Is This the Dumbest New Congressmember?

[StusBlues]

Florida lawmaker calls House ban on hats ‘sexist’

Is it wise in any way to make an issue of the right to look like an idiot? Or am I missing some nuance of the spirit of American liberty?

[Marley23]

I'm not much for talking about the dignity of Congress, but if Congress wants to ban hats from being worn while it's in session - and then further show her up by banning sequins - I would fully support it.

[gonzomax]

I can see a congressman wearing a beanie with a propeller to the floor. It's all good.

[Skammer]

Well, to be fair, the rule was targetted at men's hats... no one in the 1800s foresaw women congresspeople coming or the rule may have been different.

But still, as a freshman congresslady, she should not make this her first priority. Seriously.

[StusBlues]

Yeah, if Bella Abzug was able to abstain, Wilson should be able to hold off.

[Marley23]

Originally Posted by Skammer

Well, to be fair, the rule was targetted at men's hats... no one in the 1800s foresaw women congresspeople coming or the rule may have been different.

I'm sure it was. Of course that makes her comment about sexism really backward - the rule is unisex, it's the social etiquette on hats that is sexist (very mildly so). I think I'm more annoyed by her lack of understanding of what sexism means than by the ridiculous hat in the photo.

[MyFootsZZZ]

I don't understand the sexist argument... It's because men don't traditionally wear hats in-doors but women traditionaly can get away with it?

[Chronos]

It looks to me like she has a problem with the fact that the rule isn't sexist. Now, if the rule said that men had to doff their hats but women could leave them on, that would be sexist.

Meanwhile, does the prohibition against arresting legislators in session apply to the fashion police? Because that's gone way beyond "classy" or "fancy" into outright gaudy and tacky.

[MyFootsZZZ]

"It's like a fetish."

[Marley23]

Congratulations, Florida, you've done it again!

[Wheelz]

Wow, there's someone who clearly has her finger on the pulse of the American voter!
"Elect me to Congress and I'll overturn the hat ban!" Let others worry about the economy and junk.*

I'd be embarrassed if I'd voted for this twit.



*Sure, I don't know. Maybe she is worrying about the economy too. But this is truly a tone-deaf way to make one's congressional debut.

[StusBlues]

BTW, this is the same person who was terribly confused by the word 'alien' as it applied to immigration a few years ago.

[Giles]

Originally Posted by StusBlues

BTW, this is the same person who was terribly confused by the word 'alien' as it applied to immigration a few years ago.

I don't think she was confused: she was using less than perfect English, but she was clearly opposed to the use of the word "alien" to refer to foreigners or non-citizens.

However, in this current hat matter, I think she is confused about what "sexism" means, and her confusion comes partly from her old-fashioned ideas about hat etiquette for men and women, and partly from her obvious love of wearing brightly coloured hats that few men other than professional entertainers would wear.

[howye]

Perhaps she should thought of this before applying for the job. And the picture doesn't go a long way to making her look like the brightest congress person, sparkliest though.

[jayjay]

Frankly, I was hoping to see a pic of her in Aretha's giant bow hat from the inauguration...

[Ludovic]

Originally Posted by howye

And the picture doesn't go a long way to making her look like the brightest congress person, sparkliest though.

Yup, it one of the better "Durp" shots I've seen.

[foolsguinea]

Clearly she wears hats as part of trying to look feminine. So in a way, telling her not to wear a hat is like telling her not to wear makeup, or a dress. To un-woman her, or even to discourage a woman from being on the floor. It is sexist in a way, rather as if a grammar school forbade trousers for its teachers. Yes, I know women don't all wear hats. But they may wear weaves & wigs in this context, & those are just as artificial.

[Marley23]

Originally Posted by foolsguinea

So in a way, telling her not to wear a hat is like telling her not to wear makeup, or a dress. To un-woman her, or even to discourage a woman from being on the floor.

Come on now. The rule doesn't stop her from doing anything except wearing a hat, and she happens to like wearing hats. It was clearly not designed to keep women from being on the House floor: women couldn't even vote when the rule was passed. It doesn't "un-woman" her, whatever that means. The wording of the rule is gender neutral, and it doesn't have a disproportionate effect on any one group. It's not sexist.

It is sexist in a way, rather as if a grammar school forbade trousers for its teachers.

How would preventing men and women from wearing trousers be sexist?

[rocking chair]

Originally Posted by StusBlues

Yeah, if Bella Abzug was able to abstain, Wilson should be able to hold off.

i was under the impression that there was a religious exception for her.

[Sparky812]

As if Congress doesn't have more important issues to deal with...you know, like the economy, oil spills, health care, inflation, etc.. some bimbo wants to debate whether she can wear her stupid sequined cowboy hat in session!
A hat is to keep the sun off your head and believe me.. the lights in Congress aren't that bright! (pun intended)

[Captain Amazing]

Originally Posted by Marley23

How would preventing men and women from wearing trousers be sexist?

Well, it would be harder on the men than the women. . .

[StusBlues]

Originally Posted by rocking chair

i was under the impression that there was a religious exception for her.

According to this, Bella went hatless in the chamber. Many Jewish women wear wigs as a head covering, and she may have done this. Anyone want to step up and fight some ignorance?

[Rick]

Clueless? Check
Worried about shit that doesn't matter? Check
Does not know the meaning of words? Check
Democrat? Check

Figures

[rocking chair]

Originally Posted by StusBlues

According to this, Bella went hatless in the chamber. Many Jewish women wear wigs as a head covering, and she may have done this. Anyone want to step up and fight some ignorance?

thanks! i would reckon if anyone could have had it overturned it would have been ms abzug, she had a really good argument.

[Chronos]

Clueless? Check
Worried about shit that doesn't matter? Check
Does not know the meaning of words? Check
Democrat? Check

Figures

You do notice, do you not, that there are plenty of Democrats in here who think she's an idiot, too? Sure, there are losers in both parties, but we don't embrace ours.

[Really Not All That Bright]

I'm not sure it's quite as dumb as the guy who claimed the Pilgrims were escaping socialism, but I can't remember if that guy was a freshman.

[Fiveyearlurker]

Originally Posted by Really Not All That Bright

I'm not sure it's quite as dumb as the guy who claimed the Pilgrims were escaping socialism, but I can't remember if that guy was a freshman.

That's actually the right meme of the day right now. It's been all over Foxnews and Rush.

[elfkin477]

Originally Posted by Marley23

It doesn't "un-woman" her, whatever that means.

It's probably a Macbeth riff

Come, you spirits
That tend on mortal thoughts, unsex me here,
And fill me from the crown to the toe top-full
Of direst cruelty! make thick my blood;
Stop up the access and passage to remorse,
That no compunctious visitings of nature
Shake my fell purpose, nor keep peace between
The effect and it! Come to my woman's breasts,
And take my milk for gall, you murdering ministers,
Wherever in your sightless substances
You wait on nature's mischief! Come, thick night,
And pall thee in the dunnest smoke of hell,
That my keen knife see not the wound it makes,
Nor heaven peep through the blanket of the dark,
To cry 'Hold, hold!'

Of course, the Bard would probably think she's already unsexed herself by seeking the power of office, anyway.

[Saint Cad]

I don't know if she's crazier for want the rule waived for her or because of the wacky ass hats she wants to wear to Congress.

[gonzomax]

It is not her love of hats. It is her terrible taste in hats that matters.

[Saint Cad]

Originally Posted by gonzomax

It is not her love of hats. It is her terrible taste in hats that matters.

Exactly. When I see those hats, I don't think "feminine" but rather, "bad act in Vegas that cost $5 and you get a coupon for the prime rib buffet"

[Vinyl Turnip]

Originally Posted by MyFootsZZZ

"It's like a fetish."

I'm fairly sure sexually pleasuring oneself on the House floor is also banned, or at least frowned upon.

[Really Not All That Bright]

Originally Posted by Saint Cad

Exactly. When I see those hats, I don't think "feminine" but rather, "bad act in Vegas that cost $5 and you get a coupon for the prime rib buffet"

Anything to cut the deficit.

[Saint Cad]

Originally Posted by Vinyl Turnip

I'm fairly sure sexually pleasuring oneself on the House floor is also banned, or at least frowned upon.

Would you raise a point of order if it were Michelle Bachmann?

[Shoeless]

Wow. Over 300 hats? A separate room in her house to store them? She's like the Imelda Marcos of (fugly) hats.

[Steve MB]

Whenever she's down in the dumps, she gets a new hat.

Most of us go to the mall, instead.

[Really Not All That Bright]

Originally Posted by Saint Cad

Would you raise a point of order if it were Michelle Bachmann?

I'd raise a point of throwing up in my mouth a little bit. I don't think Robert's Rules cover that, do they?

[jayjay]

Originally Posted by Vinyl Turnip

I'm fairly sure sexually pleasuring oneself on the House floor is also banned, or at least frowned upon.

Well, there's at least one former Senate candidate you know wouldn't be doing that, anyway...

[descamisado]

Yes, but I'm sure there's something in the by-laws about boiling cauldrons on the floor during sessions.

[magellan01]

What a friggin' idiot.

[dhkendall]

Originally Posted by Chronos

It looks to me like she has a problem with the fact that the rule isn't sexist. Now, if the rule said that men had to doff their hats but women could leave them on, that would be sexist.

Actually, several places have such a rule. A Google search finds this PDF from the Florida Senate that talks about men removing their hats for the anthem but not women. That comes from the centuries-old notion that a man's hat is an accessory to his outfit, but a woman's hat is part of it. I wouldn't say it's sexist any more than a law saying that men can remove their shirts in public, but women cannot.

Now, with that out of my system, I agree that this is an absolutely stupid fight to start your Senate career off on, never mind taking it on at any point during your public service life!

[boytyperanma]

Well I think in fairness the men shouldn't be allowed to where head coverings either. No more toupees for anyone.

Sure she's an idiot and wasting time in the House with nonsensical issues but it's not like the House has anything better to do. The House has all the time in the world to do fuck all. IMO they shouldn't bother to show up until they have a bill passed by the Senate to vote on. The house could do more good back in their own districts doing community service rather then debating bills the Senate will never take up.

[Brown Eyed Girl]

Originally Posted by Marley23

Congratulations, Florida, you've done it again!

Breathing a sigh of relief up here in South Carolina. Hats off to you, Florida!

[Really Not All That Bright]

Originally Posted by boytyperanma

Sure she's an idiot and wasting time in the House with nonsensical issues but it's not like the House has anything better to do. The House has all the time in the world to do fuck all. IMO they shouldn't bother to show up until they have a bill passed by the Senate to vote on. The house could do more good back in their own districts doing community service rather then debating bills the Senate will never take up.

Bills can originate in the House, too, you know.

[jali]

Maybe she's balding and embarrassed to remove her hat.

[boytyperanma]

Originally Posted by Really Not All That Bright

Bills can originate in the House, too, you know.

Sure and nearly everyone of them that's originated in the house over the past couple years has died without ever even getting to the senate floor. Passing House bills is just something they do at this point to pass the time. If they can't even get a acknowledgment from the Senate they will even look at a bill, why bother getting the House together to vote on a bill?

My congressman would be doing more for me, picking up trash and spending his evenings at home with his family. He could head into DC the few rare times something gets done in the Senate.

Though this woman's decided to take up the wearing of hats, at least that's something the house can resolve on their own. Maybe she has the right idea taking up useless issues because it's time better spent then sending legislation to the Senate.

[Really Not All That Bright]

Originally Posted by boytyperanma

Sure and nearly everyone of them that's originated in the house over the past couple years has died without ever even getting to the senate floor.

Citation needed.

[boytyperanma]

The Senate is currently sitting on over 400 bills passed by the House. These bills will likely never see a vote from the Senate. Everyone of those bills represents hours of the House's time wasted. Many of them were passed with overwhelming bipartisan support and will likely have to be reintroduced in the next congress representing even more wasted time.

Here's a list

http://www.opencongress.org/wiki/Bil...111th_Congress

I understand that doesn't meet the cite requested, I couldn't the specific information on which house passed the bills first. In 2009 bills that passed both houses and signed into law amounted to 123. I'm pretty sure less bills passed the senate this year then last.

I'll give up my quote you requested citation for, but still maintain the House showing up to vote on bills, not passed by the senate, is a waste of time.

It is a bit exaggerated because some types bills are required to pass the House before the Senate can consider them, such as tax bills which must originate in the House. So yeah for a few things the House does need call a vote first.

[Kevbo]

Originally Posted by boytyperanma

Well I think in fairness the men shouldn't be allowed to where head coverings either. No more toupees for anyone.

There head coverings either. There castle either. Oh, I'm sorry, I thought you wanted to talk like that. Damn my eyes.

For those puzzled:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XaPZZJVDx6Y

about the 3:20 mark.

[Polycarp]

Originally Posted by Vinyl Turnip

I'm fairly sure sexually pleasuring oneself on the House floor is also banned, or at least frowned upon.

Originally Posted by Really Not All That Bright

Anything to cut the deficit.

..