Jump to content

Fitlump fucking won an Austin City Council seat


atomheartbevo

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Wally Fairway said:

As for her greatest accomplishment, Kelly is mother of an inquisitive daughter, Rebekah, a student in the Round Rock ISD, and is happily married. She is a 2005 graduate of Westwood High School (Go Warriors!).

I think she spells Rebekah with three K's. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, thunderlounge said:

The Senate? Really?

I get letting her get away with city council, but anything higher with real consequences, we all know how to put the brakes on.

After all, it's not like she's running for office...

You should probably speak more kindly about our future first woman POTUS.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, thunderlounge said:

The Senate? Really?

I get letting her get away with city council, but anything higher with real consequences, we all know how to put the brakes on.

After all, it's not like she's running for office...

I saw her on KXAN yesterday.

And her past is going to do nothing but help her.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, thunderlounge said:

we all know how to put the brakes on.

We knew how to put the brakes on when she ran for city council. But we didn't bring the heat. Now the lump is adapting and growing. It's become sentient.

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/3/2023 at 1:26 PM, atomheartbevo said:

I saw her on KXAN yesterday.

And her past is going to do nothing but help her.

Is she the only council member anymore?  Seriously, she's on the Fox 7 morning show like once a week and I have NEVER seen another council member being interviewed about anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Jkwellborn said:

If one of y’all doesn’t buy it and request that she signs it with the inscription, “What the hell, it’s not like I’m running for office anyway”, you don’t have any hair on your ass.

If this book actually makes it out, we are all buying it, let's not kid ourselves.  It'll be something to tell the grandkids about how you got the President's autograph back when she was just on a small little city council, and you had gifs of her doing football drills.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, after she wore them and masturbated in them on MyFreeCams.
And then a few years later she was elected to the city council of the tenth largest city in the country.

I knew she was a cam girl. Didn’t know she peddled panties. I just remember the 8 days to new boobs
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Before she perma-blocks you (like she did me many years ago), someone should ask:

"Tell us how your adventures running an illegal AirBnB out of your apartment knee-walking drunk distance from the Water Tank educated you in dealing with Austin's homeless situation?" Bonus rep if you include the pic of her building bunk beds with the cordless drill that didn't have a battery pack.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, RPM said:

I think we have a class action suit. Or at least a strenuous objection.

I mean, it's not her "official" account but I think an argument could be used that she's using this, her personal account, in a public capacity which blurs the line.

From the ACLU link:

It is important to remember that people who hold public office can wear two hats: Sometimes, they act as private individuals, and other times they are government actors. While they maintain their First Amendment rights when acting as private individuals, they are subject to the limits the First Amendment places on the government whenever they’re doing government work.

As the court rightly held, that includes any time that they’re controlling a Facebook page they maintain in their official roles. Specifically, the court recognized that when a public official uses a Facebook page as a tool of governance — that is, when she uses it to inform the public about her government work, solicits input on policy issues through the page, and swathes it “in the trappings of her office” — she is controlling the page as a government actor.

And if she opens that page to public comment, the interactive space of the Facebook page constitutes a public forum. The fact that the page exists on a website owned by a private company doesn’t change that.

That means that, when a public official blocks critics from the page because of their viewpoints, she violates the Constitution. Indeed, the right to criticize the government is at the heart of the First Amendment. The court specifically recognized blocking as infringing on that right, noting that blocking someone in order to silence criticism of government work is itself evidence of government action.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, bolverk said:

Be sure to take and save a better screenshot that includes your reply along with her original tweet soliciting public feedback, you know, for evidence-gathering purposes.

You mean like this?

image.thumb.png.3793360adf702b5d53d0d3c941d34ea7.png

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...