Anchor Rising: What's he Smoking? Er.....

June 13, 2007

What's he Smoking? Er.....

Marc Comtois

So, I read the story in today's ProJo about the ongoing budget battle and came across this:

“This isn’t a Democratic budget by any means. This is a Republican budget. Let’s face it,” said Tom Slater, D-Providence, who did not sign the petition and said yesterday he wasn’t aware of it. “I would never have set up a budget like this.”

Then why did he vote for it in the House Finance Committee meeting last week?

“Because it’s a give-and-take process. If you want items, you have to give up items,” he said, declining to be more specific.

And the first thing I wondered was, "What is this guy on..." Then I remembered.

UPDATE: Commenter MRH writes "The medical marijuana crack seems a bit harsh..." and commenter Will adds, "I agree. Slater is just a plain old idiot, not a drug addict." I've responded, but here's more...I admit, the post does approach the line. (That's me, ever the provocateur!) And I did consider whether or not I should post it in the way I did. But then again, what's wrong with a little irreverence every now and then?

8:00 AM | TrackBack (0)

Comments, although monitored, are not necessarily representative of the views Anchor Rising's contributors or approved by them. We reserve the right to delete or modify comments for any reason.

Okay, let me get this straight. A member of the House Finance Committee would never have set up a budget like this even though he sits as a member of the committee that set up a budget like this?

I think Mr. Slater needs to hire a life coach like Patches Kennedy, somebody who can remind him what he actually does each day.

Bugs Bunny said it best, "What a maroon!"

Posted by: John at June 13, 2007 10:25 AM

The medical marijuana crack seems a bit harsh...

Posted by: mrh at June 13, 2007 10:40 AM

I agree. Slater is just a plain old idiot, not a drug addict.

Posted by: Will at June 13, 2007 10:47 AM

Consider it a form of experimentation on my part...how far could our relatively staid blog venture before accused of being harsh. I figured it would be approaching the line.

Posted by: Marc Comtois at June 13, 2007 12:19 PM

Maybe I'm just humorless, but for personal reasons I have trouble taking the denial of palliative care lightly.

Carry on.

Posted by: mrh at June 13, 2007 12:23 PM

MRH, I got ya, but it was intended as a facile swipe anyway, so don't think too deep on it. Besides, I'm sure there are plenty of things that you'd joke about in a similarly facile manner that may offend my sensibilities if I were to take it too seriously. Anyway, 'nuff said.

Posted by: Marc Comtois at June 13, 2007 1:52 PM

Indeed. No harm, no foul.

Posted by: mrh at June 13, 2007 2:37 PM

This is one of the hazards of forfeiting your reading skills in favor of letting the Dem leadership guide your hand as you rubberstamp their work product. Whether spoken in a drug haze or not, this statement makes the representative look remarkably foolish indeed.

Posted by: SusanD at June 13, 2007 4:19 PM