Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Poll

Bay12 Presidential Focus Polling 2016

Ted Cruz
- 7 (6.5%)
Rick Santorum
- 16 (14.8%)
Michelle Bachmann
- 13 (12%)
Chris Christie
- 23 (21.3%)
Rand Paul
- 49 (45.4%)

Total Members Voted: 107


Pages: 1 ... 103 104 [105] 106 107 ... 667

Author Topic: Bay12 Election Night Watch Party  (Read 832244 times)

Scoops Novel

  • Bay Watcher
  • Talismanic
    • View Profile
Re: FearfulJesuit's American Politics Megathread Two: Election Boogaloo
« Reply #1560 on: June 24, 2013, 04:21:21 pm »

I've seen that Michael Hastings was involved int the reporting of the Iraq war, but while i  look it up myself who he is and what's happened presented in detail would be appreciated, possibly in it's own thread.
Logged
Reading a thinner book

Arcjolt (useful) Chilly The Endoplasm Jiggles

Hums with potential    a flying minotaur

misko27

  • Bay Watcher
  • Lawful Neutral; Prophet of Pestilence
    • View Profile
Re: FearfulJesuit's American Politics Megathread Two: Election Boogaloo
« Reply #1561 on: June 24, 2013, 04:56:27 pm »

So guys, time to focus on the whole Supreme Court thing.


First off, we have just received a interesting ruling on Affirmative action, not going against it but sending it to the lower courts under a tighter standard.

Second, we are expecting Cases on the legality of the extra attention payed to changing election laws in states which had Discriminatory laws, Legality of the Gay marriage ban, and legality of the Defense of Marriage act or Federal Benefits for Same Sex Married couples. All this in the next couple of days.
« Last Edit: June 24, 2013, 05:24:38 pm by misko27 »
Logged
The Age of Man is over. It is the Fire's turn now

nwob

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: FearfulJesuit's American Politics Megathread Two: Election Boogaloo
« Reply #1562 on: June 24, 2013, 06:31:23 pm »

So guys, time to focus on the whole Supreme Court thing.


First off, we have just received a interesting ruling on Affirmative action, not going against it but sending it to the lower courts under a tighter standard.

Same old same old then, by and large?
Logged

ggamer

  • Bay Watcher
  • Reach Heaven through Violence
    • View Profile
Re: FearfulJesuit's American Politics Megathread Two: Election Boogaloo
« Reply #1563 on: June 24, 2013, 10:20:29 pm »

Quick question for the politics junkies out there (I'm off my game right now, it's not debate season); Is No Child Left Behind still a law, or is it just up for renewal?

MetalSlimeHunt

  • Bay Watcher
  • Gerrymander Commander
    • View Profile
Re: FearfulJesuit's American Politics Megathread Two: Election Boogaloo
« Reply #1564 on: June 24, 2013, 10:24:18 pm »

It has no expiration clause, it never has to be renewed. However, a lot of states were granted conditional wavers by Obama.
Logged
Quote from: Thomas Paine
To argue with a man who has renounced the use and authority of reason, and whose philosophy consists in holding humanity in contempt, is like administering medicine to the dead, or endeavoring to convert an atheist by scripture.
Quote
No Gods, No Masters.

misko27

  • Bay Watcher
  • Lawful Neutral; Prophet of Pestilence
    • View Profile
Re: FearfulJesuit's American Politics Megathread Two: Election Boogaloo
« Reply #1565 on: June 24, 2013, 10:39:56 pm »

So the IRS was being honest? Well then. IRS, do you like being hated by Conservatives or something? Mentioning you were targeting liberal, and non-partisen groups too might have helped. Now you're being investigated on a flawed basis.

Same old same old then, by and large?
For now. But the others have other interesting implications.
Logged
The Age of Man is over. It is the Fire's turn now

Karlito

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Logged
This sentence contains exactly threee erors.

GlyphGryph

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: FearfulJesuit's American Politics Megathread Two: Election Boogaloo
« Reply #1567 on: June 24, 2013, 11:45:31 pm »

Hahah. And apparently they've used it as an excuse to scrub scrutiny of Conservative groups... while keeping it up on everyone else.

So this went basically exactly as I figured it would.

Still, the IRS has shown time and again that they are essentially the most honest, most dutiful, and most trustworthy branch of government. (Not so much most competent, but they are also vastly underfunded) I'm glad to see my trust in them wasn't misplaced.
Logged

FearfulJesuit

  • Bay Watcher
  • True neoliberalism has never been tried
    • View Profile
Re: FearfulJesuit's American Politics Megathread Two: Election Boogaloo
« Reply #1568 on: June 25, 2013, 01:38:27 am »

While the rest of us have been busy with the adventures of Ed Snowden, the IRS scandal, and the rest of it, the GOP continues to implode:

Marco Rubio, onetime darling of the Tea Party, has been abandoned by them for supporting immigration reform.

The farm bill, long a hallmark of bipartisanship and noncontroversy, dies as GOP wingnuts in the House use it to stump for unnecessary and cruel cuts to food stamps. John Boehner, for his part, pretends there is no egg on his face. Pelosi warns him not to pull the same bullshit with immigration reform, a sure and frightening omen of things to come...

Boehner is now increasingly faced with an incredibly difficult choice: either accede to the demands of the crazies in his party, which can't possibly get passed, or bring the Senate bill to a vote and try to pass it with mostly Democratic votes, which will risk coup from the loonies and only split the party further. Such voices of reason as Bill O'Reilly are urging its passage. If the farm bill is anything to go by, things are looking grim.

Demographic doom continues to rear its head, this time in the South.

Meanwhile, with Rubio facing a revolt from his own ex-supporters for being too sane, the GOP is counting on one man to be its eleventh-hour savior: Rand Paul. He can't do it.
Logged


@Footjob, you can microwave most grains I've tried pretty easily through the microwave, even if they aren't packaged for it.

palsch

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: FearfulJesuit's American Politics Megathread Two: Election Boogaloo
« Reply #1569 on: June 25, 2013, 08:00:14 am »

First off, we have just received a interesting ruling on Affirmative action, not going against it but sending it to the lower courts under a tighter standard.
A little more on this.

The standard for any discrimination based on race, including affirmative action, is in the parts;

1) It must achieve a legitimate (state) interest.
In this case this is campus diversity. It's pretty solidly established that diversity is a legitimate interest for colleges (including state colleges) by improving educational and other outcomes for both minority and majority students. So colleges may discriminate based on race to increase diversity, so long as the program also meets the other two goals.

2) It must be narrowly tailored.
Just having a legitimate reason to discriminate doesn't mean you can discriminate as you wish. Any discrimination must be designed to achieve the specific goal stated and no more.

3) It must be the least restrictive means of achieving the goal.
In this case restrictive means discriminatory. If there was a race neutral method of increasing racial diversity that was shown to work then racial discrimination would automatically be illegal, because it is no longer the least restrictive means of achieving that goal.

In Fisher it's points 2 and 3 that are combined in the challenge. Essentially the lower court is being asked to check more closely whether the discrimination in admissions policies is actually the absolute minimum racial discrimination required to achieve the diversity goals.

The serious argument here is based on the Texas Top 10% Rule, where the top ten percent of graduates from any given Texas high school are given automatic admission into any Texan public university. This is a (supposedly) race neutral program that is nevertheless designed to give racial and background diversity (based on the racial and background diversity of Texas high schools) to the state universities. It seems a toss up to me whether the lower courts will accept that this program is a non-discriminatory way of achieving racial diversity.
Logged

Dutchling

  • Bay Watcher
  • Ridin' with Biden
    • View Profile
Re: FearfulJesuit's American Politics Megathread Two: Election Boogaloo
« Reply #1570 on: June 25, 2013, 08:01:16 am »

Wasn't there some high court bromance lawsuit going on in the US of A?
Logged

palsch

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: FearfulJesuit's American Politics Megathread Two: Election Boogaloo
« Reply #1571 on: June 25, 2013, 08:42:21 am »

Wasn't there some high court bromance lawsuit going on in the US of A?
???

SCOTUSblog live blog of today's opinions, just in case the big ones appear today.


Looks like today's (first?) huge opinion is in Shelby County v Holder. The court has found section 4 of the Voting Rights Act unconstitutional in a 5-4 split (usual lines). First quote;
Quote
: "Our decision in no way affects the permanent, nationwide ban on racial discrimination in voting found in [Section] 2. We issue no holding on [Section] 5 itself, only on the coverage formula. Congress may draft another formula based on current conditions"
The full decision.
Quote
In Justice Ginsburg's dissent, she says: "In the Court's view, the very success of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act demands its dormancy."
Looks like no marriage decisions today.
« Last Edit: June 25, 2013, 09:20:08 am by palsch »
Logged

Dutchling

  • Bay Watcher
  • Ridin' with Biden
    • View Profile
Re: FearfulJesuit's American Politics Megathread Two: Election Boogaloo
« Reply #1572 on: June 25, 2013, 09:19:08 am »

I'm not sure exactly what happened there... And as you say it huge, I would like to know >.<
Logged

MetalSlimeHunt

  • Bay Watcher
  • Gerrymander Commander
    • View Profile
Re: FearfulJesuit's American Politics Megathread Two: Election Boogaloo
« Reply #1573 on: June 25, 2013, 09:27:37 am »

Section 5 required a three-judge panel in DC to clear any changes in voting laws in areas which are considered to be at risk for or had attempted voting law regression.

This does not really change any legal standards on voting rights; it removes federal oversight on changes to them before they happen.
« Last Edit: June 25, 2013, 09:29:20 am by MetalSlimeHunt »
Logged
Quote from: Thomas Paine
To argue with a man who has renounced the use and authority of reason, and whose philosophy consists in holding humanity in contempt, is like administering medicine to the dead, or endeavoring to convert an atheist by scripture.
Quote
No Gods, No Masters.

Dutchling

  • Bay Watcher
  • Ridin' with Biden
    • View Profile
Re: FearfulJesuit's American Politics Megathread Two: Election Boogaloo
« Reply #1574 on: June 25, 2013, 09:32:40 am »

Not completely related, but is making voting illegal for illiterate people even, like, constitutional o.O?
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 103 104 [105] 106 107 ... 667