Republican’s First Rule: Rules Are For Other People

Of course it was. And for argument’s sake I’ll say it doesn’t hold water. But that does not mean that ALL such arguments are baseless or ridiculous.

So you’re say Morrissey’s attack on the health care bill was not based on his conservative reservations about lengthy bills and regulations?

No. If Oliver had simply attacked Morrissey for saying that the health care bill was too long that would be one thing, but he used it as an example to attack broader right-wing reservations about lengthy bills and regulations.

Which was, of course, exactly Oliver’s point.

The again, you have yet to tell us what page count range you consider “just right” for good legislation. Under 100? Under 10?

Is this really your argument? Are you really trying to disagree with the idea that lengthy legislation could correlate with complexity and inefficiency?

If you received a manual with your ipod and it was 500 pages would that be too long? Well, yes. Is there a hard and fast rule for how long that manual should be? An exact page count? No, but I doubt that would preclude you from thinking that it was too long.

A piece of legislation’s length should vary with the subject that it is tackling. A budget will be longer than a resolution recognizing national secretaries day. There is no hard and fast rule.

If the health care bill was 10,000 pages would you think it is too long? Is it impossible for legislation to be too long?

Is this particular health care bill too long? I will leave that to others to decide (although my preferred length would be zero). But there plainly is such thing as legislation that is too long.

And you determined this based solely on its page count, right?

No, but the page count was a good hint. A reading of the bill simply confirmed those suspicions.

But, Colin, if you’re judging the quality of a bill on its page count alone, surely there will be times when 10-12 pages could make the difference good legislation and “horrible liberal pork barrel,” right?

The again, you have yet to tell us what page count range you consider “just right” for good legislation. Under 100? Under 10?

Well, yes. NCLB was a horrible piece of legislation.

And you determined this based solely on its page count, right?

No, I didn’t. I came to defend against Oliver’s nonsensical rant about conservative obsession with bill size, explaining that it is a good proxy for complexity and micromanagement. The longer a bill is the more complex and opaque it is likely to be. You continue to mount attacks on Ed Morissey but since I never defended him it is a waste of energy.

Did you see the margins and line spacing in that doc?

Sure did. It has the formatting of most pieces of Congressional legislation — double spaced with generous margins. But that hardly means that when placed in a more conventional format that it suddenly goes from book to brochure.

And how many actual pages is it in pdf form? 670.

So Colin, too many pages?

Well, yes. NCLB was a horrible piece of legislation. My preferred page count would have been zero.

You get to the full text right after this warning:

This bill is very large, and loading it may cause your web browser to perform sluggishly, or even freeze. This is especially true for old and/or bad browsers. As an alternative you can download the PDF of the bill or read the text on THOMAS.

ZOMG!!!! It’s “VERY LARGE”!!!!! Why now I don’t even have to read the bill to know it’s terrible!

And how many actual pages is it in pdf form? 670.

So Colin, too many pages?

Oh, and Colin. Did you see the Parents United Now pdf? Did you see the margins and line spacing in that doc?

Colin, please provide us with an acceptable conservative page count range between a post it and the tax code. Is it like between 1 and 166?

Because Morrissey didn’t say the health Care bill was complicated or inefficient. He complained that it was too large, as if length itself was a bad thing.

So sorry, Colin, it’s Morrisey whose done a disservice to your Conservative principles by taking an aversion to complex bills and reducing it to an aversion to high page counts.

And he does this over a bill that’s only 167 pages long.

And you came here to defend him.

Now imagine Morrissey really wanted to drive him his point by noting the actual page count. Let’s see what it might have read like:

“Obama’s National Health Care Bill is so complex and byzantine it runs over 160 pages in length. Can you believe it? It really takes 167 pages to create a national health care program for every man, woman and child in the United States?”

He’d kind of sound like a moron wouldn’t he?

It would be great to have a right wing con artist like “Colin” speak up against corporate-contract fine print, but it seems clear he’s all for corporate legalese, even the trickster legalese of the corporate-medical-insurance-industry that allows corps to wiggle out of their coverage even if you have always paid your insurance bill on time and in full.

Dishonest corporatists and their shell games are a far greater threat to US than our democratic republic that right winger’s like “Colin” clearly hates.

Why do you hate our representative democracy, “Colin”?

Yes, that’s gotta be it.

You do understand that Obama did not reach this conclusion based solely on the tax code’s page count, right?

I do, but I also find it highly likely that it played a role. Saying that the tax code is too complicated is one thing, but it really drives the point home when you also note that it is 16,845 pages long. (source: http://www.trygve.com/taxcode.html — last paragraph)

Again, complexity and length usually correlate fairly well. It’s difficult to imagine an overly convoluted tax code that is 10 pages long. It’s possible I suppose, but pretty unlikely.

I remember an apartment complex once asking it’s residents to sign upwards of two dozen pages of contracts.

And let’s not forgot font size. When a contract is at the tiniest font size legible, and runs almost to all the edges (margins) of a an extra long legal piece of paper, that’s the equivalent of what, 10 normal size pages?

But right wing con artist “Colin” is assuredly fine with corporations using onerous legal regulations (contracts), he’s just against Citizen’s asking that his corporate masters be similarly regulated.

Excellent, then I shall immediately expect that all contracts for legal purposes will be immediately shortened!

I shall immediately expect that all contracts for credit cards will be immediately shortened!

I shall immediately expect that all contracts for home mortgages will be immediately shortened!

I shall immediately expect that all contracts for using software will be immediately shortened!

Oh, wait, credit card companies and banks and software companies and every other company that uses lengthy contracts (which are regulations) have particular interests in having me sign lengthy regulations and “Colin” has never said a peep about that.

What right wing con artist’s like “Colin” are in favor of is limiting Citizen’s rights to make rules so that con artists like “Colin” and the predatory corporations that he is a tool of can in turn use lengthy regulations in the form of onerous and unregulated contracts to control what goes on.

What right wing con artist “Colin” is working for is a world where he and his corporate masters aren’t beholden to an empowered Citizenry.

Just to put a point to it, Colin: You do understand that Obama did not reach this conclusion based solely on the tax code’s page count, right?

Bill size, it stands to reason, is also a good proxy or indicator for poor margins and spacing.

Moron.