Nadeau: The Bills Might Suck But How Dare Congress Intervene

[Anonymous]

“Outside of work, he and his wife have two young daughters and live in Park View.”

He and his wife Brianne Nadeau.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:“Outside of work, he and his wife have two young daughters and live in Park View.”

He and his wife Brianne Nadeau.

Yes, and?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If Nadeau’s husband serving on the board of GGW isn’t an issue why does he omit it on his bio?

It's interesting that you say he's omitting it, when in fact, nobody's bio among the GGW board members includes their spouse's or partner's names.

[Anonymous]

When you have an economic interest in what the council may address it’s very important and relevant. How do they separate this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If Nadeau’s husband serving on the board of GGW isn’t an issue why does he omit it on his bio?

It's interesting that you say he's omitting it, when in fact, nobody's bio among the GGW board members includes their spouse's or partner's names.

He omits it because GGW Emma's endorsed his nitwit wife multiple times and he doesn't want that fact known so their endorsements seem on the level. They actually got called out on this in their most recent endorsement and were shamed into addressing this fact.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:When you have an economic interest in what the council may address it’s very important and relevant. How do they separate this?

Health care, you mean?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is hard to take this lady seriously.

I don't understand your issue. I mean, why isn't she right?

See: Constitution, Of the United States of America (1791)

See: the difference between "it is legal to" and "it is moral/ethical/good public policy to"

Every year every Member of Congress has thousands of constituents who come to their capital city to petition their government for the redress of grievances. This activity is at the core of our democracy and the Congress has every right, and obligation, to ensure their constituents are not murdered, car jacked, or have the clothes literally stolen off their backs in broad daylight. Please save us Congress!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is hard to take this lady seriously.

I don't understand your issue. I mean, why isn't she right?

See: Constitution, Of the United States of America (1791)

See: the difference between "it is legal to" and "it is moral/ethical/good public policy to"

Every year every Member of Congress has thousands of constituents who come to their capital city to petition their government for the redress of grievances. This activity is at the core of our democracy and the Congress has every right, and obligation, to ensure their constituents are not murdered, car jacked, or have the clothes literally stolen off their backs in broad daylight. Please save us Congress!

If DC were capable of self-governance, comments like this would cause some introspection among the council and the statehood people. Instead they will probably just get really mad and pout about Democracy. Its why no one outside the city can take them seriously and why so many (maybe even a majority) of DC residents are cheering on Congress of all things.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is hard to take this lady seriously.

I don't understand your issue. I mean, why isn't she right?

See: Constitution, Of the United States of America (1791)

See: the difference between "it is legal to" and "it is moral/ethical/good public policy to"

Every year every Member of Congress has thousands of constituents who come to their capital city to petition their government for the redress of grievances. This activity is at the core of our democracy and the Congress has every right, and obligation, to ensure their constituents are not murdered, car jacked, or have the clothes literally stolen off their backs in broad daylight. Please save us Congress!

If DC were capable of self-governance, comments like this would cause some introspection among the council and the statehood people. Instead they will probably just get really mad and pout about Democracy. Its why no one outside the city can take them seriously and why so many (maybe even a majority) of DC residents are cheering on Congress of all things.

Self-governance is, basically, not one of those things were somebody else gets to decide whether or not you're ready for it.

Plus, I visited Manhattan last year, I guess I should get to vote in elections in New York now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is hard to take this lady seriously.

I don't understand your issue. I mean, why isn't she right?

See: Constitution, Of the United States of America (1791)

See: the difference between "it is legal to" and "it is moral/ethical/good public policy to"

Every year every Member of Congress has thousands of constituents who come to their capital city to petition their government for the redress of grievances. This activity is at the core of our democracy and the Congress has every right, and obligation, to ensure their constituents are not murdered, car jacked, or have the clothes literally stolen off their backs in broad daylight. Please save us Congress!

If DC were capable of self-governance, comments like this would cause some introspection among the council and the statehood people. Instead they will probably just get really mad and pout about Democracy. Its why no one outside the city can take them seriously and why so many (maybe even a majority) of DC residents are cheering on Congress of all things.

DC has forfeited the right to complain about democracy after the DC Democrats have stacked the Council for decades by running as “independents” for the at large seats.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is hard to take this lady seriously.

I don't understand your issue. I mean, why isn't she right?

See: Constitution, Of the United States of America (1791)

See: the difference between "it is legal to" and "it is moral/ethical/good public policy to"

Every year every Member of Congress has thousands of constituents who come to their capital city to petition their government for the redress of grievances. This activity is at the core of our democracy and the Congress has every right, and obligation, to ensure their constituents are not murdered, car jacked, or have the clothes literally stolen off their backs in broad daylight. Please save us Congress!

If DC were capable of self-governance, comments like this would cause some introspection among the council and the statehood people. Instead they will probably just get really mad and pout about Democracy. Its why no one outside the city can take them seriously and why so many (maybe even a majority) of DC residents are cheering on Congress of all things.

DC has forfeited the right to complain about democracy after the DC Democrats have stacked the Council for decades by running as “independents” for the at large seats.

That is just not how democracy works, although I understand you're frustrated because the candidates you don't support keep winning.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree with her. If this is the crime bill I don’t support it bit Congress has no business meddling in it.

Except for this a thing called the US Constitution. Article I. Section 8. Clause 17.

“To exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession of particular states, and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the government of the United States, and to exercise like authority over all places purchased by the consent of the legislature of the state in which the same shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other needful buildings;”

The Constitution is a shitty, antiquated document in desperate need of being modernized

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is hard to take this lady seriously.

I don't understand your issue. I mean, why isn't she right?

See: Constitution, Of the United States of America (1791)

See: the difference between "it is legal to" and "it is moral/ethical/good public policy to"

Every year every Member of Congress has thousands of constituents who come to their capital city to petition their government for the redress of grievances. This activity is at the core of our democracy and the Congress has every right, and obligation, to ensure their constituents are not murdered, car jacked, or have the clothes literally stolen off their backs in broad daylight. Please save us Congress!

If DC were capable of self-governance, comments like this would cause some introspection among the council and the statehood people. Instead they will probably just get really mad and pout about Democracy. Its why no one outside the city can take them seriously and why so many (maybe even a majority) of DC residents are cheering on Congress of all things.

Self-governance is, basically, not one of those things were somebody else gets to decide whether or not you're ready for it.

Plus, I visited Manhattan last year, I guess I should get to vote in elections in New York now.

Self-governance is exactly the sort of thing others get to decide on. Parents decide if a child is capable of making its own decisions, various levels of government set age limits for all sorts of acts of self-governance. People who are obvious unable to govern themselves find themselves governed by others in the prison or mental health system.

DC is a teenager trying to eat a bunch of batteries and throwing a tantrum when told no.

[Anonymous]

Hahaha. True.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is hard to take this lady seriously.

I don't understand your issue. I mean, why isn't she right?

See: Constitution, Of the United States of America (1791)

See: the difference between "it is legal to" and "it is moral/ethical/good public policy to"

Every year every Member of Congress has thousands of constituents who come to their capital city to petition their government for the redress of grievances. This activity is at the core of our democracy and the Congress has every right, and obligation, to ensure their constituents are not murdered, car jacked, or have the clothes literally stolen off their backs in broad daylight. Please save us Congress!

If DC were capable of self-governance, comments like this would cause some introspection among the council and the statehood people. Instead they will probably just get really mad and pout about Democracy. Its why no one outside the city can take them seriously and why so many (maybe even a majority) of DC residents are cheering on Congress of all things.

Self-governance is, basically, not one of those things were somebody else gets to decide whether or not you're ready for it.

Plus, I visited Manhattan last year, I guess I should get to vote in elections in New York now.

You probably could vote there or soon be able to. What does residency have to do with anything?