Acidus and Decius wrote:
] But the saddest thing in this entire article is:
]
] ] "I'm going to vote for this bill, but I'm voting for it
] ] for one reason: because this is a political bill,"
] ] said Sen. Mike Jacobs. "If I vote against it, it will
] ] show up in a campaign mail piece."
]

This mentality is pervasive, and this is the practical effect of negative compaigning, which was never meant to directly influence the voters. It has evolved to the point where the mere threat of such advertising is a major deterrent. And the insecure congressmen are so paranoid about this that they actually fabricate threats against themselves in order to rationalize their own behavior.

This is exactly the same reason why we have legislation like the Women's Restroom Equity Bill:

http://www.memestreams.net/thread/bid19081/

I only included part of the quote in my stream. The full quote is:

"It's a good bill, but if there was ever a bill I was afraid of being on the wrong side of, it is this bill," said Councilman Erik Martin Dilan of Brooklyn, voicing a sentiment held by a number of his colleagues. Noting that 60 percent of his constituents are women, Councilman Dilan added, "I really don't want to face them in an election year having to explain my position if I was on the wrong side of this vote."

Now who was the genius that decided to put the word "equity" in the title of a bill that mandates a 2-to-1 ratio?

RE: Senate OKs Video Game Restrictions