About
Learn More about our progressive online community for the Granite State.

Create an account today (it's free and easy) and get started!
Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


Search




Advanced Search


The Masthead
Managing Editor
Mike Hoefer

Editors
elwood
susanthe
William Tucker
The Roll, Etc.
Prog Blogs, Orgs & Alumni
Bank Slate
Betsy Devine
birch paper
Democracy for NH
Granite State Progress
Mike Caulfield
Miscellany Blue
Pickup Patriots
Re-BlueNH
Still No Going Back
Susan the Bruce
New Hampshire Labor News
Chaz Proulx: Right Wing Watch

Politicos & Punditry
The Burt Cohen Show
John Gregg
Landrigan
Pindell
Primary Monitor
Scala
Schoenberg
Spiliotes

Campaigns, Et Alia.
NH-Gov
- Maggie Hassan
NH-01
- Andrew Hosmer
- Carol Shea-Porter
- Joanne Dowdell
NH-02
- Ann McLane Kuster

ActBlue Hampshire
NHDP
DCCC
DSCC
DNC

National
Balloon Juice
billmon
Congress Matters
DailyKos
Digby
Hold Fast
Eschaton
FiveThirtyEight
MyDD
Open Left
Senate Guru
Swing State Project
Talking Points Memo

50 State Blog Network
Alabama
Arizona
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Missouri
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Rhode Island
Tennessee
Texas
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin

Brunelle Brouhaha, Part Deux

by: Tim C.

Fri Mar 04, 2011 at 23:45:41 PM EST


Because House Republican leadership can never get enough of making themselves look like vindictive and incompetent stumblebums, Legislative Administration Chairman and L'Affaire Brunelle High Inquisitor Paul Mirski decided, just as he did last week, that the optimal move was to toss the matter to a person outside the committee (that was charged by the House with dealing with the matter) to fiddle with for a while and drag out this imbecilic and hypocritical juvenile prank of a political hatchet job a bit longer.

Hatchet job? That might be giving them a little too much credit. It's more like a bad indie remake of "The Lizzie Borden Story," where Lizzie is drunk, blindfolded and armed with a herring.

Tim C. :: Brunelle Brouhaha, Part Deux
In this case -- to mix film metaphors -- the guy who gets Leslie Nielsen's "stalling for time at the Oscars" role from The Naked Gun 33 1/3 is not the hapless committee researcher, with the apolitical role of furnishing nonpartisan historical information. It is Speaker O'Brien-appointed House Counsel Ed Mosca, who is being asked to take all the information that the researcher has provided (mostly petitions from the 1790s -- no, seriously) and tell the committee what it should do next, in 2011.

So the Committee on Legislative Administration, a full standing House committee charged with examining the matter and providing its considered opinion to the entire House, is now, courtesy of Chairman Paul Mirski, instructed to surrender its capacity for debate and judgment to a single unelected political appointee, who owes his position and salary to the erratic anger gnome -- the worst holder of the House gavel in living memory -- whose crony he is.

And with the sole honorable exception of Rep. David Kidder (R-New London), who's intelligent enough and been around long enough to recognize a baseless partisan attack when he sees it, and who is a sufficiently decent human being to refuse to take part in it (is that really so hard a thing to expect of every representative?), every Republican on the committee lined up behind the Honorable Paul Mirski -- and sure, he is an honorable man -- and voted for his stage-managed motion, as semi-competently mouthed by Rep. Marilinda Garcia. (Whose good looks, youth, femaleness and willingness to carry the hierarchy's water make her a preferred mask on its ugly, obsolescent and overwhelmingly male face. She has shown no evidence of having the zealously pro-ignorance ethos and monstrous personality of Sarah Palin, but make no mistake -- whatever prominence she is given will be for exactly the same reasons that Palin was given hers.)

What will Edward Mosca tell the committee to do? Well, that depends on whether petty preening potentate William O'Brien's hatred for the Democratic Party and all it represents outweighs his fear of the contempt that his tinfoil-hat crusade is fomenting, or whether he does a gut check, finds himself lacking, and bails on the whole process by telling Mosca to throw up some legal cover while he cuts and runs.

Watch next week's Brunelle work session to see if the Big O is capable of going all-out against an enemy. If Mosca comes back with plans for show trials, he is. If he comes back with "homina homina homina," not so much.

And that's this week's report on the laser-focus-on-jobs House, incorrigibly iniquitous inquisition edition.

Oh, and hey, here's just a little bonus about why you parents shouldn't be all frivolous about divorces, like you always are:

(Background: this is testimony on HB587, banning no-fault divorces for couples with minor children. [Surprise! O'Brien's gung ho for it, because you're such selfish and irresponsible people, so you'll "have to identify some cause to enter divorce, and not that you just decided you don't want to invest in the relationship any longer". Because, yeah, that's totally why people with kids go through the horrible gut-wrenching process of divorce these days, because they're all, "Meh, I don't feel like this anymore."] Y'all couples who just plain loathe the very sight of each other now get to flip a coin to see who gets to be accused of adultery, and who gets to perjure him/herself. Family values!)

Tags: , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Re: Divorce Frivolity (4.00 / 1)
It's not as bad as that, Tim.  Looking at the fault grounds for divorce, it appears that if you really really don't believe in marriage any more, on religious grounds, and you join up with enough likeminded individuals, then you can get that frivolous divorce after a six month separation.

 458:7 Absolute Divorce, Generally. - A divorce from the bonds of matrimony shall be decreed in favor of the innocent party for any of the following causes:
   I. Impotency of either party.
   II. Adultery of either party.
   III. Extreme cruelty of either party to the other.
   IV. Conviction of either party, in any state or federal district, of a crime punishable with imprisonment for more than one year and actual imprisonment under such conviction.
   V. When either party has so treated the other as seriously to injure health or endanger reason.
   VI. When either party has been absent 2 years together, and has not been heard of.
   VII. When either party is an habitual drunkard, and has been such for 2 years together.
   VIII. When either party has joined any religious sect or society which professes to believe the relation of husband and wife unlawful, and has refused to cohabit with the other for 6 months together.
   IX. When either party, without sufficient cause, and without the consent of the other, has abandoned and refused, for 2 years together, to cohabit with the other.
   X-XIII. [Repealed.]

It certainly makes one wonder what was in repealed sections X-XIII.

I am assuming this section was intended for the benefit of someone whose spouse went and joined the Shakers, unilaterally making the marital relationship a thing of the the past. But it appears to me that either the joining spouse or the non-joining spouse could use this provision.

Interesting that you could get a divorce after six months if this happened, but you still had to wait two years if you were abandoned for any other reason.  What is THAT about?

The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane. --Marcus Aurelius, courtesy of Paul Berch


Marilinda Garcia once (0.00 / 0)
got up at the well and said young women can't make decisions for themselves because they are on a emotional roller coaster as a result of their hormones. As though we all had constant PMS or something. That was in opposition to repealing the unconstitutional parental notification law I'll never, ever forget that speech.

How these people (0.00 / 0)
expect us to raise children who can go out into the world and eventually run it I don't know.  They seem determined to teach them that they are incapable of making their own decisions.

Oh, wait...that's a feature, not a bug!  They need people to be incapable of free thought and action, they need to be told how to act and to follow their authoritarian leaders.  


[ Parent ]
the tally right now (4.00 / 4)
seems to indicate that high school students are the most responsible people in NH, since they can be trusted to choose to drop out of high school at age 16.

College students, according to O'Brien are not responsible enough to vote, and adults are not responsible enough to end their marriages. Women are too feeble to make their own reproductive decisions.

Nanny O'Brien - our own Rufus T. Firefly of Live Freedonia or Die.  


"Stumblebums" (4.00 / 1)

A great and descriptive word that has sadly gone out of use. But it needs to be brought back because it really captures the keystone kops flavor of these wannabe Jeffersons and faux Madisons.  


Connect with BH
     
Blue Hampshire Blog on Facebook
Powered by: SoapBlox