|
Also immigrant and alien have distinct meanings in the immigration code, immigrant being a subset of alien edit: The rest of the bill is pro-child murder though, so thumbs up nativists
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 03:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 16:09 |
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Nope. If it was Ted, the bill would still be blocked. It was Tom Coburn who wanted one of his last acts in the senate to be blocking vets from getting help to prevent suicide. Let's all just take a moment to enjoy one middling moment of silver lining: Tom Coburn is no longer a member of the Senate. (Post-script: I should add that Coburn's cancer isn't something to celebrate and I hope he manages a full recovery from it, but at the same time I am desperately glad he is no longer making federal decisions)
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 03:41
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:But as if losing her house is not scary enough, the new voter laws North Carolina is pushing makes it difficult to impossible to vote if you do not own property. So basically they passed a law that allows them to suddenly re-evaluate her property values and leave her no choice but to sell and become homeless.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 03:42
|
|
|
Aren't landowner voting laws illegal on a federal level and something that would get shot down if Roberts wasn't dead set on killing the VRA and anything related to it?
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 04:15
|
|
|
It looks like Loretta Lynch will require Joe Biden's vote to secure her nomination as Attorney General.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 04:16
|
|
|
Evil Fluffy posted:Aren't landowner voting laws illegal on a federal level and something that would get shot down if Roberts wasn't dead set on killing the VRA and anything related to it? Well, just because a law might have the effect of disenfranchising non-landowners, that doesn't mean the lawmakers who passed it were thinking unconstitutional thoughts in their heart of hearts so we must overturn any federal laws that stop states from disenfranchising landowners for what may be completely pure motives as far as we know.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 04:19
|
|
|
WaPo:quote:If the GOP response ranges from sheer denial of a problem to “¯\_(ツ)_/¯”, that’s a sign that they’re not serious at all about foreign policy.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 04:19
|
|
|
ComradeCosmobot posted:It looks like Loretta Lynch will require Joe Biden's vote to secure her nomination as Attorney General. Yay! Joe Biden gets to do something other than touching up women and girls!
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 04:24
|
|
|
Which one of you etc. etc. Last page posts about "getting feisty" in South Carolina, it's always this feisty, nobody has liked Nikki Haley. Even the people who elect her don't like her.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 04:29
|
|
|
So Krugman put this blog post upquote:Back in the 60s and 70s — which I, sad to say, actually remember — there was much talk about the disintegration of the black family and of African-American values more generally, and how that was the root cause of America’s poverty problem. And the social dysfunction was clearly real. But was it cause or effect? William Julius Wilson, in When Work Disappears, famously argued that it was a symptom: good jobs in inner cities, where African-American men could take them, went away, and the cultural changes followed.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 05:03
|
|
|
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/415254/tom-cottons-letter-iran-gets-constitution-right-john-yoo Heres an editorial in which John "gently caress the Geneva Convention" Yoo informs us on why we should never ever trust anyone from an Ivy.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 05:41
|
|
|
His Purple Majesty posted:http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/415254/tom-cottons-letter-iran-gets-constitution-right-john-yoo He's not wrong
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 06:10
|
|
|
SumYungGui posted:And that's just the extremely obvious damage caused by poor water infrastructure. Let's talk about bridges, or dams. The things that can fail and kill a lot of people, and are going to start doing so in alarming numbers. The electrical grid in this country? Sweet baby Jesus it's amazing things still work and a testament to the engineering of times gone past when people invested in the future as opposed to watching (or making) things burn to the ground so they can loot the ashes for their next quarterly report. Gotta keep cutting those taxes though. Can't have that nasty gubmint going around doing things. People might get ideas into their heads. It seems like George W Bush was the last major Republican politician savvy enough to know that "small government" and "end wasteful spending" are just lies you tell the rubes to get elected, but once you're in running a modern country costs money and you can pass huge spending bills on education and agriculture and infrastructure and health care while coasting on your Republican small-government cred to protect you from your voters noticing that you're spending money. This crop of governors and national politicians arising around the same time as Bush's ascension to the presidency seem like a bunch of True Believer idiots who really do think you can just stop funding everything because 'murica is the greatest country on earth and runs on gumption and old-fashioned know-how, not "money" or "infrastructure" or "technology"
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 06:54
|
|
|
You've got it backwards. Bush was a true believer and the hero conservatives have been waiting for. But he had enough familial connections that he sorta had to, you know, actually also fund things while going crazy. Played crazy with the books (Iraq war spent a lot of time off the books, Afghanistan pretty much never was on the books) but people he worked with wanted to get PAID and make fat stacks of cash. The current crop is less concerned with getting PAID and making fat stacks. They want to make a point, they have an ideology. And they rode in on the Bush wave, they just don't have a million relatives and friends pulling them aside and saying, "I love that you believe, but I'm feeling a little strapped right now, so if you could help me out that'd be great . . ."
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 07:20
|
|
|
I don't know, Bush funded NCLB with Ted Kennedy as a co-author and passed Medicare Part D. Yeah sure Part D was a naked cash grab by the drug industry that banned the government from using its market leverage to negotiate prices (gently caress you, free market! -conservatives) but just try to get something like that passed now. Really aside from the Iraq War, Bush seemed at least somewhat interested in keeping the government funded and operational while he was in office even if he preferred huge deficits to sane tax policy. What I am saying is as bad as Bush was, his cynical cronyism was still better for the country than the True Believer Articles of Confederation crew running the GOP now 
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 09:08
|
|
|
I think Bush actually wanted to help people and do things with the government to that end. He just want very good at it and surrounded himself with people who wanted only to help themselves.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 11:21
|
|
|
Bush was selected to be the stooge, he did not select those around him, they selected him. The GOP back then didn't want a strong leader, they wanted some dumb gently caress to take point and do whatever they wanted. Cheney was the real leader. Bush was there to smile and wave and look deep into people's eyes and see their soul. While Cheney and co were handing zero bid contracts to their butt buddies.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 11:43
|
|
|
So about the E-mailghazi... Hilldawg choosing to use a private e-mail account wasn't the smartest thing to do, I'll admit. And her excuses for why she did so appear pretty lame as well. With that being said though, what are the supposed consequences of her actions? I don't mean how will she be punished. I mean, what kind of problems do people fear (or at least claim to fear) have arisen from doing such a thing?
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 11:53
|
|
|
I wonder if in eight years republicans that hate Obama guts will feel the same way about him I do about Bush, "Eh, he wasn't so bad"
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 11:54
|
|
|
greatn posted:I wonder if in eight years republicans that hate Obama guts will feel the same way about him I do about Bush, "Eh, he wasn't so bad" Any new Democratic president/presidential candidate automatically and retroactively makes the previous Democratic president/presidential candidate "not that bad" in the Republican mindset.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 12:29
|
|
|
greatn posted:I wonder if in eight years republicans that hate Obama guts will feel the same way about him I do about Bush, "Eh, he wasn't so bad" So, what you're saying is you have a really terrible memory.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 13:05
|
|
|
happyhippy posted:Bush was selected to be the stooge, he did not select those around him, they selected him. They still talk like this, saying that the most important thing they need from a Republican President is the ability to hold a pen. It's how they sell moderates to the ultra-conservatives.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 13:41
|
|
|
greatn posted:I wonder if in eight years republicans that hate Obama guts will feel the same way about him I do about Bush, "Eh, he wasn't so bad" 1: Is George W. Bush black 2: Do you hate blacks if the answer to either 1 or 2 is "no", then your experience is not transferable to conservatives' feelings about Obama They hate him, have always hated him (even before they had heard of him!) and will always hate him except when it is politically useful to pretend otherwise, such as when criticizing his Democratic successors. Antti posted:Any new Democratic president/presidential candidate automatically and retroactively makes the previous Democratic president/presidential candidate "not that bad" in the Republican mindset. I don't think this is particularly true. Sure mushy-middle Republican-voting independents are always going on about how much they miss Clinton, but I don't think the real Republicans ever softened on him. They will claim to have fond memories of the 90s, particularly when they are Newt Gingrich and attempting to burnish their get-things-donesmanship credentials, but the raw disdain at the core of things has never faded. PupsOfWar fucked around with this message at 13:50 on Mar 13, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 13:46
|
|
|
Mr Interweb posted:So about the E-mailghazi... Either that she was emailing shadowy evil conspiracies that they cannot subpoena or that sensitive emails didn't have the appropriate level of security. That being said, if there is a single elected official anywhere in the country that doesn't also use a separate email account from their government one, I'll eat my metaphorical hat.  zoux fucked around with this message at 14:15 on Mar 13, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 14:00
|
|
|
zoux posted:Either that she was emailing shadowy evil conspiracies that they cannot subpoena or that sensitive emails didn't have the appropriate level of security. No one remembers that GW did the same thing while he was president. Not only that but there is reason to believe that a lot of really sketchy poo poo was on those servers and when officials tried to investigate, millions of e-mails were suddenly lost by accident. More than once. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush_White_House_email_controversy
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 14:16
|
|
|
You know there are a lot of people who say that Netanyahu's speech to Congress was just an electoral stunt but to them I say duhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pDmN6itHfOc
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 14:33
|
|
|
Quote of the morning, "You know, the 'lol' is redundant when you have the 'haha'." ~ Barack Obama. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RDocnbkHjhI
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 14:33
|
|
|
Wee Tinkle Wand posted:No one remembers that GW did the same thing while he was president. Not only that but there is reason to believe that a lot of really sketchy poo poo was on those servers and when officials tried to investigate, millions of e-mails were suddenly lost by accident. More than once. Length of the American voter's memory: the candidate could punch a voter in the face while they are in the voting booth and that person will forget it even happened by the time they finish their ballet.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 14:34
|
|
|
The sublime grace of the American Election Ballet.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 14:35
|
|
|
Wee Tinkle Wand posted:No one remembers that GW did the same thing while he was president. Not only that but there is reason to believe that a lot of really sketchy poo poo was on those servers and when officials tried to investigate, millions of e-mails were suddenly lost by accident. More than once. To be fair, there were so many scandals, and scandals within scandals during those years..it's nigh impossible to recall even a majority of them. Though to our credit as a nation, we seem to have forgotten all of them. Look forwards, not backwards!
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 14:53
|
|
|
zoux posted:Either that she was emailing shadowy evil conspiracies that they cannot subpoena or that sensitive emails didn't have the appropriate level of security. lawl at putting David Patreaeus in there considering what he's pleading guilty to soon.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 14:56
|
|
|
Star Man posted:Length of the American voter's memory: the candidate could punch a voter in the face while they are in the voting booth and that person will forget it even happened by the time they finish their ballet. Swan lake? (this is an identical post from the eastern europe thread, oddly enough)
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 14:57
|
|
|
zoux posted:Either that she was emailing shadowy evil conspiracies that they cannot subpoena or that sensitive emails didn't have the appropriate level of security. Lindsey Graham. Get to eating. And none of that metaphorical fruit hat bullshit
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 15:06
|
|
|
Mr Interweb posted:So about the E-mailghazi... For one thing, you have essentially a four year period where your Sec. of State's correspondence is gone, purged from the record books. Historians, following SoS's and other future leaders won't have any traces of what Hillary did as SoS. It also sets a bad precedent, especially if she ends up winning the POTUS despite this. For another, it's not so much of "problems that people fear" so much as yet another example of the Dem party trying to make itself the party of "transparency" and then going in the exact opposite loving direction. Not to mention yet another example of the Clintons basically not giving a gently caress about transparency or laws affecting them. It's also a great exercise in seeing how much liberals will bend over backwards to downplay this when they'd be loving livid if it was, say, Cheney instead.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 15:29
|
|
|
Amergin posted:For one thing, you have essentially a four year period where your Sec. of State's correspondence is gone, purged from the record books. Historians, following SoS's and other future leaders won't have any traces of what Hillary did as SoS. It also sets a bad precedent, especially if she ends up winning the POTUS despite this. I wouldn't be I would say the same thing. But also she mostly used the other email acct. to talk poo poo about Obama, as I understand it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 15:31
|
|
|
zoux posted:I wouldn't be I would say the same thing. Zoux you're a LINO. EDIT: Or a DI-NO(-SA-UR a dinosaur!)
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 15:31
|
|
|
Mr Interweb posted:So about the E-mailghazi... The other day when she had the press conference at the UN I was driving across country and listening to talking heads on AM radio. Apparently the line they are trying to push is that she was using her influence as SoS to trade favors for funneling mystery money to the Clinton Foundation. Of course there will be nothing found in the emails released by State, but that will just prove that these allegations are true and she just scrubbed all that damning evidence from her private server. It will just be another Benghazi where there is no evidence of misdeed, but that will not stop them from saying what they 'know' to be true. Every time they use her name in a sentence they will find a way to draw a connection to the Clintons and their shady past.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 15:32
|
|
|
Amergin posted:For one thing, you have essentially a four year period where your Sec. of State's correspondence is gone, purged from the record books. Historians, following SoS's and other future leaders won't have any traces of what Hillary did as SoS. It also sets a bad precedent, especially if she ends up winning the POTUS despite this. This is of course completely ignoring the thousands of emails turned over to recordkeepers. But let's not have facts get in the way.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 15:32
|
|
|
Lansdowne posted:The other day when she had the press conference at the UN I was driving across country and listening to talking heads on AM radio. Apparently the line they are trying to push is that she was using her influence as SoS to trade favors for funneling mystery money to the Clinton Foundation. Of course there will be nothing found in the emails released by State, but that will just prove that these allegations are true and she just scrubbed all that damning evidence from her private server. Trabisnikof posted:This is of course completely ignoring the thousands of emails turned over to recordkeepers. But let's not have facts get in the way. ~60,000 emails turned over Out of ~1 billion emails estimated to have been sent/received at the State Dept. But let's not have facts get in the way. EDIT: Actually I read it was down to ~40,000 in 2013. Amergin fucked around with this message at 15:35 on Mar 13, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 15:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 16:09 |
|
|
That account held a BILLION emails? 
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 15:33
|
|