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.
Jihadin wrote: Even I do not know where to go to start a domain.........
In this case, someone else owns it. However, as they have not developed it, he would be able to seize the name by opening an ICANN dispute, which he probably should have done kind of a while ago since it's been registered since 2004.
Obviously not everyone knows how to register a domain, but he really should have a staffer who's job it is to, well, buy the domain, develop a site, and stay on top of it as well as a social media presence.
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
Sounds like something you might apply for Ouze...........I would so laugh my butt off if you did and get hired. I'm looking at Cruz doing bloopers Bush Jr style
Proud Member of the Infidels of OIF/OEF
No longer defending the US Military or US Gov't. Just going to ""**feed into your fears**"" with Duffel Blog Did not fight my way up on top the food chain to become a Vegan...
Warning: Stupid Allergy
Once you pull the pin, Mr. Grenade is no longer your friend
DE 6700
Harlequin 2500
RIP Muhammad Ali.
Jihadin, Scorched Earth 791. Leader of the Pork Eating Crusader. Alpha
Blood Hawk wrote: I may just tune the news out next year when the election gets in full swing, I mean they have been talking about 2016 for what 3 years now?
That depends on who you consider "they" to be. Journalists working for conservative outlets have been talking about 2016 since 2012, and journalists working for liberal outlets have followed suit; they need the hits.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/03/23 22:31:25
Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh.
Jihadin wrote: I agree whole 110% but gawd forbid if the Left attacks his qualifications as an American to run for POTUS.
Well, I'm not a political expert, but it doesn't speak well to his campaign preparation skills that he didn't acquire http://www.Tedcruz.com for one.
Wasn't he already a mouthpiece for Time Warner or some other internet company during the recent Net Neutrality hullabaloo? I'm sure they could secure it for him as a "campaign donation."
"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
This should make Scott Walker the more attractive candidate in conservatives' eyes...
Adam B. Lerner wrote:Supreme Court declines to take up Wisconsin voter ID case
The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday denied a challenge to Wisconsin’s strict voter ID law, upholding a policy championed by the state’s Republican governor, and presidential hopeful, Scott Walker.
The law, which was ardently debated during last year’s Wisconsin gubernatorial election, was passed in 2011 and requires voters to show one of eight forms of identification, including a driver’s license and a military ID card. Identification issued by University of Wisconsin campuses are not accepted, though some other student cards are.
Since its passage, the Wisconsin provision has been the subject of multiple legal challenges centered around whether the state’s black and Hispanic populations make up a disproportionate share of the 300,000 Wisconsinites lacking adequate identification.
In 2014, the law was upheld by a panel arguing that the law is similar to Indiana’s, which was upheld by the Supreme Court in 2008, but the Supreme Court then blocked the law’s implementation before the 2014 midterm elections.
During a debate after the Supreme Court blocked the law, Walker said, “It doesn’t matter if there’s one, 100, or 1,000” instances of voter fraud. “Amongst us, who would be that one person who would like to have our vote canceled out by a vote that was cast illegally?”
His Democratic challenger, Mary Burke, called Walker’s comments “shocking,” claiming that the law could deny suffrage to thousands of Wisconsinites.
Currently, Texas’ voter ID law awaits a decision from a federal appeals court. That court’s decision could lead to a Supreme Court case that defines a new nationwide precedent on voter ID.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/03/24 01:07:08
So SCOTUS was scared of being backhanded by Walker eh
Proud Member of the Infidels of OIF/OEF
No longer defending the US Military or US Gov't. Just going to ""**feed into your fears**"" with Duffel Blog Did not fight my way up on top the food chain to become a Vegan...
Warning: Stupid Allergy
Once you pull the pin, Mr. Grenade is no longer your friend
DE 6700
Harlequin 2500
RIP Muhammad Ali.
Jihadin, Scorched Earth 791. Leader of the Pork Eating Crusader. Alpha
Could also be just positioning by the SCOTUS. Letting Wisconsin stand at this point doesn't do very much as it is too close to the next election there to be implemented. So for the April election it is business as usual there.
Meanwhile the Texas Voter ID law is making the journey through the appeals process and should be up for possible review by SCOTUS before too long. If the justices are expecting to hear the Texas case, and if the Texas case would have enough impact to include the proposed issues in Wisconsin, then they may have decided to leave Wisconsin alone for now in favor of the bigger decision.
Of course they may also spank the Texas challenge as well.
While flipping through the radio this morning some talk show guy on one of the political XM channels mentioned something about Cruz's mother renouncing her US citizenship, but after she gave birth to him. Anyone know if that is accurate.
Not that it really matters, but I am curious. It does potentially open a line of attack/help better define the line Trump is taking.
(I did a quick Google search but all I saw was that she was a US citizen when she gave birth, nothing about after that.)
Every time a terrorist dies a Paratrooper gets his wings.
While flipping through the radio this morning some talk show guy on one of the political XM channels mentioned something about Cruz's mother renouncing her US citizenship, but after she gave birth to him. Anyone know if that is accurate.
Not that it really matters, but I am curious. It does potentially open a line of attack/help better define the line Trump is taking.
(I did a quick Google search but all I saw was that she was a US citizen when she gave birth, nothing about after that.)
Mention earlier documents were can be filed to claim US Citizenship that the mother can filed.
Proud Member of the Infidels of OIF/OEF
No longer defending the US Military or US Gov't. Just going to ""**feed into your fears**"" with Duffel Blog Did not fight my way up on top the food chain to become a Vegan...
Warning: Stupid Allergy
Once you pull the pin, Mr. Grenade is no longer your friend
DE 6700
Harlequin 2500
RIP Muhammad Ali.
Jihadin, Scorched Earth 791. Leader of the Pork Eating Crusader. Alpha
Trump though not a career politician though. I would love to see economic trade deals he would hash out with other countries though. Be a interesting change
Proud Member of the Infidels of OIF/OEF
No longer defending the US Military or US Gov't. Just going to ""**feed into your fears**"" with Duffel Blog Did not fight my way up on top the food chain to become a Vegan...
Warning: Stupid Allergy
Once you pull the pin, Mr. Grenade is no longer your friend
DE 6700
Harlequin 2500
RIP Muhammad Ali.
Jihadin, Scorched Earth 791. Leader of the Pork Eating Crusader. Alpha
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - With defense and deficit hawks still eyeing each other warily over the federal budget, House Republican leaders predicted on Tuesday that their fractious caucus would close ranks and support a 10-year balanced-budget plan.
Some Republican lawmakers want more military spending, while others focus on keeping the budget deficit under control. To overcome these differences, leaders will give lawmakers a choice of plans to vote on in the hope that one will pass.
Beginning on Wednesday, the House of Representatives was expected to begin voting on a range of differing budget blueprints, including three from Republicans who now control both chambers of Congress. These call for deep cuts to social safety net programs.
Whatever emerges from the Republicans' votes has little to no chance of actually becoming law, but it will help Republican efforts to show they can work together and govern.
Representative Steve Scalise, the third-ranking House Republican, responsible for securing votes, said the party was "coming together" to support a budget that meets the needs of both camps.
"The budget's always a visionary document, but it's also a unifying document," Scalise told reporters.
Deficit hawks insist that "sequester" statutory spending caps be maintained and that any additional funding for an off-budget war operations account be offset with alternate savings.
More than 70 House Republicans, however, want the Republican budget to meet or exceed the overall defense request made by Democratic President Barack Obama.
The floor strategy for the budget will give Republicans a chance to vote for two versions of House Budget Committee Chairman Tom Price's plan. One would add $36 billion to an off-budget war account while requiring an effort to find alternate savings. The other would add $38 billion with no offsets.
Both versions propose to cut domestic spending by $5.5 trillion over 10 years, with deep cuts to social programs.
Other budget alternatives will be put up for votes, including three from Democrats and one from the conservative Republican Study Committee that slashes 10-year spending by $7.1 trillion while shifting more money from domestic programs to the core defense budget.
Representative Mo Brooks, a conservative Republican from Alabama, said he would support Price's budget with $38 billion in war funding even without offsets.
"It doesn't do any good to be financially responsible if you're dead, so I'm going to vote for it to protect national security," Brooks said.
d-usa wrote: How much money does the military actually want?
Probably a wee bit less than what the politicians want for their pork barrel projects. I would be a lot happier if they spent as much on taking care of their veterans as they did their current troops.
While flipping through the radio this morning some talk show guy on one of the political XM channels mentioned something about Cruz's mother renouncing her US citizenship, but after she gave birth to him. Anyone know if that is accurate.
Not that it really matters, but I am curious. It does potentially open a line of attack/help better define the line Trump is taking.
(I did a quick Google search but all I saw was that she was a US citizen when she gave birth, nothing about after that.)
Mention earlier documents were can be filed to claim US Citizenship that the mother can filed.
I get that, just interested in knowing if she did so and then renounced her own US citizenship to fully claim Canadian citizenship.
Every time a terrorist dies a Paratrooper gets his wings.
While flipping through the radio this morning some talk show guy on one of the political XM channels mentioned something about Cruz's mother renouncing her US citizenship, but after she gave birth to him. Anyone know if that is accurate.
Not that it really matters, but I am curious. It does potentially open a line of attack/help better define the line Trump is taking.
(I did a quick Google search but all I saw was that she was a US citizen when she gave birth, nothing about after that.)
Mention earlier documents were can be filed to claim US Citizenship that the mother can filed.
I get that, just interested in knowing if she did so and then renounced her own US citizenship to fully claim Canadian citizenship.
Surely for the purposes of Ted Cruz it should only matter what the citizenship of his parents was at the time of birth.
Edit
did not sign documents renouncing her citizenship
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/03/24 23:27:54
Proud Member of the Infidels of OIF/OEF
No longer defending the US Military or US Gov't. Just going to ""**feed into your fears**"" with Duffel Blog Did not fight my way up on top the food chain to become a Vegan...
Warning: Stupid Allergy
Once you pull the pin, Mr. Grenade is no longer your friend
DE 6700
Harlequin 2500
RIP Muhammad Ali.
Jihadin, Scorched Earth 791. Leader of the Pork Eating Crusader. Alpha
Ted Cruz is a little bit country and not a bit rock ‘n’ roll.
In an interview Tuesday on “CBS This Morning,” the Texas senator told his TV hosts that he “grew up listening to classic rock” but that that soon changed.
“My music taste changed on 9/11,” Cruz said.
“I actually intellectually find this very curious, but on 9/11, I didn’t like how rock music responded,” he said. “And country music, collectively, the way they responded, it resonated with me.”
Cruz’s comments came during a lightning round of interviews the morning after he announced his candidacy for president in 2016 in a John Lennon-inspired, “Imagine”-themed speech.
Cruz did not mention any specific country music that resonated with him or which rock artists did not respond well to the terror attacks.
“I had an emotional reaction that said, ‘These are my people,’” Cruz said. “So ever since 2001, I listen to country music.”
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."
]WASHINGTON (Reuters) - With defense and deficit hawks still eyeing each other warily over the federal budget, House Republican leaders predicted on Tuesday that their fractious caucus would close ranks and support a 10-year balanced-budget plan.
Some Republican lawmakers want more military spending, while others focus on keeping the budget deficit under control. To overcome these differences, leaders will give lawmakers a choice of plans to vote on in the hope that one will pass.
Beginning on Wednesday, the House of Representatives was expected to begin voting on a range of differing budget blueprints, including three from Republicans who now control both chambers of Congress. These call for deep cuts to social safety net programs.
Whatever emerges from the Republicans' votes has little to no chance of actually becoming law, but it will help Republican efforts to show they can work together and govern.
Representative Steve Scalise, the third-ranking House Republican, responsible for securing votes, said the party was "coming together" to support a budget that meets the needs of both camps.
"The budget's always a visionary document, but it's also a unifying document," Scalise told reporters.
Deficit hawks insist that "sequester" statutory spending caps be maintained and that any additional funding for an off-budget war operations account be offset with alternate savings.
More than 70 House Republicans, however, want the Republican budget to meet or exceed the overall defense request made by Democratic President Barack Obama.
The floor strategy for the budget will give Republicans a chance to vote for two versions of House Budget Committee Chairman Tom Price's plan. One would add $36 billion to an off-budget war account while requiring an effort to find alternate savings. The other would add $38 billion with no offsets.
Both versions propose to cut domestic spending by $5.5 trillion over 10 years, with deep cuts to social programs.
Other budget alternatives will be put up for votes, including three from Democrats and one from the conservative Republican Study Committee that slashes 10-year spending by $7.1 trillion while shifting more money from domestic programs to the core defense budget.
Representative Mo Brooks, a conservative Republican from Alabama, said he would support Price's budget with $38 billion in war funding even without offsets.
"It doesn't do any good to be financially responsible if you're dead, so I'm going to vote for it to protect national security," Brooks said.
