Government By the (Page) Numbers
[Guest post by DRJ]
CNN’s Jack Cafferty compares the number of pages in the health care reform bill (1,990) to the number of pages in other important government documents (I’ll leave the numbers blank so you can guess):
The original draft of the 1935 Economic Security Act, which established the Social Security Administration was _____ pages.
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 – forbidding discrimination based on race and sex: _____ pages.
The 19th amendment to the Constitution, giving Women the right to vote in 1920: _____ page.
The Emancipation Proclamation, with which Abraham Lincoln freed the slaves in 1863: _____ pages.
Or, if you really want to get back to basics: The Declaration of Independence came in at _____ page in 1776.
As suggested by the singular “page,” the 19th Amendment and the Declaration of Independent were both 1 page. The other answers are at the link.
I’ll take the oatmeal video over Jack Cafferty.daleyrocks (718861) — 10/30/2009 @ 8:44 pm
daley, this time it’s worth looking at. The fawning is starting to vanish.
Nuff said?John Hitchcock (3fd153) — 10/30/2009 @ 8:58 pm
John – I appreciate that, but I think Cafferty is pretty much useless.daleyrocks (718861) — 10/30/2009 @ 9:33 pm
Don’t get me wrong, daley, I have no clue who this Cafferty dude is and I really don’t care. When I had cable, I refused to watch CNN. I only watched CNN when I was on a layover (back when I had a decent income). But I think the snake is starting to turn, if only a little bit.John Hitchcock (3fd153) — 10/30/2009 @ 9:36 pm
[…] not interested in the opinion of the Father of the Constitution, perhaps you’re interested in other numbers. Like the number of pages of other, more important […]Democrats: The Party Of “NO!” « Truth Before Dishonor (45e6e8) — 10/30/2009 @ 10:34 pm
[…] not interested in the opinion of the Father of the Constitution, perhaps you’re interested in other numbers. Like the number of pages of other, more important […]Common Sense Political Thought » Blog Archive » Democrats: The Party Of “NO!” (73d96f) — 10/30/2009 @ 10:46 pm
Good for Cafferty. I guess CNN is trying to regain some dignity after placing last in the ratings and last in Jeopardy.Patricia (b05e7f) — 10/30/2009 @ 11:08 pm
And Patricia brings some music to the place.John Hitchcock (3fd153) — 10/30/2009 @ 11:18 pm
There is something to be said for brevity. There tends to be a belief among progressives that complexity equals greatness. That philosophy certainly dominates the arts. Difficult = good; if you don’t understand it, it must be great. Pretentious claptrap. But that’s what they’re selling here: it’s so big and so complex . . . it must be good!Icy Texan (4ff1d7) — 10/31/2009 @ 3:00 am
Err on the side of brevity.JD (d3806e) — 10/31/2009 @ 6:31 am
There is only one reason for the bloated crap our betters produce–to legalize and hide from public view the theft they use to line the pockets of their supporters and themselves in their pusuit of total power.tmac (5559f7) — 10/31/2009 @ 6:59 am
Don’t do CNN links.Dr. Carlo Lombardi (6ba9cd) — 10/31/2009 @ 7:05 am
Actually, I like it that it’s a CNN link. This way, the libturds cannot say “FOX lied, babies cried” because it is a link to one of their own.John Hitchcock (3fd153) — 10/31/2009 @ 7:11 am
Just as a matter of clarification and correctness, the Emancipation did not free any slaves. It was an attempt to get the slaves in Confederate held territories to revolt. It did not free the slaves in the Union states (yes there were slaves in those states) or in Union held territory in Confederate States.Ron Olliff (0503a0) — 10/31/2009 @ 7:12 am
There is only one reason for the bloated crap our betters produce–to legalize and hide from public view the theft they use to line the pockets of their supporters and themselves in their pusuit of total power.
Have some caution going down that road. You do know this site is festooned with many a lawyer. And fine, eloquent ones they be. But after what seems like eons of laws piled upon more laws, bloat doesn’t even come close. In my imaginary kingdom there’d be no new law unless you find two or three to take off the books beforehand. That’d be some damn fine brevity in action right there.political agnostic (cf10d7) — 10/31/2009 @ 7:40 am
Now let’s hear from Conyers again about how it’s ridiculous for any of the citizens in this country to expect their elected representatives to have actually read the bill themselves. Why, that’s impossible! They just have their staffs give them the highlights and then vote for all of it, sight unseen.
Jefferson is turning in his grave.Dmac (a964d5) — 10/31/2009 @ 7:43 am
Ahh, in my dream world, there would be a Constitutional Amendment that required all bills to be typed out on a manual typewriter, in 10-pitch, double-spaced, and be a maximum of 50 pages, including any amendments to the bills.John Hitchcock (3fd153) — 10/31/2009 @ 7:44 am
OT, Scozzafava drops out of 23rd race.Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (0ea407) — 10/31/2009 @ 7:51 am
Oh noes! Nobody better tell Eric, he’s gonna be vewy, vewy angwey! Newt continues descent into complete irrelevance! Film at 11!Dmac (a964d5) — 10/31/2009 @ 7:56 am
Question is: Will the RNC and NRCC finally do the right thing now that Scuzzy Favor has “suspended her campaign?”John Hitchcock (3fd153) — 10/31/2009 @ 8:15 am
Declaration of Independent?msr (9ca937) — 10/31/2009 @ 9:53 am
I declared myself to be independent right after my wife divorced me.Icy Texan (d84394) — 10/31/2009 @ 10:25 am
You know what would really be worthwhile? If they took all of the printed copies of this bill and distributed them to the homeless to use as a source of heat during this colder than average — that’s right, AlGore! — winter.Icy Texan (e136f9) — 10/31/2009 @ 10:30 am
Samuel Adams said, “How strangely will the tools of a tyrant pervert the plain meaning of words.”ropelight (9cd82d) — 10/31/2009 @ 10:41 am
“Amendment __: Any legislative bill that exceeds the word count of the Constitution as originally adopted, is, on its’ face, Un-Constitutional.”AD - RtR/OS! (a63966) — 10/31/2009 @ 10:45 am
John Hitchcock – Cafferty would actually be providing more of a service and showing more indications of the worm turning if he took the time to analyze some of the provisions of Granny McRictusbotoxface’s reforms. For example, the section which mandates insurers all offer the same minimum levels of coverage and deviations in coverage and pricing be approved by a government authority. No option to offer more stripped down catastrophic type coverage should consumers want it, plus the insertion of Big Brother in the approval process. To me this sounds like socialized medicine built into the bill itself, rather than competition and choice, but the mileage of others may vary.daleyrocks (718861) — 10/31/2009 @ 11:23 am
daley, I completely agree. The public option is there in plain sight.Mike K (2cf494) — 10/31/2009 @ 11:43 am
Mike K – I’m talking about the restrictions imposed on private coverage – Section 213. Powerline has a good post on it.
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2009/10/024833.phpdaleyrocks (718861) — 10/31/2009 @ 12:00 pm
Can’t recall where I read it, but it sure does paint a truer picture if instead of calling it a public option, better to call it the GOVERNMENT option. That would convey the intent and purpose of this whole steaming pile.political agnostic (cf10d7) — 10/31/2009 @ 12:22 pm
I would like to have the option of NOT paying for any of this shit.Icy Texan (208688) — 10/31/2009 @ 12:35 pm
Noooooooo, it’s the consumer option! The be-kind-to-dolphins option! The unicorn power option!Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (0ea407) — 10/31/2009 @ 1:01 pm
I am kind to Dolphins!
I keep supporting them, and betting on them to win their games, despite their losing record.Icy Texan (208688) — 10/31/2009 @ 1:05 pm
(groan)Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (0ea407) — 10/31/2009 @ 1:09 pm