Florida Senator Siplin passing out belts

Saggy pants a big issue? Senator Siplin was out passing out belts to the dudes with saggy pants. Too Funny.

http://www.wptv.com/dpp/news/state/florida-senator-gary-siplin-and-other-lawmakers-fight-saggy-pants

Because belts will hold the economy up.

Those berkeleying things better be made in the US.

A bit flawed in the logic also. I am pretty sure the only reason a lot of those pants stay on is BECAUSE of a belt:

N Sperlo wrote: Those berkeleying things better be made in the US.

My thoughts exactly.

Who cares where the belts are made?

We have a Democrat politician making an effort to teach his constituents the concepts of self-pride and personal responsibility. Seems like that's something that's long overdue.

My hat goes off the Sen. Siplin and to others who follow his lead.

It goes over well with the AARP crowd, and he needs their votes

I think sagging pants like flashing headlights is held under freedom of speech in Florida.

JoeyM wrote: It goes over well with the AARP crowd, and he needs their votes

District demographics suggest the AARP crowd is not a major factor:

http://www.flsenate.gov/UserContent/Senators/Districts/SD_Stat/SD19stats.pdf

In reply to oldsaw:

I would be most concerned with the fact that one in ten people are not citizens.

Who cares if some idiots were their pants low?

Political diversion tactics at work. Never mind double digit unemployment and major budget issues "that dude's pants are falling down".

oldsaw wrote: Who cares where the belts are made? We have a Democrat politician making an effort to teach his constituents the concepts of self-pride and personal responsibility. Seems like that's something that's long overdue. My hat goes off the Sen. Siplin and to others who follow his lead.

And also since it's a jailhouse fashion that really shouldn't be something you'd want to emulate I think it's a worthwhile "statement" by him.

Of course I'm jaded and feel every good deed every politician does between now and the election are just electioneering stunts that's not to say that some won't have some longer term positive benefits.

Entropyman wrote: Political diversion tactics at work. Never mind double digit unemployment and major budget issues "that dude's pants are falling down".

You've got to start somewhere. If you think you can do nothing because you can't deal with the #1 & #2 that's spurious thinking at it's best.

This is a short thread so far, but already several of these have been posted:

A Red Herring is a fallacy in which an irrelevant topic is presented in order to divert attention from the original issue. The basic idea is to "win" an argument by leading attention away from the argument and to another topic. This sort of "reasoning" has the following form:

This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because merely changing the topic of discussion hardly counts as an argument against a claim.

aircooled wrote: A bit flawed in the logic also. I am pretty sure the only reason a lot of those pants stay on is BECAUSE of a belt:

Typical politician, falls short of a real solution.

"State law now says kids can be suspended from school if their pants sag too much."

Suspenders would have been more appropriate.

Could have bumper stickers with "Suspenders or Suspended" on the back of the school bus.

For what it's worth, the cops love saggy pants. The wearers can't run well with their pants falling off, and having to hold them up also slows them down.

I just don't understand why the berkeley anyone cares. I mean if I want to wear a shirt inside out and backwards you can look at me like I am stupid all you want but it isn't any of the government's business.

stuart in mn wrote: This is a short thread so far, but already several of these have been posted: A Red Herring is a fallacy in which an irrelevant topic is presented in order to divert attention from the original issue. The basic idea is to "win" an argument by leading attention away from the argument and to another topic. This sort of "reasoning" has the following form: Topic A is under discussion. Topic B is introduced under the guise of being relevant to topic A (when topic B is actually not relevant to topic A). Topic A is abandoned. This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because merely changing the topic of discussion hardly counts as an argument against a claim.

So stop pontificating and get the thread back on topic with your salient and omnicient wisdom.

Rob_Mopar wrote: Could have bumper stickers with "Suspenders or Suspended" on the back of the school bus.

Those are braces! Suspenders hold up stockings!!!!

Maybe if some of these kids took pride in their appearance and dress appropriately they could get a real job and contribute to our economy.

Would you hire a youth with his waistband around his knees?

93EXCivic wrote: I just don't understand why the berkeley anyone cares. I mean if I want to wear a shirt inside out and backwards you can look at me like I am stupid all you want but it isn't any of the government's business.

When they can't get a job because they dress like that and no sane employer will hire them so they end up on the dole that the government has to pay with tax payer dollars people should care.

Cone_Junky wrote: Maybe if some of these kids took pride in their appearance and dress appropriately they could get a real job and contribute to our economy. Would you hire a youth with his waistband around his knees?

I can imagine a class on how to put a belt on, but it will likely turn up as useless as sex ed.

carguy123 wrote:

Entropyman wrote: Political diversion tactics at work. Never mind double digit unemployment and major budget issues "that dude's pants are falling down".

You've got to start somewhere. If you think you can do nothing because you can't deal with the #1 & #2 that's spurious thinking at it's best.

Negative attention from authority figures increases the "cool factor" of the offending fashion and increases it's popularity. It is a fashion that would have gone away 10 years ago if nobody had payed attention to it. To refer back to the original post, it's not a big issue. Kids wear things simply to irritate adults and every generation has.

ThePhranc wrote:

93EXCivic wrote: I just don't understand why the berkeley anyone cares. I mean if I want to wear a shirt inside out and backwards you can look at me like I am stupid all you want but it isn't any of the government's business.

When they can't get a job because they dress like that and no sane employer will hire them so they end up on the dole that the government has to pay with tax payer dollars people should care.

That is another issue completely. We shouldn't been spending our money on idiots like that. And maybe they dress normal for work but not on their time off which makes it none of their business.

Sometimes I feel like I've stepped into 1956 reading this board. Who cares how some dorky teenagers like to wear their pants? This is not something that needs to be "fixed", especially by intervention from a politician.

That said, any expectation that it will actually work is hilarious. This guy is just playing to the Grandpa Simpson crowd and he knows it.