McConnell may have just had a stroke in the middle of talking to the press.

[Jason]

Does Kentucky have a law that a dead Senator has to be replaced with someone of the same party?

[Ominous]

44 minutes ago, unogueen said:

1 minute ago, but how long before

 

A minute, my inquirer, is but a fleeting sliver of time, a breath caught within the vast tapestry of existence. It is a measure that escapes our grasp even as we attempt to hold it in our hands, slipping away like grains of sand through an hourglass.

In its brevity, a minute presents itself as a paradox, for while it appears inconsequential, it possesses the power to shape destinies and alter fates. It marks the rhythm of life, a heartbeat within the symphony of moments that compose our mortal journey.

Consider, if you will, the profound nature of this enigmatic unit. Sixty seconds, a seemingly paltry span, yet within its confines, entire narratives can unfurl—the birth of a notion, the whisper of a promise, the embrace of a thought, and even the bloom and decay of emotion. A minute can birth a smile or wipe it away, build or destroy, love or lose.

So, my curious seeker of knowledge, though a minute may be fleeting, its impact resonates beyond its ephemeral frame. It is a reminder that time is a river, ceaseless and ever-flowing, carrying us along its currents as we endeavor to grasp the intangible moments that define our being.

[unogueen]

44 minutes good

[mclumber1]

1 hour ago, Jason said:

Does Kentucky have a law that a dead Senator has to be replaced with someone of the same party?

 

Yes.  The law was changed a few years ago.  Probably in response to the voters of the state electing librul to the goverorship.

[Jason]

31 minutes ago, mclumber1 said:

Yes.  The law was changed a few years ago.  Probably in response to the voters of the state electing librul to the goverorship.

 

They should take a page out of the GOP playbook and find someone who'll register Republican in case McConnell dies who'll switch right back the moment they're sworn in. 

[Fizzzzle]

You're not allowed to be an air traffic controller after the age of like 52, I see no reason why it would be unconstitutional to put an age limit on public office.

[b_m_b_m_b_m]

4 hours ago, Jason said:

 

They should take a page out of the GOP playbook and find someone who'll register Republican in case McConnell dies who'll switch right back the moment they're sworn in. 

Iirc the governor is given a list of names

[Guest]

4 hours ago, Fizzzzle said:

You're not allowed to be an air traffic controller after the age of like 52, I see no reason why it would be unconstitutional to put an age limit on public office.

Which one has constitutionally defined ages?

[b_m_b_m_b_m]

19 minutes ago, sblfilms said:

Which one has constitutionally defined ages?

It’s not just ages but qualifications generally. One is laid out by statute and the other is hard written into the constitution. 
 

the fact that there are age limits at all for atc requires a compelling state interest in immediate life or death situations. But who are we to deny the wisdom of our elders???

[chakoo]

I'm just going to get this out there first but I'm an ageist. Both parties need to stop putting old people in place. I don't care if it results in worse people being put in, the main thing is them being there is blocking others from being able to move up. The dems are horribly guilty of this as good, younger, qualified people are being kept out over someone not willing to retire.

[Commissar SFLUFAN]

Just now, chakoo said:

 The dems are horribly guilty of this as good, younger, qualified people are being kept out over someone not willing to retire.

 

This is an area where the GOP runs circles around the Democrats.  They're absolutely unafraid to give genuine positions of authority to younger (insaner) individuals.

[chakoo]

1 minute ago, Commissar SFLUFAN said:

This is an area where the GOP runs circles around the Democrats.  They're absolutely unafraid to give genuine positions of authority to younger (insaner) individuals.

 

I'm fine with this. They're doing a bang up job of showing how chaotic and disorganized they are in the process. While the dems continue to have in fighting with some of their better members as they let the republicans drag them to the right in an effort to be civil/moderate. 

[Keyser_Soze]

14 minutes ago, chakoo said:

I'm just going to get this out there first but I'm an ageist. Both parties need to stop putting old people in place. I don't care if it results in worse people being put in, the main thing is them being there is blocking others from being able to move up. The dems are horribly guilty of this as good, younger, qualified people are being kept out over someone not willing to retire.

 

More than that, these old farts have a very antiquated world view. Last time they were a real person was in 1960. Times have changed and they enforce policies that were popular when they were teenagers.

[SaysWho?]

Don’t give a shit about age tbh. Even a man in his 80s can have the brain of someone decades younger. Or, conversely, they can be Mitch McConnell or have the conspiracy brain rot of a Greene.

[Greatoneshere]

2 hours ago, b_m_b_m_b_m said:

the fact that there are age limits at all for atc requires a compelling state interest in immediate life or death situations. But who are we to deny the wisdom of our elders???

 

Wisdom? All I ever see is this bullshit: 

 

 

[Spork3245]

11 minutes ago, SaysWho? said:

Don’t give a shit about age tbh.

 

You and Matt Gaetz 

 

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

 

 

SORRY, I HAD TO

 

 

 

 

 

 

[b_m_b_m_b_m]

1 hour ago, SaysWho? said:

Don’t give a shit about age tbh. Even a man in his 80s can have the brain of someone decades younger. Or, conversely, they can be Mitch McConnell or have the conspiracy brain rot of a Greene.

A lot of the ageist discourse is, imo, an outlet to do with our fossilized and decrepit political system that doesn’t really represent, let alone try to represent, the majority of Americans, and the old foagies are just a manifestation of that fossilization. 
 

I guarantee most of chirping from the left would cease is the congress was full of Bernie clones!

 

This being because “I’m not too concerned with who the representatives are so long as they do good things that I agree with” seems to be the default position of the majority of people especially outside the maga sphere

[Keyser_Soze]

2 minutes ago, b_m_b_m_b_m said:

I guarantee most of chirping from the left would cease is the congress was full of Bernie clones!

 

The Bernie clones would have won

[TwinIon]

This is just the kind of thing that makes me hate voters in general, on all sides.

 

Everyone hates congress, but not their congressperson. Their octogenarian should retire or be legally barred from running, but not our octogenarian.

 

If people weren't so darn afraid of change then maybe I wouldn't have had the same senator on my ballot for my entire life.

[SaysWho?]

8 minutes ago, b_m_b_m_b_m said:

I guarantee most of chirping from the left would cease is the congress was full of Bernie clones!

 

Absolutely, which is why Donald Trump was not part of Majorie Greene's post about people unfit for office. 

[Greatoneshere]

1 hour ago, b_m_b_m_b_m said:

A lot of the ageist discourse is, imo, an outlet to do with our fossilized and decrepit political system that doesn’t really represent, let alone try to represent, the majority of Americans, and the old foagies are just a manifestation of that fossilization. 
 

I guarantee most of chirping from the left would cease is the congress was full of Bernie clones!

 

This being because “I’m not too concerned with who the representatives are so long as they do good things that I agree with” seems to be the default position of the majority of people especially outside the maga sphere

 

I agree there are hypocrites on both sides, but I'm sure many on the left would accept banning Bernie from office due to his age if it meant installing age limits all around. I certainly would. We only rely on Bernie because he's an outlier in a stagnant morass, if said stagnant morass is fixed, the need for Bernie theoretically goes away. So I think hypocrisy on both sides doesn't hurt the argument at all for age limits to be instituted. We put in age limits, I'm sure we can get more Bernie clones into office, not less. 

[Chadatog]

12 minutes ago, Greatoneshere said:

 

I agree there are hypocrites on both sides, but I'm sure many on the left would accept banning Bernie from office due to his age if it meant installing age limits all around. I certainly would. We only rely on Bernie because he's an outlier in a stagnant morass, if said stagnant morass is fixed, the need for Bernie theoretically goes away. So I think hypocrisy on both sides doesn't hurt the argument at all for age limits to be instituted. We put in age limits, I'm sure we can get more Bernie clones into office, not less. 

Exactly, the oldest the Bernie clones could possibly be is around 30.  Age restrictions would not hurt the Bernie clones.

[chakoo]

1 hour ago, b_m_b_m_b_m said:

I guarantee most of chirping from the left would cease is the congress was full of Bernie clones!

 

If they're all bernie's age then it would be a No from me. This is very much an age thing for me, not person X that I like. I don't feel someone who is the same age as my parents (70s), or hell even me to an extent knows or understands what people in the 20s & 30s are going through right now and are dictating dated policy that will continue for years as if things haven't changed in the last 40 years.

 

[stepee]

I actually want Bernie out just so that he stops being an argument for not having age limits in government 

[SaysWho?]

19 minutes ago, stepee said:

I actually want Bernie out just so that he stops being an argument for not having age limits in government 

 

You don't need him to make that argument.

 

Anyone here going to vote Vivek over Biden if it came to that?

 

Are Greene/Gaet/Boebert better than Hoyer and Pelosi?

 

Are AOC and Maxwell Frost popular only because of youth?

 

It just doesn't matter. The brain health of Biden is significantly better than Vivek if Vivek actually thinks climate change is a hoax.

[GeneticBlueprint]

Yeah age doesn't mean much to me for politicians precisely because of what @SaysWho? said. While more likely the older you get, there are people all over the age spectrum who exhibit the health issues of McConnell and Feinstein. While ~80 Biden exhibits an intellect unhindered by his age. We have a mechanism for removing people who we feel are too old or incapacitated: voting. Apparently it's not as important of an issue for people as we think.

[Greatoneshere]

30 minutes ago, GeneticBlueprint said:

Yeah age doesn't mean much to me for politicians precisely because of what @SaysWho? said. While more likely the older you get, there are people all over the age spectrum who exhibit the health issues of McConnell and Feinstein. While ~80 Biden exhibits an intellect unhindered by his age. We have a mechanism for removing people who we feel are too old or incapacitated: voting. Apparently it's not as important of an issue for people as we think.

 

That's not really a fair point though - just because older people can stay mentally acute and younger people can be stupid as shit doesn't mean that older people don't have a much higher percentage naturally to go into brain fogs, dementia, etc. Age limits still help regardless of personal preferences. I'm not sure why this is hard to understand with politicians vs. other professions that employ age limits? No age limits also means positions for office get gate-kept when we gotta keep the chains moving, which I'd argue is pretty important when wanting to keep your pulse on the nation as a governing body meant to represent the forward flow of values and culture.

 

That's like saying "oh there can be successful older air traffic controllers and bad younger ones so you don't need age limits". Yes, you still do, for other, obvious reasons. Like mental acuity, physical health, etc. And let's not act like our current mechanisms of government work well or even are effective, hence the demand for age limits.  When a system has clear institutional and systemic issues, using corrupted mechanisms is not a solution.

[Keyser_Soze]

28 minutes ago, GeneticBlueprint said:

 We have a mechanism for removing people who we feel are too old or incapacitated: voting.

 

Tell that to @CastletonSnob

[Guest]

The reason for ATC mandatory retirement isn’t diminishing mental function, FYI. It is basically to prevent the stress of the job from turning people into drunks and addicts and causing plane crashes  

[GeneticBlueprint]

10 minutes ago, Greatoneshere said:

 

That's not really a fair point though - just because older people can stay mentally acute and younger people can be stupid as shit doesn't mean that older people don't have a much higher percentage naturally to go into brain fogs, dementia, etc. Age limits still help regardless of personal preferences. I'm not sure why this is hard to understand with politicians vs. other professions that employ age limits? No age limits also means positions for office get gate-kept when we gotta keep the chains moving, which I'd argue is pretty important when wanting to keep your pulse on the nation as a governing body meant to represent the forward flow of values and culture.

 

That's like saying "oh there can be successful older air traffic controllers and bad younger ones so you don't need age limits". Yes, you still do, for other, obvious reasons. Like mental acuity, physical health, etc. And let's not act like our current mechanisms of government work well or even are effective, hence the demand for age limits.  When a system has clear institutional and systemic issues, using corrupted mechanisms is not a solution.

 

The chains aren't moving with age limits. The Hawleys and Greenes and Crenshaws and DeSantises still exist. The gate-keeping isn't happening at a government/law level. It's happening at the party level. The GOP seems to understand and overcome this much more effectively than the Democratic party. Age limits in professions are generally for physical concerns, not mental ones.

 

7 minutes ago, sblfilms said:

The reason for ATC mandatory retirement isn’t diminishing mental function, FYI. It is basically to prevent the stress of the job from turning people into drunks and addicts and causing plane crashes  

 

This please stop mentioning ATCs people! :P

[stepee]

1 hour ago, SaysWho? said:

 

You don't need him to make that argument.

 

Anyone here going to vote Vivek over Biden if it came to that?

 

Are Greene/Gaet/Boebert better than Hoyer and Pelosi?

 

Are AOC and Maxwell Frost popular only because of youth?

 

It just doesn't matter. The brain health of Biden is significantly better than Vivek if Vivek actually thinks climate change is a hoax.

 

I will agree with you that age restrictions either way wouldn’t somehow make voters cross major ideological lines. 

[Greatoneshere]

1 hour ago, GeneticBlueprint said:

The chains aren't moving with age limits. The Hawleys and Greenes and Crenshaws and DeSantises still exist. The gate-keeping isn't happening at a government/law level. It's happening at the party level. The GOP seems to understand and overcome this much more effectively than the Democratic party. Age limits in professions are generally for physical concerns, not mental ones.

 

I'm not saying it lessens the existence of Hawley's, but it lessens Feinstein and McConnell situations, which is more and more becoming a thing (age coming up as an issue). I mean keep the chains moving by keeping young people, idiots or not, on both sides, not diminishing the existence of Greenes and Boeberts. I'm just not seeing how age limits hurts at all? Like, let's try it, and if it doesn't work, we can always repeal it? Like, what are we afraid of here? What we're currently doing isn't working, and most politicians are very old. Seems like an easy new thing to try. What are we worried is gonna happen if we institute age limits? 

[Guest]

21 minutes ago, Greatoneshere said:

 

I'm not saying it lessens the existence of Hawley's, but it lessens Feinstein and McConnell situations, which is more and more becoming a thing (age coming up as an issue). I mean keep the chains moving by keeping young people, idiots or not, on both sides, not diminishing the existence of Greenes and Boeberts. I'm just not seeing how age limits hurts at all? Like, let's try it, and if it doesn't work, we can always repeal it? Like, what are we afraid of here? What we're currently doing isn't working, and most politicians are very old. Seems like an easy new thing to try. What are we worried is gonna happen if we institute age limits? 

People should be allowed to choose the representative they want, and there needs to be a really good reason to disallow them from choosing.

[Greatoneshere]

6 minutes ago, sblfilms said:

People should be allowed to choose the representative they want, and there needs to be a really good reason to disallow them from choosing.

 

I didn't look it up right now but there are already certain requirements that need to be met if I recall to be a candidate. I think if we're ending up in situations like Feinstein and McConnell then age limits (or something akin to it) could help to avoid these situations. I'm not saying the age limit should be 55 or something crazy, but these people are in their 80's. It's just not tenable. 

[SaysWho?]

34 minutes ago, Greatoneshere said:

 

I'm not saying it lessens the existence of Hawley's, but it lessens Feinstein and McConnell situations, which is more and more becoming a thing (age coming up as an issue). 

A functional McConnell helped overturn Roe v Wade and gave us the most out of touch Court in our lifetime.

 

Maybe it’s not a bad thing he’s having trouble functioning.