Three councilmen walk out in protest during San Bernardino council meeting 

You gotta swing your hips now, c'mon baby jump up, jump back. Well I think you got the knack, whoa, whoa

It's a chief of staff position for the Mayor, I'm not sure why anyone else would be involved. I've worked on Capitol Hill for a decade now and US Senators and Congressman choose their own Chief's of Staff. The Mayor can hire whoever they want to be Chief of Staff, it's that simple.

I don't know, are you a 10 year old?

@@davechamberlain229 ah... Get your feelers hurt?

If the chair doesn't know the rules or won't enforce them, it's chaos. Most places using RR suffer from this.

Perhaps you could explain this to the San Bernardino council ?

Hard to count all the violations of RONR happening here, but this is my first try, using the 12th Edition: 0:23 Mr Shorett interrupts without making any of the allowed motions (42:18-22; t44-45) -- he should be cautioned by the Chair with an explanation, and (if he persists) a motion made to discipline him (61:10-21) 0:34 Motion stated by chair but then never opened up to debate (4:3; 4:27-32; 43:3-6 ); instead a vote is called immediately. 1:41 following Mr Nickel's statement of the amendment ("substitute motion") the floor is supposed to return to the chair to state the amended motion and request a second (12:82-91). Instead Mayor Pro Temp Richard immediately takes the floor out of order 1:50 Same thing with the City Attorney 2:08 Same thing, back to Mr Nickel; he then addresses the Mayor Pro Temp Richard directly, instead of stating his question to her via the Chair (violating 3:12); her question to restate the amendment proves that RONR wasn't being followed, as the Chair was supposed to state the amended question, which she could then second if she approved or thought it worth the assembly's attention. 2:24 Mr Mulvihill interrupts and attacks the Chair directly -- way out of order. If he thought the Chair was remiss he should've made a "point of order" (42:18-22) and justified his reasoning 2:44 Chair immediately launches into debate about his position against the amended motion, violating 43:29, when he was supposed to restate the amended motion and then request a second (as the City Attorney has to remind him). 3:02 Mr Nickel claims his amendment was a "friendly amendment" (12:19), but that doesn't mean it doesn't need a second (as he seems to think). He then AGAIN addresses Mayor Pro Temp Richard directly (3:12) asking her if she's "ok" with his amendment

Try it again in English.

Or a pot field

Let me guess. You're a Trump cultist.

Then why do people live there then?

Are you suggesting people eat dogs? Americans don't eat dogs. Are you confused and thinking of specific Asian countries? Besides some of these people look like they should eat less.

No kidding. I remember when I lived in the Dino thinking how prevalent the smell of rottweiler feces was in certain neighborhoods 🤢

You need to change your name to MRpedantic

Maybe, when an exceptional number of people say a word the same way, there's no point in calling that pronunciation "wrong"

Daylight come an we wan go home

@@rhianimal19 🤣

@@andrewvelonis5940 HILARIOUS

You have 16 lmfao

How are you liking East Sanberdo?

It's best way to stop corruption and make sure the best person is chosen.

Trumper ???