this post was submitted on 28 Jan 2024
1204 points (99.1% liked)

Political Memes

5428 readers
2444 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Skullgrid@lemmy.world 158 points 9 months ago (1 children)

any bill around internet monitoring and censorship : saving the precious children from horrible paedophiles act of 20xx

any bill for actually taking care of the physical and intellectual well being of children : bill 50906-3

[–] PugJesus@kbin.social 87 points 9 months ago (2 children)

"Wow, you want to FEED kids to keep them in good health? I'd rather spy on everyone in the hopes of catching someone under 18 accessing 18+ material. That's where REAL good health comes from."

[–] SkyezOpen@lemmy.world 32 points 9 months ago (3 children)

They care about their SPIRITUAL health. Physical health doesn't matter compared to an eternity of hellfire, you heathen.

[–] snooggums@kbin.social 14 points 9 months ago

The suffering means we are doing it right!

[–] PugJesus@kbin.social 14 points 9 months ago

Oh God, I'm having flashbacks to growing up in an evangelical community

[–] DumbAceDragon@sh.itjust.works 4 points 9 months ago (1 children)

The sooner the kid dies the less likely they are to sin.

[–] SkyezOpen@lemmy.world 5 points 9 months ago

You're saying that once we figure out how to baptize unborn babies, abortion is back on the menu?

OK that was a joke but I'm curious how the more radical Christian groups would react to that. Like you can basically guarantee a soul an instant ticket to heaven, why wouldn't you? Though I guess you'd have to find whichever group actually genuinely believes the spiritual war stuff instead of using it as a cover for a demographic war.

[–] arin@lemmy.world 11 points 9 months ago

Ban abortion, also makes it illegal to find food to kids or homeless

[–] PP_BOY_@lemmy.world 113 points 9 months ago

Anytime I see something like the Safe Children and Everyone Who Wants One Gets a Puppy Act I know my life is about to get worse

[–] Euphorazine@lemmy.world 85 points 9 months ago (3 children)

"The Sunshine Protection Act", oh is this some bill against pollution or something. "This bill makes daylight savings permanent."

Oh fuck off, that's too grandiose of a name for that. I mean I want that, but you aren't protecting sunshine ...

[–] AceFuzzLord@lemm.ee 10 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I don't have a problem with that act having a grandiose name because axing daylight savings time is something I can totally get behind no matter where I am.

[–] Piemanding@sh.itjust.works 3 points 9 months ago

Yes. I will finally only drive into the sun half the year instead of the whole year.

[–] ShaggySnacks@lemmy.myserv.one 4 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I always thought it was weird, that the one argument for Day Light Savings is that we get more sun. Someone can correct me, if I am wrong. I'm pretty sure the amount of daylight isn't magical dictated by clocks and time created by humans.

Abolish day light savings time. Stick to standard time like the rest of the world does.

[–] Euphorazine@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago (4 children)

So like, in January, the sun sets at say around 5:15pm. With DST active, it would set at 6:15pm.

So there is more daylight after work or school gets out for most people.

Either way, the time change seems like it's not useful in today's age, so we should pick one.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] MisterFrog@lemmy.world 48 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (4 children)

It's wild this is even allowed in your country. You'd think a bill should relate to a single topic or area so you can actually vote on it, and people can easily see how reps voted on certain topics.

Right?

[–] Alexstarfire@lemmy.world 21 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

But if they did that, how else would they be able to get money for some random project in their district. Or tack on something everyone is against because the optics of going against the stop Stop Child Rape bill are so bad.

If there is no answer for "how does this help a politician?" then it's probably not going to happen.

[–] ame@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz 17 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

The funny part is public initiatives are bound to this rule, depending where you live

[–] yarr@feddit.nl 7 points 9 months ago

??? How am I supposed to get pork-barrel projects for my district? That would never work! People should be forced to vote for things they don't agree with to get things they do agree with. That's the American way.

[–] paddirn@lemmy.world 48 points 9 months ago (2 children)

They also have to have a cute acronym, so it fits neatly into a headline:

  • FAPS (Free Affordable Pepsi Soda) Act
  • ANAL (Anyone who Needs it Always gets Licorice) Act
  • BROJOB (Best fRiends Only Jack-Off Best friends) Act
  • PUPPY (Pee Under People’s Pants Yearly) Act
[–] AeonFelis@lemmy.world 14 points 9 months ago

SODA (Scorn Owners of Dogs Act)

[–] WarmSoda@lemm.ee 5 points 9 months ago (1 children)
[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 12 points 9 months ago (2 children)

I'm gonna vote in favor of ANAL.

[–] rikudou@lemmings.world 7 points 9 months ago

Aren't we all?

[–] WarmSoda@lemm.ee 5 points 9 months ago

How else would the brown licorice industry survive?

[–] Reverendender@sh.itjust.works 40 points 9 months ago

Also this bill bans soda

[–] tegs_terry 32 points 9 months ago

One of America's dumbest legislative mechanics.

[–] Steve@startrek.website 30 points 9 months ago

Something something Patriot Act

[–] TheGiantKorean@lemmy.world 26 points 9 months ago

Ah, yes. Citizens United.

[–] creditCrazy@lemmy.world 18 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Oh silly you. This bill is called free soda for all because it's trying to free this dog that happens to be named soda.

[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 8 points 9 months ago

And by "free," they mean "free from its mortal coil."

[–] JustZ@lemmy.world 11 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

It's because Congress doesn't have a single subject rule.

43 states have it.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-subject_rule

E: There are some good reasons why Congress doesn't have it. First, Congress does soooooo much stuff that it might be utterly impossible to do it one subject at a time. That's why we have omnibus bills for things such as spending, which includes the budgets of all or most federal departments. Along with reconciliation and appropriations bills, it's how a lot of business gets done and how compromises are made. A single subject rule would clear up a lot of the pork, but night just grind things to a hault just by the shear number of bills that would have to be written, debated, and voted.

Another reason is that it opens a whole new category of litigation as to whether or not the title of the bill matches the subject of the bill; the standard is one of whether the title alone would give fair notice as to the range of subject matter in the bill.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omnibus_bill

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pork_barrel

[–] JargonWagon@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago

Yeah, I wish we had this for a long time in Congress.

[–] stebo02@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 9 months ago (3 children)
[–] underisk@lemmy.ml 53 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)
  • The Patriot Act - is about increasing government surveillance
  • EARN IT - is about adding backdoors to encryption and increasing government monitoring of internet traffic.
  • Kids Online Safety Act - is about internet censorship and platform liability.
  • The Inflation Reduction Act - is about taxes and climate.
  • Unborn Victims of Violence Act - you can probably guess what this is about.
  • Working Families Flexibility Act - is about changing overtime and vacation benefits and giving employers flexibility in when they allow their employees to redeem them.
[–] stebo02@lemmy.dbzer0.com 21 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

Unborn Victims of Violence Act

Abortion? Lmfao they called it that? x⸑x

If it wasn't America I would guess it was to protect future generations of kids in war zones.

[–] underisk@lemmy.ml 4 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

It has a specific exception for abortion but was largely a ploy to elevate fetuses legal status to a party capable of being wronged under federal law and so lay the groundwork for future challenges to abortion. The pretense was that violent crimes against pregnant women should get punished more harshly because there’s two victims.

Turns out they didn’t need it, they could just pack the courts and get what they wanted without all the trouble.

[–] droans@lemmy.world 32 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Indiana SB52.

It's claimed to promote the local economy.

It actually just bans bus rapid transit in Indianapolis.

It's claimed to have the support of the businesses and the people living in the area.

It actually has no support outside of Andy Mohr Auto Group.

[–] 1995ToyotaCorolla@lemmy.world 8 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I don’t think I can think of something stupider than banning busses in a city (if I’m reading this right)

[–] droans@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago (1 children)

https://fox59.com/news/bill-trying-to-stop-blue-line-headed-for-third-reading-in-senate/

Bus rapid transit uses dedicated lanes for the busses, which is what they're banning. State senator Aaron Freeman is the one behind it and he's a complete moron.

They're also not banning it statewide. The law applies to all cities with a consolidated city-county government... Which is decided by state law... Which has been changed over the years so it only applies to Indianapolis.

Oh, they also announced a "compromise" with the city a few weeks ago! In exchange for changing nothing, they also agreed to prevent the city from banning rights on red downtown!

Sure, the pedestrian fatality rate is through the roof and prohibiting rights on red would do a lot to bring it down, but can you imagine how horrible it is to make a driver wait an extra three seconds at a stoplight?!

This has been a friendly message from the same party that also decided back in 1985 that the city would no longer build any new sidewalks or street lights.

And the same party that banned light rail in Indianapolis, only agreeing to overturn it if Amazon moved their headquarters here.

And the same party that signed into law RFRA.

And the same party that's trying to both ban gay marriage and refuse transgender recognition.

And the same party that consolidated the city-county government because they were afraid of blacks getting uppity.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] altec@midwest.social 6 points 9 months ago

Patriot Act

[–] metaStatic@kbin.social 6 points 9 months ago (3 children)

I've said it before and I'll say it again Democracy simply doesn't work

[–] preach224@lemmy.world 12 points 9 months ago (1 children)

for those who are downvoting, this is a simpsons reference about almost this exact same thing.

if you’re downvoting because it’s a simpsons reference, ouch!

[–] Shapillon@lemmy.world 11 points 9 months ago

First past the post representative "democracy" sure as hell doesn't.

I'm not certain it's a valid inference to throw all possible forms of truly democratic government through the drain along with it.

[–] Pizza_Rat@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago

It works quite well. And it could work much better than it does now in the US. But wealth inequality erodes the education and free time of the population entrusted with the responsibility of voting.

load more comments
view more: next ›