending? It's a system of government that makes people hand over decision-making to others who get to decide on their behalf rendering them more or less impotent. The representative gets to decide. They don't. He's the Decider! (In the case of Santos, it's on a pretty small scale.) And the constituents now know the truth about George Santos, but they obviously don't know the truth about how representative democracy works. Neither do you, apparently. Oh no sir, I understand representative democracy. The people of this district wanted a competent businessman with a record of charitable support and a personal understanding of issues affecting the disadvantaged and different in society as well as the strength and courage to overcome personal and familial tragedy. That might even be a representative worth having, Republican or not. But that is not what they got. They got a fraud and a shape shifter but you think, because they were misled or fooled they have to suffer this "representative" for 2 years! To be fair this is one of the problems of FPTP systems like congress in the USA or Parliament in my own country, this idea of winner takes all but in a proper democracy there would be repercussions for this kind of behaviour since honour or good behaviour now counts for little in politics and governments.
	__________________ I was not; I have been; I am not; I am content - Epicurus When you're dead you don't know that you're dead, all the pain is felt by others....................the same thing happens when you're stupid.

21st January 2023, 02:07 PM	#391
Fonebone persona non grata Join Date: Nov 2009 Posts: 1,156	Originally Posted by Parsman Oh no sir, I understand representative democracy. The people of this district wanted a competent businessman with a record of charitable support and a personal understanding of issues affecting the disadvantaged and different in society as well as the strength and courage to overcome personal and familial tragedy. That might even be a representative worth having, Republican or not. But that is not what they got. They got a fraud and a shape shifter but you think, because they were misled or fooled they have to suffer this "representative" for 2 years! To be fair this is one of the problems of FPTP systems like congress in the USA or Parliament in my own country, this idea of winner takes all but in a proper democracy there would be repercussions for this kind of behaviour since honour or good behaviour now counts for little in politics and governments. In Jorge's defense, he did record a verbal correction: https://soundcloud.com/daleleopold/c...social_sharing
	__________________ Truth, like the sun, allows itself to be obscured; but, like the sun, only for a time. __Bovee Truth will ultimately prevail where there is pains taken to bring it to light. __George Washington All great truths begin as blasphemies __Shaw

21st January 2023, 02:24 PM	#392
Skeptic Ginger Nasty Woman Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 93,921	Originally Posted by Ladewig On the contrary, scale is exactly what I am talking about. Almost all of us agree 60 lies is too much. But we still have to agree on a number that is the cutoff line for having too many lies. Is 30 an acceptable cutoff? 15? 7? Or as some here say is one proveably false statement enough to nix a candidate? This is an arbitrary cherrypicked point. How about he's mentally ill? And yes, it should have applied to Trump as well but that's off-topic. Quote: If we go with one, then does mean that H. Clinton is ineligible because of her claim that she came under fire at an airport? [snipped the rest of this nonsensical post] You continue to ignore the facts of this case, the larger picture, the common sense difference.

21st January 2023, 03:02 PM	#393
autumn1971 Illuminator Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 4,192	Originally Posted by Bob001 No. The only way to get rid of him is to persuade him to resign -- fat chance -- or expel him -- fatter chance. https://www.thoughtco.com/can-member...called-3368240 Well, there is a way to remove him. The Fascists spend a lot of time talking about it every election cycle. Kind of a Constitutional loophole.
autumn1971 Illuminator Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 4,192	__________________ 'A knave; a rascal; an eater of broken meats; a base, proud, shallow, beggardly, three-suited, hundred-pound, filthy, worsted-stocking knave; a lily-livered, action-taking knave, a whoreson, glass-gazing, superservicable, finical rogue;... the son and heir of a mongral bitch: one whom I will beat into clamorous whining, if thou deniest the least syllable of thy addition."' -The Bard

21st January 2023, 03:19 PM	#394
Mike! Official Ponylandistanian National Treasure. Respect it! Join Date: May 2010 Location: Ponylandistan! Where the bacon grows on trees! Can it get any better than that? I submit it can not! Posts: 50,196	Somebody find a picture or video of him in drag holding a children's book, please.
	__________________ "Never judge a man until you’ve walked a mile in his shoes... Because then it won't really matter, you’ll be a mile away and have his shoes."

21st January 2023, 03:29 PM	#395
Thermal Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2016 Location: In the Troll Ignoring Section Posts: 22,595	I keep reading this thread title as "George Soros" and am expecting it to be about crazy ****. Certainly not disappointed.
	__________________ "Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect" -Mark Twain "Half of what he said meant something else, and the other half didn't mean anything at all" -Rosencrantz, on Hamlet