Author |
Message |
 |
|
 |
Advert
|
Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
- No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
- Times and dates in your local timezone.
- Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
- Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
- Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now. |
|
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/09/26 00:07:30
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
|
 |
5th God of Chaos! (Ho-hum)
Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!
|
ScootyPuffJunior wrote: d-usa wrote:Considering that the Republicans ran on the message of "give us the Senate, and we will govern responsibly and there will be no more gridlocks and stuff will get done" and are insisting on not passing a budget that doesn't defund PP (a move that the majority of the country actually disagrees with), it will be pretty easy to see who will shoulder the blame.
Obama, obviously.
See... here's the dealio... it's as if, because the GOP controls both houses, there's nothing "legitimate" in your eyes as it's the wrong team.
And, yes, I blame Obama because his office tells them that he'll veto any budgets that doesn't conform to ALL OF HIS WISHES. Because, in his mind... he won.
I blame the ideology that Obama/Democrats champions... and I also blame that back-stabbing bs in the GOP leadership now that they're in power.
Feth 'em both. Automatically Appended Next Post: Tannhauser42 wrote: Grey Templar wrote:Withholding money is one of the checks and balances granted to congress. Its a perfectly valid use of their power.
If they couldn't elect to withhold money power of the purse wouldn't exist.
I could almost accept your point of view of it being a "valid use", except for one small point: Congress still gets paid during a shutdown while nobody else gets a fething dime.
Yeah... that needs to change.
IF the government shuts down because they can't get this gak in order, they yeah, they shouldn't be paid either. Even more, they shouldn't fething get back pay... ever.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/09/26 00:08:50
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/09/26 00:27:16
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
|
 |
Mutated Chosen Chaos Marine
|
@whemby: It's actually not "in his mind" that he won. He won. Link to whatever you like, show me one where he didn't, and I will show you a delusional idiot. Period end.If they can't override his veto, that's on them. Get a better bill. Or let the entire house vote and see howmit pans out. (Hint: the few who opposed Boehner won't like it--and the idiot trump items wouldn't have any leg to stand on).
Edit: if he were politically smart, he would have been doing this all along. Let the Dems and the GOP die on their respective minorities, he would have had a legitimate reason to run as a third party--and based on Political fervor out ther right now, he would have had massive support.
|
This message was edited 5 times. Last update was at 2015/09/26 00:42:19
Help me, Rhonda. HA! |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/09/26 00:46:03
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
|
 |
5th God of Chaos! (Ho-hum)
Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!
|
Gordon Shumway wrote:@whemby: It's actually not "in his mind" that he won. He won. Link to whatever you like, show me one where he didn't, and I will show you a delusional idiot. Period end.If they can't override his veto, that's on them. Get a better bill. Or let the entire house vote and see howmit pans out. (Hint: the few who opposed Boehner won't like it).
I don't disagree with you.
However, in practice, Obama can play this shutdown theater and get EVERYTHING he wants because of favorable media types.
He ain't dumb.
Also...
For your daily HRC whembly update:
As Biden would say... this is a Big Fething Deal:
Officials: More work emails from Clinton's private account
WASHINGTON ( AP) — The Obama administration has discovered a chain of emails that Hillary Rodham Clinton failed to turn over when she provided what she said was the full record of work-related correspondence as secretary of state, officials told The Associated Press Friday, adding to the growing questions related to the Democratic presidential front-runner's unusual usage of a private email account and server while in government.
The messages were exchanged with retired Gen. David Petraeus when he headed the military's U.S. Central Command, responsible for running the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. They began before Clinton entered office and continued into her first days at the State Department. They largely pertained to personnel matters and don't appear to deal with highly classified material, officials said, but their existence challenges Clinton's claim that she has handed over the entirety of her work emails from the account.
Republicans have raised questions about thousands of emails that she has deleted on grounds that they were private in nature, as well as other messages that have surfaced independently of Clinton and the State Department. Speaking of her emails on CBS' "Face the Nation" this week, Clinton said, "We provided all of them." But the FBI and several congressional committees are investigating.
The State Department's record of Clinton emails begins on March 18, 2009 — almost two months after she entered office. Before then, Clinton has said she used an old AT&T Blackberry email account, the contents of which she no longer can access.
The Petraeus emails, first discovered by the Defense Department and then passed to the State Department's inspector general, challenge that claim. They start on Jan. 10, 2009, with Clinton using the older email account. But by Jan. 28 — a week after her swearing in — she switched to using the private email address on a homebrew server that she would rely on for the rest of her tenure. There are less than 10 emails back and forth in total, officials said, and the chain ends on Feb. 1.
The officials weren't authorized to speak on the matter and demanded anonymity. But State Department spokesman John Kirby confirmed that the agency received the emails in the "last several days" and that they "were not previously in the possession of the department."
Kirby said they would be subject to a Freedom of Information Act review like the rest of Clinton's emails. She gave the department some 30,000 emails last year that she sent or received while in office, and officials plan to finish releasing all of them by the end of January, after sensitive or classified information is censored. A quarter has been made public so far.
Additionally, Kirby said the agency will incorporate the newly discovered emails into a review of record retention practices that Clinton's successor, Secretary of State John Kerry, initiated in March. "We have also informed Congress of this matter," he added.
These steps are unlikely to satisfy Clinton's Republican critics.
The House Benghazi Committee plans to hold a public hearing with Clinton next month to hear specifically about what the emails might say about the attack on a U.S. diplomatic outpost in Libya that killed four Americans on Sept. 11, 2012. And the Senate Judiciary Committee's GOP chairman said he wants the Justice Department to tell him if a criminal investigation is underway into Clinton's use of private email amid reports this week that the FBI recovered deleted emails from her server. The Senate Homeland Security Committee also is looking into the matter.
Clinton has repeatedly denied wrongdoing. "When I did it, it was allowed, it was above board. And now I'm being as transparent as possible, more than anybody else ever has been," she said earlier this week.
In August, Clinton submitted a sworn statement to a U.S. District Court saying she had directed all her work emails to be provided to the State Department. "On information and belief, this has been done," she said in a declaration submitted as part of a lawsuit with Judicial Watch, a conservative advocacy group.
The Clinton campaign didn't respond immediately to a request from The Associated Press for comment, but on Twitter, Brian Fallon, the Clinton campaign's press secretary, wrote Friday: "We always said the emails given to State dated back only to March 09. That was when she started using http://clintonemail.com ."
Clinton has been dogged for months by questions about her email practices. She initially described her choice as a matter of convenience, but later took responsibility for making a wrong decision.
Separately Friday, State Department officials said they were providing the Benghazi-focused probe more email exchanges from senior officials pertaining to Libya. The committee broadened its scope after examining tens of thousands of documents more specifically focused on the Benghazi attack.
If the AP is to be believed... this could get very problematic for HRC since she has already certified, on pain of perjury, that she had handed over copies of all of her work-related e-mails to StatesDept:
http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/09/politics/hillary-clinton-email-certified-court/
You know who's coming... right?
|
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/09/26 00:49:34
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
|
 |
The Conquerer
Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios
|
I didn't think the shock face still could get topped, but that photoshop takes the cake
You owe me a new keyboard Whembly!
|
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
MURICA!!! IN SPESS!!! |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/09/26 01:27:35
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
|
 |
Mutated Chosen Chaos Marine
|
I can really respect Biden for that. Everybody needs a nit picker.
As to your first point, Obama can get away with it because he is better at (or his handlers are) understanding the rules of the game and how to game them best. If you think the big O has gotten any media favoritism in the last four or five years, you would be wrong. Except on Msnbc, but they don't really count for anything since nobody watches it.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/09/26 01:31:59
Help me, Rhonda. HA! |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/09/26 02:06:20
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
|
 |
Did Fulgrim Just Behead Ferrus?
|
whembly wrote:
If the AP is to be believed... this could get very problematic for HRC since she has already certified, on pain of perjury, that she had handed over copies of all of her work-related e-mails to StatesDept:
Props on that photoshop, too. Did you make it, or did you find it somewhere?
Anyway, I'm still just waiting for the Hillary/Bill cybersex emails, that's when it will get interesting...
|
"Through the darkness of future past, the magician longs to see.
One chants out between two worlds: Fire, walk with me." - Twin Peaks
"You listen to me. While I will admit to a certain cynicism, the fact is that I am a naysayer and hatchetman in the fight against violence. I pride myself in taking a punch and I'll gladly take another because I choose to live my life in the company of Gandhi and King. My concerns are global. I reject absolutely revenge, aggression, and retaliation. The foundation of such a method... is love. I love you Sheriff Truman." - Twin Peaks |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/09/26 03:35:25
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
|
 |
5th God of Chaos! (Ho-hum)
Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!
|
No... I stole it from a RT'ed twittah feed.
I swear... that shockface will get a lot of mileages for years to come.
|
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/09/26 03:37:13
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
|
 |
The Conquerer
Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios
|
I've got a lot of wargame related taglines to put on that
|
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
MURICA!!! IN SPESS!!! |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/09/26 05:03:15
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
|
 |
Dwarf High King with New Book of Grudges
United States
|
whembly wrote:
And, yes, I blame Obama because his office tells them that he'll veto any budgets that doesn't conform to ALL OF HIS WISHES. Because, in his mind... he won.
When the stimulus negotiations were going on the Democrats controlled the Presidency, the Senate, and the House. Claiming that Obama's negotiating tactics in that, very exceptional, environment are reflective of those he employed later on is being deliberately obtuse.
That's all you really needed to say, the rest just falls into place the aftermath.
|
Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/09/26 17:00:45
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
|
 |
5th God of Chaos! (Ho-hum)
Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!
|
dogma wrote: whembly wrote:
And, yes, I blame Obama because his office tells them that he'll veto any budgets that doesn't conform to ALL OF HIS WISHES. Because, in his mind... he won.
When the stimulus negotiations were going on the Democrats controlled the Presidency, the Senate, and the House. Claiming that Obama's negotiating tactics in that, very exceptional, environment are reflective of those he employed later on is being deliberately obtuse.
No... it's acknowledging that he had no desire to work with the Republicans... ignoring the past 7 years, is being deliberately obtuse.
That's all you really needed to say, the rest just falls into place the aftermath.
Erm... have I argued otherwise in the past??
|
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/09/26 17:43:02
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
|
 |
Colonel
This Is Where the Fish Lives
|
whembly wrote:No... it's acknowledging that he had no desire to work with the Republicans... ignoring the past 7 years, is being deliberately obtuse.
According to you. If my three year old daughter starts crying and throwing a temper tantrum because she wants an ice cream cone and cookies for breakfast, is my refusal to give in to her ridiculous demands mean I'm being obtuse?
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/09/26 18:33:02
d-usa wrote:"When the Internet sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending posters that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing strawmen. They're bringing spam. They're trolls. And some, I assume, are good people." |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/09/26 18:28:44
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
|
 |
Dwarf High King with New Book of Grudges
United States
|
whembly wrote:
No... it's acknowledging that he had no desire to work with the Republicans... ignoring the past 7 years, is being deliberately obtuse.
How am I "...ignoring the past 7 years..." by pointing out that negotiating tactics employed within the past 7 years, are unique to a period of time less than 7 years?
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/09/26 18:31:56
Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/09/26 18:54:59
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
Whembly has it backwards. The Republicans had no desire to work with Obama. Heck, they had a meeting right after he was elected with the express purpose of opposing anything Obama wants simply because he wants it. Automatically Appended Next Post: Whembly has it backwards. The Republicans had no desire to work with Obama. Heck, they had a meeting right after he was elected with the express purpose of opposing anything Obama wants simply because he wants it.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/09/26 19:14:03
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/09/26 20:06:00
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
|
 |
Last Remaining Whole C'Tan
|
skyth wrote:Whembly has it backwards. The Republicans had no desire to work with Obama. Heck, they had a meeting right after he was elected with the express purpose of opposing anything Obama wants simply because he wants it
Well,m that hardly matters, we're still going to keep repeating the original untrue argument over, and over, and over again anyway. It doesn't matter if it's true, it only matters that you can out-endure the people willing call call you out on it. That's how we establish the truth in the OT.
|
lord_blackfang wrote:Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.
Flinty wrote:The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/09/26 20:24:55
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
|
 |
Hangin' with Gork & Mork
|
Whembly doesn't care what is true, only what can be accused!
|
Amidst the mists and coldest frosts he thrusts his fists against the posts and still insists he sees the ghosts.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/09/26 20:31:50
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
|
 |
Colonel
This Is Where the Fish Lives
|
Ahtman wrote:Whembly doesn't care what is true, only what can be accused!
That, my friend, is signature worthy.
|
d-usa wrote:"When the Internet sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending posters that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing strawmen. They're bringing spam. They're trolls. And some, I assume, are good people." |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/09/27 04:19:28
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
|
 |
5th God of Chaos! (Ho-hum)
Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!
|
Ahtman wrote:Whembly doesn't care what is true, only what can be accused!
Heh... that's gold.
Guys... does Obama bear any faults? Any at all?
|
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/09/27 07:40:47
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
|
 |
Last Remaining Whole C'Tan
|
Yeah, that's a thing people have argued; why not.
So, what is the point of this thread? Is it just to reiterate talking points, have them refuted, and then keep repeating them, while also cranking out 3 Hillary Clinton posts per page? Because this really doesn't feel like a valuable vehicle for discourse in any way. Are we really going to have the debate about the idea that Republican Party decided, for good or ill, that they would not agree to absolutely anything as a political strategy? I mean, we've done this before, more than once.
So what's the point? Why not set up an Angry Screed Man Twitter.... thing instead? It's not like this communication is bidirectional.
|
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2015/09/27 07:52:18
lord_blackfang wrote:Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.
Flinty wrote:The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/09/27 09:47:23
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
|
 |
[MOD]
Not as Good as a Minion
|
This thread exists because, if there was any evidence that a thread about politics in the lead up to an election (which it pretty much always is in one way or the other) would do anything other than what is happening here, then we wouldn't need to keep it contained as best as we could in one thread. It's a shame, but it is how it is with the OT.
|
I wish I had time for all the game systems I own, let alone want to own... |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/09/27 10:16:17
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
|
 |
Last Remaining Whole C'Tan
|
So in a way, this thread is like the political landfill of the OT
|
lord_blackfang wrote:Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.
Flinty wrote:The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/09/27 15:10:15
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
|
 |
5th God of Chaos! (Ho-hum)
Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!
|
Ouze wrote:So in a way, this thread is like the political landfill of the OT
Hey... I'm doing my part in keeping the OT sub-tread clean... pickup that trash and put it here.
To be fair, that question wasn't directed at *you* because we all know where you stand and has been vocal on things that you didn't like about Obama's tenure.
But, it got to the point that, in here and as a general discourse during the Obama tenure, that anything bad that Obama did was easily rationalize and it's the evil, weevle, rascally Republicans that is the source of all wrongs in the US. To be honest, many of it *is* the Republicans fault, but it's not like they share all the burdens.
As to my daily updates on HRC's ordeal... it's interesting... and new gak keeps coming out. I'm amazed that she's still in this race as any other candidate would be boned so hard, they'd become the new laughing stock in political lexicon.
Twelve months ago, could you fathom Trump doing this well? Seriously? Holy gak that's awesome and we can sit here deliberating why in the hell this is happening. I think we all know that Trump is a terrible candidate and would be an awful President (he has thinner skin that Obama for cripes sake!). So why... why is this happening.
All you have to do is look at any polling numbers on Congress for the last decade or so... it's epically bad.
So, Trump isn't leading the pack because he's such an awesome candidate and is reflective on what GOP voters want... he's leading because folks are more vocal now about how anti-establishment they are now... it seems to be the only way to get the established GOPers to fething listen to their constituents. Hence, there's many on the righty-blogersphere who subscribe to the "Let It Burn" tactic... by doing whatever necessary to vote for the "not GOP preferred candidate" to send a message. It might just happen.
If you forced me to predict who will be the candidates... I'd still have to say it'll be HRC (scandals is just another accessory in the clinton machines) versus Jeb! (he's got the SEC country pretty locked down). Which would then lead to a HRC Presidency.
I hope I'm wrong on all accounts, but there it is.
|
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/09/27 15:24:47
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
|
 |
Colonel
This Is Where the Fish Lives
|
whembly wrote:To be fair, that question wasn't directed at *you* because we all know where you stand and has been vocal on things that you didn't like about Obama's tenure.
But, it got to the point that, in here and as a general discourse during the Obama tenure, that anything bad that Obama did was easily rationalize and it's the evil, weevle, rascally Republicans that is the source of all wrongs in the US. To be honest, many of it *is* the Republicans fault, but it's not like they share all the burdens.
Then who was it directed at, Whembly?
My biggest problem with Obama is that he isn't liberal enough. All and all, I think he's alright; not great but not terrible. I still maintain that the United States is a center-right nation and Obama is a reflection of that.
I still have my AR and handguns, I haven't been sent off to a FEMA camp, the death panels haven't decided to kill my parents, and Obama hasn't suspended elections and appointed himself dictator.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/09/27 15:36:28
d-usa wrote:"When the Internet sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending posters that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing strawmen. They're bringing spam. They're trolls. And some, I assume, are good people." |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/09/27 15:32:07
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
|
 |
Decrepit Dakkanaut
|
It's happening because people keep on saying that Trump is doing well, when in reality he isn't.
But the GOP is repeating the mistakes of 2012 and as a result we think that a candidate who pulls in less than 25% of Republicans is doing well.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/09/27 15:47:40
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
|
 |
Did Fulgrim Just Behead Ferrus?
|
So Ted Cruz opened his mouth and verbal diarrhea came out.
Seriously, I thought we had moved on from threatening to kill other leaders about 40 years ago or so? I mean, I get Iran hasn't caught up to us yet and is still about 40 years behind us in political rhetoric (we stopped chanting "better dead than red" and similar things long ago). Do we really need to be dragged back into that era? What's next, a return to McCarthyism where people are demonized because they might be a member of a different ideology? Oh, wait, we're already there....
It was in an earlier version of that article, but in the same speech Cruz was also rather gleeful about Boehner's resignation. I guess nothing demonstrates the self-destruction of the GOP more than that several of its elected members are jubilant in the resignation of such a respected leader. And what's worse is they're too stupid to realize how much damage it's going to do to them in the long run.
Oh, quite a few. But, the real question is, does it really matter? Barack Obama and George W. Bush could walk on water, hand-in-hand, to heal a wounded swan with a touch, and the parties would still complain about the other side somehow. That's how bad the situation is. That's why so many are supporting Trump, Sanders, et al., because they represent something different (maybe real hope/change?). When one side says their primary goal is to stop the other side from accomplishing anything, in an ideal world that should have resulted in every one of them being voted out of office and replaced with someone who is willing to work together. And it doesn't matter if the other side "did it before", because that doesn't make it right. It's like revenge killing: it only stops when there's no one left.
Compromise is dead. It's like there's nobody left in Washington who understands that to get something, you have to give something, too. Now, each party just tosses the election coin every two years, hoping it lands on their side. What they don't get is that the coin never lands on a side, it always lands on its edge. Because even if one side gets the majority, the minority can still obstruct them unless they're all willing to work together. That's how our government was designed to work.
|
"Through the darkness of future past, the magician longs to see.
One chants out between two worlds: Fire, walk with me." - Twin Peaks
"You listen to me. While I will admit to a certain cynicism, the fact is that I am a naysayer and hatchetman in the fight against violence. I pride myself in taking a punch and I'll gladly take another because I choose to live my life in the company of Gandhi and King. My concerns are global. I reject absolutely revenge, aggression, and retaliation. The foundation of such a method... is love. I love you Sheriff Truman." - Twin Peaks |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/09/27 15:49:19
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
|
 |
Confessor Of Sins
WA, USA
|
Exalted harder than I have exalted before Tannhauser.
|
Ouze wrote:
Afterward, Curran killed a guy in the parking lot with a trident.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/09/27 15:58:18
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
|
 |
5th God of Chaos! (Ho-hum)
Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!
|
ScootyPuffJunior wrote: whembly wrote:To be fair, that question wasn't directed at *you* because we all know where you stand and has been vocal on things that you didn't like about Obama's tenure.
But, it got to the point that, in here and as a general discourse during the Obama tenure, that anything bad that Obama did was easily rationalize and it's the evil, weevle, rascally Republicans that is the source of all wrongs in the US. To be honest, many of it *is* the Republicans fault, but it's not like they share all the burdens.
Then who was it directed at, Whembly?
You're one of them
My biggest problem with Obama is that he isn't liberal enough. All and all, I think he's alright; not great but not terrible. I still maintain that the United States is a center-right nation and Obama is a reflection of that.
Obama isn't liberal enough?
*Loved that movie by the way.
I can't wait for a hypothetical GOP President unilaterally making laws with respect to Obamacare, Immigration policies or the whole shebang. But, go ahead a ignore the dangerous precedent that Obama laid down/re-enforced. If that happens, I won't be hearing any complaints from you... right?
I still have my AR and handguns, I haven't been sent off to a FEMA camp, the death panels haven't decided to kill my parents, and Obama hasn't suspended elections and appointed himself dictator.
You see... this is the part of the problem. It's as if any opposition to Obama (or Democrats in general) are thrown into the crazy bucket in attempt to delegitimize said opponent's discourse.
FWIW, you'd probably think I'm a raging right wringer that could be put in that stereotypical bucket... but, I'd love to have the Canadian Healthcare model here in the states. What does that make me? Automatically Appended Next Post: d-usa wrote:It's happening because people keep on saying that Trump is doing well, when in reality he isn't.
But the GOP is repeating the mistakes of 2012 and as a result we think that a candidate who pulls in less than 25% of Republicans is doing well.
Yup... that's a very good point. But, the problem here is the large field in the GOP primary. Folks are concerned, shall we say, that Trumps support is a little more than the anti-establishment tantrum. Automatically Appended Next Post: Tannhauser42 wrote:
Oh, quite a few. But, the real question is, does it really matter? Barack Obama and George W. Bush could walk on water, hand-in-hand, to heal a wounded swan with a touch, and the parties would still complain about the other side somehow. That's how bad the situation is. That's why so many are supporting Trump, Sanders, et al., because they represent something different (maybe real hope/change?). When one side says their primary goal is to stop the other side from accomplishing anything, in an ideal world that should have resulted in every one of them being voted out of office and replaced with someone who is willing to work together. And it doesn't matter if the other side "did it before", because that doesn't make it right. It's like revenge killing: it only stops when there's no one left.
Compromise is dead. It's like there's nobody left in Washington who understands that to get something, you have to give something, too. Now, each party just tosses the election coin every two years, hoping it lands on their side. What they don't get is that the coin never lands on a side, it always lands on its edge. Because even if one side gets the majority, the minority can still obstruct them unless they're all willing to work together. That's how our government was designed to work.
It isn't that Compromise is dead... it's literally the amount of effort our Congression critters want to maintain the status quo.
I'd make three major changes, somehow, to encourage to promote an environment of compromise:
1) If you want to filibuster, go back to the ol'stand in front of congress and talk until you can't go on, or another colleague picks up the bat. No more, voting to allow a bill to be voted on.
2) If Congress can't fund the government due to not passing a budget/ CR... they don't get paid, and by statute lose that paycheck even if they do eventually pass a budget/ CR.
3) No more mega bills... break it up by the depts that oversees those fundings.
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/09/27 16:05:58
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/09/27 16:16:25
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
|
 |
Colonel
This Is Where the Fish Lives
|
Are you fething kidding me, dude? Please find where I have ever sat here and sung Obama's praises because I think you have me confused with someone else. Just because I don't get a raging hateboner for him like you and poutrage about how he's "destroying America" and is the "worst president ever" doesn't mean I think he's the greatest thing since sliced bread. Personally, I'm pissed that I voted for him because he sold himself as a progressive and didn't come close to delivering on that promise.
Remember, despite what you think the world is not black and white and:
Obama isn't liberal enough?
Yeah, really.
You're just another one of those people that confuses "things you don't like" with "liberal" because the media you consume tells you as much. Just like it said in the closing of the article I posted: I don’t expect any conservatives to recognize the truth of Obama’s fundamental conservatism for at least a couple of decades—perhaps only after a real progressive presidency. In any case, today they are too invested in painting him as the devil incarnate in order to frighten grassroots Republicans into voting to keep Obama from confiscating all their guns, throwing them into FEMA re-education camps, and other nonsense that is believed by many Republicans. But just as they eventually came to appreciate Bill Clinton’s core conservatism, Republicans will someday see that Obama was no less conservative.
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/09/27 16:24:51
d-usa wrote:"When the Internet sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending posters that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing strawmen. They're bringing spam. They're trolls. And some, I assume, are good people." |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/09/27 16:27:40
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
|
 |
5th God of Chaos! (Ho-hum)
Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!
|
Again... I'm gonna call BS that Obama is a Republican being right of center.
It's a weird defense, as if it's a bad thing to be liberal.
O.o
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/04/29/how-liberal-is-president-obama/?_r=0
D-nominate has it's issues ( as dogma will no doubt jump in)... but this is till 2010. I'd bet good money that he'll surpass the other Democratic president as the most liberal when Obama is done.
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/09/27 16:29:32
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/09/27 17:07:24
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
|
 |
Dwarf High King with New Book of Grudges
United States
|
whembly wrote:
1) If you want to filibuster, go back to the ol'stand in front of congress and talk until you can't go on, or another colleague picks up the bat. No more, voting to allow a bill to be voted on.
So you propose to create legislation which goes against the, Constitutionally established, ability of Congress to regulate itself?
whembly wrote:
2) If Congress can't fund the government due to not passing a budget/ CR... they don't get paid, and by statute lose that paycheck even if they do eventually pass a budget/ CR.
Powerful Senators and Congressmen don't care about their Congressional salaries, they have other ways of making money.
whembly wrote:
3) No more mega bills... break it up by the depts that oversees those fundings.
Why? What is the difference between a series of bills with different names, and one bill with sections that have different parliamentary designations?
|
Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/09/27 17:19:18
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
|
 |
Colonel
This Is Where the Fish Lives
|
whembly wrote:Again... I'm gonna call BS that Obama is a Republican being right of center.
Of course not, you're much too entrenched in the Republican Party to ever admit it. You toe the party line harder than anyone I know and you can't look at any policy without extreme party bias.
It's a weird defense, as if it's a bad thing to be liberal.
It's not a "defense," it's a complaint. I want Obama to be the progressive he sold himself as, but it's too late in the game to actually expect it.
|
d-usa wrote:"When the Internet sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending posters that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing strawmen. They're bringing spam. They're trolls. And some, I assume, are good people." |
|
 |
 |
|