Comments on: Why Are Politicians So Stupid?!

By: B.B,

B.B, — Wed, 12 Aug 2009 10:54:46 +0000

They only way the idiots(politicians)are going to help anyone.You have to contribute to their campaign fund.They could careless about the average person.They are money grubbers.I e-mailed my representative and said the cash for clunkers was hurting the poor people.I got a stupid response it said to find more about the program go the web site What in the world are these people smoking.These politicians are living in the twilight zone.They are completely out of touch Their are a lot of people trying to get get out of poverty.No help there are a lot of programs that don`t work They talk about creating jobs how are people going to get there Cash for clunkers killed that one.The automakers sure could help.They could supply a couple cars

By: B.B,

B.B, — Mon, 10 Aug 2009 11:06:43 +0000

I sent a letter to Majority Leader.I ask him how much did the auto makers pay the politicians to pass the cash for clunkers bill,no answer yet.Cash for clunkers is going to be disastrous.

It has hurt a lot of people already.

By: B.B,

B.B, — Sun, 09 Aug 2009 18:51:37 +0000

Politicians have to take a IQ test.They can`t score higher then 3 ,lower is better.Politicians besides being stupid and idiots also,have to be drunk, stoned and head in a paper bag or all the above.

By: The Truth

The Truth — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 01:40:25 +0000

Thats because the average age of a politican especially a Senator is 60+…. They always say the older you get the more child like you brain becomes… You have 80+ men completely out of touch with the world… There so old they crap themselves and get spoonfeed by there mistresses… There needs to be a age cap… you can't be older than 62… Force a retirement age…. average age should be 40… These old farts are to fucking stubborn.

By: For Ladies by Ladies - The Morning Dish: Why are Politicians So Stupid? |

For Ladies by Ladies - The Morning Dish: Why are Politicians So Stupid? | — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 10:02:03 +0000

[...] However, they’re not the only ones who like to get drunk and go a little crazy. No, no my friends – the political arena is where all the craziest stuff happens. [...]

By: snarktastic

snarktastic — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 22:25:16 +0000

they're not elected as moral beacons. the media eats it up because sex sells.

sexual assault and lying about it? not okay. affairs? not my business.

and i wouldn't think these would be the "stupidest politicians of recent years". how about marion berry – the crack-using mayor? abramoff scandal? those are REAL problems. sexual exploits? unless they involve kids, not an f-ing problem. get over it.

By: Ana

Ana — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 19:59:44 +0000

While I agree that some of these men are pure scum, I think you're missing the bigger issue here. The point of some of these affairs are not, in fact, the affairs themselves. What politicians do in their personal lives really have little to do with their ability to run a country. Winston Churchill was a raging alcoholic, FDR had many affairs, whereas Hitler was a vegetarian. Sex doesn't matter either. More women would mean less affairs? Really? Have we learned nothing from female teachers who molest their students? From Hollywood? Or would we rather have our woman who does not have affairs, but misinterpret the Census, like Michele Bachmann? Not to say women don't belong in the government. I greatly respect Nancy Pelosi and Secretary Clinton, but I would rather have a woman who understood the issues better than her male opponent rather than a woman for a woman's sake.

The issue with some of these men is that they let down their constituents in the way they went about the affair. Sanford left South Carolina without telling anybody, leaving him untraceable. What if something had happened? The lt. Gov had no authority to act should something bad had happened. Other men used government funds to conduct their affair.

Seriously, why isn't Clinton on your list? Why hasn't Bill disappeared from the political spectrum, even though he had a very public affair and "lied" under oath? Because it was none of our business.

Also, you imply that Edwards himself "released" the sex tape…the tape has not, to my knowledge, been released, but it was his former aide, not Edwards himself, who says that the tape exists. But then again, this guy has had a streak of lying, claiming that he was the actual father of Edwards' mistress' child. Can we believe him?