Hacker News new | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

California senator Dianne Feinstein, who appears on this list, also sponsored Consume But Don't Try Programming (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consumer_Broadband_and_Digital_...) back in the day.

As long as she's on the ballot, I'll be voting for her Republican opponent, however loathsome.

I am almost in the same boat. But this time around the Republicans ran Carly Fiorina.

I'm sorry, but if you're going to run a businesswoman on her record, don't run one who did that much damage to her company (HP), who got fired by her board, and who was universally agreed to be so bad that the stock shot up on the news that she was finally gone. As much as I disliked Boxer, I didn't want to find out the hard way how much worse Fiorina could be if she was given access to power (again).

To steal a bit from Jack Black and make it my own:

Those who can't do, teach. Those who can't teach, teach gym. Those who can't teach gym go into politics.

I heard it this way:

If you can't do, teach,

If you can't teach, administrate,

If you can't administrate, go into politics,

If you can't get elected, go to work for the government.

What makes you think her generic unnamed Republican opponent wouldn't vote the same way?

That's actually besides the point. Once the seat trades parties a few times, the occupant will figure out that if they want to be reelected they have to listen to their constituents. Or so the theory goes.

What? There’s no way that this particular issue is near-and-dear to enough people that it will cause anything more than a blip in voter turnout or choices. If you want to make a difference, go do some real organizing and build some kind of momentum up behind your position. Complaining in an online discussion and declaring you’ll cast your individual ballot for the out-of-power candidate so long as both parties disagree with you is a complete waste of your indignation, your time, and your vote..... of course, it’s a lot easier than doing the real work that organizing requires.

I was merely explaining why someone may decide to vote against someone, even if the person they vote for is no better. I reserve my indignation for shit that matters, like variable names.

My god that has to be one of the worst ideas I've ever heard. Seems Leahy was at the helm of that disaster, too.

Actually, Leahy killed CBDTP:

Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT), chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, had stated that he could "not support" the proposed legislation and, as chairman, intended to block consideration of the controversial bill. This essentially killed the bill in 2002.

Indeed, thanks! Reading comprehension fail.

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact