Tweet of the late night:

[applegrove]

Link to tweet

[OAITW r.2.0]

1. Another Traitor still in Congress. nt

[Hugh_Lebowski]

2. Hate to have to mention it but to be fair, the entire 'Squad' did the same thing (nt)

[Budi]

4. K & R Thank You! They all proudly cast that vote along with Boebert.

Shame.

[Hugh_Lebowski]

5. But, to also be fair, the motivation was entirely different

And it came nowhere even remotely close to mattering ... 16 members in the entire congress (over 500 people) is pretty meaningless.

[Hugh_Lebowski]

8. In July they voted against the final, actual bill because of their Defund the Police stance

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/07/29/senate-capitol-security-vote-501565

"The House took up the bill soon after Senate passage under a fast-track process. It earned overwhelming support from the House despite opposition from an unlikely group that included progressives like Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and conservatives like Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas).

Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) said she voted against the legislation because she wanted an investigation before it advanced. She said she believed "we have to stop giving more resources in response to any time there is some level of incompetence or underpreparedness.”"

The two interests (police and visas) were combined in the final bill.

I saw the 'July vote' and assumed this was about the actual bill that passed, not the earlier House version.

As I stated above, they voted against it for a different motivation than Boebert (their 'No' vote was not about the Visas for them, it was about other concerns).

Sorry for any (esp. mine) confusion.

My point was, you can't always read that much into people's votes on specific bills. It's not 'wrong' to say the Squad voted 'No' on the bill that expanded the Visas. BUT ... that is not why they voted against it.

[CentralMass]

9. Then I stand corrected. Deleting the post above.

[Hugh_Lebowski]

10. I'm not saying you're wrong ... it's just confusion on which version of the bill was at hand ...

It's a good convo either way

[CentralMass]

11. Agreed.

[Budi]

3. 1975, Biden was 30 yrs old. Newly elected to the Senate.

Today he is President of the United States & you are not.

Today Joe Biden is Donald Trump's President

[Rhiannon12866]

12. Twitter reply:

Link to tweet

[Budi]

15. The dumbing down of Congress didn't take long!

But they're celebrities!!!

Media 'Likes', always a camera & everybody knows my name!!

That's all they got.

[dchill]

13. A piece of shit exercising her piece-of-shitness.

As per usual.

[Caliman73]

14. Idiot Boebert supports perpetual war...

We were in Vietnam for 11 years, likely longer, but officially from 1964 to 1975. We lost 54,000 men and women, with millions of Vietnamese dead. For what? We left and within a year, Vietnam was united under Communist rule, but unlike the stupid Domino hypothesis, Communism did not take over all of Asia and end up on our doorstep. In fact the Communist government of Vietnam invaded the Communist country of Cambodia to depose Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge and drove them out of power.

We have been in Afghanistan for almost 20 years and lost 2,400 men and women with over 20,000 casualties, for what? Minerals? A gas pipeline? We routed the Taliban within a few weeks of the invasion and ostensibly held control of the country. We had Bin Laden, the reason we were supposedly there, hiding like a rat in a cave, until Bush Jr. got bored and let him flee into Pakistan. President Obama and VP Biden tracked down and killed Bin Laden but we stayed, and stayed, with no real purpose except propping up a government that was never really interested in defending itself.

Boebert is what happens when people grow up watching Fox News and listening to right wing radio. They know absolutely nothing about history and only know to spew right wing stupidity.