Mamas Don’t let Your Babies Grow Up to Be Politicians

Just when you think Conservatives have run out of ridiculous, unnecessary legislation to put forward, they manage to prove you wrong. According to We Party Patriots, New Hampshire State Republican JR Hoell, and 20 year old first term Tea Partier Kyle Jones,

“…have introduced legislation that would do away with laws guaranteeing workers the right to a mandatory lunch break.”

According to young Mr. Jones,

“This is an unneeded law, If I was to deny one of my employees a break, I would be in a very bad position with the company’s human resources representative. If you consider that this is a very easy law to follow in that everyone already does it, then why do we need it? Our constituents have already proven that they have enough common sense to do this on their own.”

How sweet. Only a young person with not much work experience would still believe that a company’s Human Resources Dept. is there to benefit the employees.

New Hampshire Democratic Rep. Herbert Richardson asked Jones,

“You don’t think they’re giving these (lunch) breaks because it’s the law and they have to and they would do it if we did away with the law?”

To which young Kyle replied,

“It’s in their best interest to treat their employees well.”

What was the vetting process for this kid, demonstrating he could tie his shoes? Has he ever read a newspaper?  The scary part is, he’s been rated A+ by David Koch’s “Americans For Prosperity”, so the corrupting process has already begun, and a future Scott Walker is most likely in the making.

This entry was posted in Employment, Politics, Republicans, Tea Party and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.
Share
Print Friendly
This site for Democrats welcomes comments from all viewpoints as long as they are on topic and contribute to the discussion. Trolls are absolutely not tolerated.
Anonymized Disqus accounts are treated as spam. For more details, see our Commenting Policy.
  • Scott

    …If you really, really believe that all employers would be generous enough to give lunch breaks when it's not mandatory, then what's the point of appealing the law in the first place? Even going by his logic, claiming you want to remove a law because it's "unnecessary" seems like a waste of time. And going by real world logic, it's true that a lot of employers probably only give lunch breaks because it's mandatory, and that completely refutes his point. That's like saying we could remove civil rights acts because we already know that corporations will employ and service minorities.

  • Doug Marquardt

    No kidding. Both Ron and Rand Paul have said a business should have the right to discriminate based on race. Regulations are reactions to prior abuses. Because if you give conservatives an inch, they'll take a mile. Hell, they'll take the whole damn road.

    All Americans should think twice when a conservative says, "trust us, you don't need regulations".