Print

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

[Mego]

It is seriously messed up how much of a joke the Peacekeepers are. Not only do they never actually keep the peace, but they've set up sex slavery rings in places they've been deployed more than once.

And now I'm thinking of the Hunger Games Peacekeepers. Which is probably how most of the Republican party views the UN Peacekeepers.

[Leafsnail]

Curious if anyone on that side of the aisle has found a way to blame Obama, the Democrats or Iran for the storm yet.

Don't be stupid, the hurricane is clearly a false-flag operation.

[mainiac]

Make the godless heathens think that God hates the GOP so they'll be tricked into voting for the cause of justice thinking they're supporting Satan?

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Apparently Ron Paul has refused to attend the convention after being informed he is required to declare support for Romney.

[Jervill]

So is he going to hold a convention in the sister city (St. Petersburg, in this case) like he did in 2008?

[FearfulJesuit]

Why is he required to declare support?

[MetalSlimeHunt]

The party leaders say so.

[kaijyuu]

At least he's not being dragged out back and shot for not declaring support.


EDIT:

How to appeal to younger voters:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

[darkrider2]

How to appeal to younger voters:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Oh that's brilliant.

[FearfulJesuit]

Now coming to a workplace near you: mandatory campaigning.

Though I'd really like to see a less biased article on this...

[RedKing]

Well, if you follow the trail of links, what you find is that the original case involved a labor union ostensibly requiring the union employees (not union members, but the actual employees of the union itself) to participate in phone-banking, campaigning, etc. for a Democratic candidate. Three employees claimed they were fired for refusing. The union got slapped with a fine by FEC.

What this is all over was two of the FEC members (who were Republicans) dissenting, saying that they don't think the coercion portion should be considered illegal, only the lack of reporting of expenditures. It's kind of boggle logic, but it's not really a partisan thing, given all the elements. And it was only a dissenting opinion, not a law being made.

[FearfulJesuit]

Well, if you follow the trail of links, what you find is that the original case involved a labor union ostensibly requiring the union employees (not union members, but the actual employees of the union itself) to participate in phone-banking, campaigning, etc. for a Democratic candidate. Three employees claimed they were fired for refusing. The union got slapped with a fine by FEC.

What this is all over was two of the FEC members (who were Republicans) dissenting, saying that they don't think the coercion portion should be considered illegal, only the lack of reporting of expenditures. It's kind of boggle logic, but it's not really a partisan thing, given all the elements. And it was only a dissenting opinion, not a law being made.

Right. Carry on, then, folks.

[Sheb]

Also, I don't see how this differ much from the statu quo. Pay an ad agency or have your employee do the job, what's the difference? (Well, except employees will be utterly demotivated and possible  have a negative effect on your candidate. :p )

[RedKing]

Also, I don't see how this differ much from the statu quo. Pay an ad agency or have your employee do the job, what's the difference? (Well, except employees will be utterly demotivated and possible  have a negative effect on your candidate. :p )

Well, and in most jurisdictions it's illegal to force your employees to support a certain candidate. Especially on their own, unpaid time (which is what the union was doing).

Smacks of late 1800's type shenanigans.

[Sheb]

Oh, if it's on their own time, then yeah, it sucks.