Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Descan]

Democrats aren't that unified, there'd be enough people out of the party line to get things working, better than it is now, at least.

Though whether the RESULTS of that working are actually better is up to you.

[Sheb]

I actually wonder what Rep would do if they could actually repel Obamacare. People hate the name, but just wait until people with pre-existing conditions realize they will be dropped...

Actually, now that the Senate and the House are republicans, how come Obama doesn't spend his time vetoing Obamacare repel laws?

[Angle]

He does. That's the only thing keeping the federal army from invading texas and enacting gay marriage laws.

[Bauglir]

I assume they keep dying in committees in the Senate or something. Apparently he's only had to veto 4 things during his presidency, although part of that probably has to do with Congress' inability to put anything in front of him.

[mainiac]

Actually, now that the Senate and the House are republicans, how come Obama doesn't spend his time vetoing Obamacare repel laws?

Because the Senate Filibusters them all.

[RedKing]

Yep. The Senate fell to Republican hands, but thankfully their hands are still small and weak enough that they don't have the 60-vote threshold to overcome threats to filibuster (because nobody except Rand Paul actually DOES a filibuster anymore...they just say they're going to, and that's enough to kill the bill).

[nenjin]

Yes, thank god the first thing Republicans did once they took control of both houses was turn on each other. If they'd truly been able to put aside their differences out of their mutual hatred of Obama, things might have really taken a turn for the WTF. But they basically spent all their time since the Congressional elections positioning for the Presidential election and undercutting each other. Democrats may have their factions and disputes, but nobody puts it front and center like the Republicans.

[Bohandas]

The misuse of "treason" is another of my pet peeves.

What *IS* treason?  The willful act of assisting the established enemies of a nation, so as to enable those enemies to strike, and cause harm to the nation.

What is treason?
Treason is joining a terrorist group, and planting bombs.
Treason is telling foreign intelligence agencies where the president's plane will stop for fuel so it can be blown up with him on board.
Treason is is giving away the plans and sourcecode for missile defense systems to hostile nations.

Things that are NOT treason:
Exposing the wrongdoing of the nation's political elite.
Exposing systemic faults in policy and process that puts everyone at risk, that go unfixed because "that's hard." (allowing the faults to exist is what puts people at risk. Exposing the faults is the first step toward forcing a fix!)
Expressing anti-government sentiment about how the nation is being run, especially when backed with real, credible evidence of mismanagement (Because the mismanagement is a far bigger threat to the actual safety and security of the country! See the Holodomor and pals comments from the previous pages)

I'd go as far as to say that not exposing the wrongdoing of the elite could be treason, at least in cases where that wrongdoing is unconstitutional (which should also be considered treason).

[mainiac]

But words mean specific things.

[penguinofhonor]

.

[mainiac]

Today I was tasked with figuring out which state had the most useful sex offender database.  Congrats to North Carolina.

[RedKing]

You're....welcome? (not sure if that's a good thing or not) 

[Frumple]

... so what were the measurements, anyway? What's NC's competitive(?) edge?

[mainiac]

... so what were the measurements, anyway? What's NC's competitive(?) edge?

Amount of time it took me to accurately convert the entire database into STATA.  (Half an hour, that's really good!)

[smjjames]

Well, Jeb Bush is finally announcing his candidacy (or maybe surprise with a not running) today.

Anyways, according to Wikipedia, Donald Trump is supposed to be announcing tomorrow, although CNN hasn't even mentioned him by name and he's not even in the polls either. So, AFAIK, the only source that says he is, is the MSNBC article. I really hope he doesn't because he's just going to make the whole thing even more of a mockery.

Edit: Guess what Jeb did for his campaign logo? The exact same one with just his name and an exlaimation point after it which he used back in 1994. Not sure how to read that because there are at least two ways of interpreting that fact. Although like the commentator said, sometimes a logo is just a logo.