Utterly Meaningless

Charity dictates that we assume she misspoke, and was asking what the founding fathers would have thought about representation without taxastion. And we can pretty confidently state they would have been against it, what with all the discussions about the poll tax, and not thinking people were mature until they owned property and could support a family, and whatnot.

Of course, charity has been wrong before. Maybe she’s just dumb.

I’ve heard her speak on teevee several times. I doubt she’ll win the Nobel in, well, just about anything.

But what would “representation without taxation” mean? Charitably speaking, maybe she was “thinking” the people in DC don’t pay taxes? That wouldn’t be dumb. Just ignorant.

“I just wondered that if our founders thought taxation without representation was bad, what would they think of representation WITH taxation?”

That’s the quote and I think it’s clever. In it’s own way.

She’s expressing outrage — suggesting our founding fathers would have been outraged that, after all that struggling to get representation, this is what we are stuck with.

Of course, she misses the actual point.

We are getting exactly what we voted for. Hurray!

It just isn’t what she voted for. Next time, she should vote for the guy who wins.

Nance

its

its own way.

Sigh. . . and to think I am supposed to be a literacy tutor. 🙂

Which is going well, btw. Need to blog about that . . .

Nance