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.
2016/04/17 14:01:27
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
Cruz is obviously just trying to lure people into a false sense of security before he stabs them and sends encrypted messages to the police and newspapers
There's a Trump rally happening tonight about 45 min way from where I live (Poughkeepsie, where I live up in the Hurley-Woodstock area). Should be interesting. There are 3-4 groups going to protest there. Although the thing that most annoys me is that they are closing a bunch of roads for the rally.
Homosexuality is the #1 cause of gay marriage.
kronk wrote: Every pizza is a personal sized pizza if you try hard enough and believe in yourself.
sebster wrote: Yes, indeed. What a terrible piece of cultural imperialism it is for me to say that a country shouldn't murder its own citizens
BaronIveagh wrote: Basically they went from a carrot and stick to a smaller carrot and flanged mace.
2016/04/17 19:06:47
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
It's fair enough to close roads. While annoying, it's something that gets done for any major event like a parade, big sports fixture or village fete, and it's not a special privilege for Trump.
And of course funding it the problem. If congress spent half the time writing laws and getting funding to help this sort of thing they spend with riotous indignation, they wouldn't happen.
Homosexuality is the #1 cause of gay marriage.
kronk wrote: Every pizza is a personal sized pizza if you try hard enough and believe in yourself.
sebster wrote: Yes, indeed. What a terrible piece of cultural imperialism it is for me to say that a country shouldn't murder its own citizens
BaronIveagh wrote: Basically they went from a carrot and stick to a smaller carrot and flanged mace.
2016/04/18 13:30:24
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
And of course funding it the problem. If congress spent half the time writing laws and getting funding to help this sort of thing they spend with riotous indignation, they wouldn't happen.
We already have disclosure requirements for real estate agents, home sellers and contractors/renovation companies to notify residents/owners/buyers that all homes/buildings built prior to 1978 may contain lead based paint and to disclose any information/knowledge of lead based paint in the residence/building. Congress doesn't have the right to enter the 2.000.000+ homes in the US that might have lead paint in them, test all the paint and pay to have it removed/replaced. If you buy or rent a house that was built before 1978 then you've been informed of the risk of lead paint, what you do about it is your personal choice. The federal govt can't forcibly repaint private residences for the sake of the children.
Mundus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur
2016/04/18 13:30:48
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
And of course funding it the problem. If congress spent half the time writing laws and getting funding to help this sort of thing they spend with riotous indignation, they wouldn't happen.
We already have disclosure requirements for real estate agents, home sellers and contractors/renovation companies to notify residents/owners/buyers that all homes/buildings built prior to 1978 may contain lead based paint and to disclose any information/knowledge of lead based paint in the residence/building. Congress doesn't have the right to enter the 2.000.000+ homes in the US that might have lead paint in them, test all the paint and pay to have it removed/replaced. If you buy or rent a house that was built before 1978 then you've been informed of the risk of lead paint, what you do about it is your personal choice. The federal govt can't forcibly repaint private residences for the sake of the children.
You appear to have misunderstood. People apply for grants, the government doesn't force it on them.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/04/18 13:32:57
Homosexuality is the #1 cause of gay marriage.
kronk wrote: Every pizza is a personal sized pizza if you try hard enough and believe in yourself.
sebster wrote: Yes, indeed. What a terrible piece of cultural imperialism it is for me to say that a country shouldn't murder its own citizens
BaronIveagh wrote: Basically they went from a carrot and stick to a smaller carrot and flanged mace.
2016/04/18 19:30:22
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
jmurph wrote: I support the forcible repainting of dangerous houses. We must eliminate all the hostile and seditious colors!
Seriously, though, how is this even an issue?
Pretty easily an issue if you understand the effects that lead poisoning has on people. More importantly and specifically the effects on children. It also disproportionately effects poor people who live in cheap housing where slum lords to not follow the letter of the law.
2016/04/18 20:51:27
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
Prestor Jon wrote: Congress doesn't have the right to enter the 2.000.000+ homes in the US that might have lead paint in them, test all the paint and pay to have it removed/replaced.
If you buy or rent a house that was built before 1978 then you've been informed of the risk of lead paint, what you do about it is your personal choice. The federal govt can't forcibly repaint private residences for the sake of the children.
What if your neighbor refuses to care for the lead in the paint that saturates his walls?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/04/18 20:52:18
Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh.
2016/04/18 21:29:32
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
So Sanders has taken up the gauntlet that Politico threw down in regards to the Clinton campaign taking money/donations disproportionally from the Hillary Victory Fund (supposed to be disbursing $ "down line" to help other Dems) to the Hillary for America fund (her official campaign fund).
Sounds all too fishy to me...but not surprising given her party-darling status.
Spoiler:
The Bernie Sanders campaign issued a blistering statement accusing Hillary Clinton’s campaign of circumventing federal campaign finance regulations.
In an official letter to Debbie Wasserman Schultz, chair of the Democratic National Committee (DNC), Sanders’ campaign attorney Brad C. Deutsch accused the Hillary Clinton campaign of using a joint fundraising committee to skirt campaign finance regulations. As Politico reported this weekend, the Hillary Victory Fund (HVF), which was designed to be a joint fundraising effort between the Clinton campaign and the DNC to help Democrats win down-ticket races, is unloading unusually large amounts of cash to Hillary for America (HFA) — Hillary Clinton’s official campaign account.
Deutsch pointed out that the money disbursed by the Hillary Victory Fund is disproportionately benefiting the Clinton campaign, rather than the Democratic Party as a whole:
The Hillary Victory Fund has reported receiving several individual contributions in amounts as high as $353,400 or more, which is over 130 times the $2,700 limit that applies for contributions to Secretary Clinton’s campaign. Bernie 2016 is particularly concerned that these extremely large-dollar individual contributions have been used by the Hillary Victory Fund to pay for more than $7.8 million in direct mail efforts and over $8.6 million in online advertising, both of which appear to benefit only HFA by generating low-dollar contributions that flow only to HFA, rather than to the DNC or any of the participating state party committees.
The press release from the Sanders campaign also mentions the “unusual arrangement” in how Hillary Clinton’s campaign staffers are reimbursed for time spent helping the Hillary Victory Fund, allowing the joint committee to unload large sums of cash directly into the Clinton campaign’s coffers:
The joint committee has paid the Clinton campaign committee $2.6 million ostensibly to “reimburse” the Clinton presidential campaign staff for time spent running the joint committee. The unusual arrangement, Deutsch said, “raises equally serious concerns that joint committee funds, which are meant to be allocated proportionally among the participating committees, are being used to impermissibly subsidize HFA through an over-reimbursement for campaign staffers and resources.”
On the Hillary Victory Fund’s official FEC report, the joint fundraising committee disbursed $9.5 million in funds to HFA, while only allocating just over $2 million for the DNC and even less money for state Democratic parties.
The Sanders campaign called this a “serious apparent violation” of existing campaign finance laws, which limit the maximum amount an individual can contribute to $2,700 for each candidate in a campaign cycle. Because the Hillary Victory Fund is classified as a joint fundraising committee rather than a campaign, it can solicit contributions of up to a third of a million dollars from one individual, as Walmart heir Alice Walton contributed.
The $2,700 individual limit was seen as a trying obstacle for the Clinton campaign in early 2016, as the LA Times reported in February that the former Secretary of State was already panicking over its well of maximum donors drying out with nearly half a year to go before the nominating contest was over.
As of this writing, the DNC has yet to respond to the Sanders campaign’s inquiry.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/04/18 21:32:31
I destroy my enemies when I make them my friends.
Three!! Three successful trades! Ah ah ah!
2016/04/18 21:36:06
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
Prestor Jon wrote: Congress doesn't have the right to enter the 2.000.000+ homes in the US that might have lead paint in them, test all the paint and pay to have it removed/replaced.
I disagree. Interstate commerce.
Not many houses built pre 1978 are crossing state lines to be sold.
Every time a terrorist dies a Paratrooper gets his wings.
2016/04/18 21:40:07
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
The point it moot as the government isn't forcing people to do anything. People with lead-based paint in their houses apply for grants to deal with it (or at least that's my general understanding).
Homosexuality is the #1 cause of gay marriage.
kronk wrote: Every pizza is a personal sized pizza if you try hard enough and believe in yourself.
sebster wrote: Yes, indeed. What a terrible piece of cultural imperialism it is for me to say that a country shouldn't murder its own citizens
BaronIveagh wrote: Basically they went from a carrot and stick to a smaller carrot and flanged mace.
2016/04/18 22:01:32
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
And of course funding it the problem. If congress spent half the time writing laws and getting funding to help this sort of thing they spend with riotous indignation, they wouldn't happen.
We already have disclosure requirements for real estate agents, home sellers and contractors/renovation companies to notify residents/owners/buyers that all homes/buildings built prior to 1978 may contain lead based paint and to disclose any information/knowledge of lead based paint in the residence/building. Congress doesn't have the right to enter the 2.000.000+ homes in the US that might have lead paint in them, test all the paint and pay to have it removed/replaced. If you buy or rent a house that was built before 1978 then you've been informed of the risk of lead paint, what you do about it is your personal choice. The federal govt can't forcibly repaint private residences for the sake of the children.
You appear to have misunderstood. People apply for grants, the government doesn't force it on them.
Yes I know. You were advocating for congress to do more but there isn't anything congress can do to get people to repaint their homes. Paint used to be lead based, old houses have old paint, replacing the old lead paint with new lead free paint removes the lead poisoning hazard but it's an optional change that has to originate with the home owner. It's not a problem that requires congress to act.
Prestor Jon wrote: Congress doesn't have the right to enter the 2.000.000+ homes in the US that might have lead paint in them, test all the paint and pay to have it removed/replaced.
If you buy or rent a house that was built before 1978 then you've been informed of the risk of lead paint, what you do about it is your personal choice. The federal govt can't forcibly repaint private residences for the sake of the children.
What if your neighbor refuses to care for the lead in the paint that saturates his walls?
My neighbor can paint the house my neighbor owns however my neighbor wants its not my problem or my house.
The house was already built and painted the commerce was already conducted. Interstate commerce doesn't apply since the painting was already done, nobody can currently paint the interior or exterior of homes with lead paint. Congress can't pass post facto laws. You can buy a house with lead paint or not buy a house with lead paint, you can choose to replace the paint or not. It's not a federal issue and does not require federal action.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Co'tor Shas wrote: The point it moot as the government isn't forcing people to do anything. People with lead-based paint in their houses apply for grants to deal with it (or at least that's my general understanding).
You said you wanted congress to write new laws to deal with old houses that have lead based paint and to increase funding for lead paint remediation. What new federal laws do you think we need to get more homeowners to decide to repaint their old homes?
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/04/18 22:08:58
Mundus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur
2016/04/18 22:25:24
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
I was more thinking about funding, after-all, that was a pretty big point in the video, that the situation is solvable, it just requires adiquite funding, which it does not receive. Did you not watch the video?
Homosexuality is the #1 cause of gay marriage.
kronk wrote: Every pizza is a personal sized pizza if you try hard enough and believe in yourself.
sebster wrote: Yes, indeed. What a terrible piece of cultural imperialism it is for me to say that a country shouldn't murder its own citizens
BaronIveagh wrote: Basically they went from a carrot and stick to a smaller carrot and flanged mace.
2016/04/18 22:34:46
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
I don't have time to watch the video, but i am under the impression that lead paint is safe when it is inert, ie, sitting dry on the wall. It's only a hazard if you mess with it, start to sand it or you have a house fire for example. Does the video debunk this? Just living in a house with lead paint is harmful?
We were once so close to heaven, St. Peter came out and gave us medals; declaring us "The nicest of the damned".
“Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'”
2016/04/18 22:37:13
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
My neighbor can paint the house my neighbor owns however my neighbor wants its not my problem or my house.
I disagree, even more so when it comes to the safety of the public and children. Congress even disagreed with your argument, since you cannot use lead paint to paint your house anymore. So really your neighbor cannot paint his house the way he wants to paint his house because it is our problem.
The issue now is that all these houses still have lead paint in them and it is still effecting people, even though we have tried to get rid of it. We still have lead pipes in the ground, even though we know we shouldn't.
This is a very fixable situation, what it comes down to is people arguing "freedom" and "cost". In reality, you do not have the "freedom" to harm another human being directly or indirectly. We also have the money to do this so "cost" is really not an issue.
feeder wrote: I don't have time to watch the video, but i am under the impression that lead paint is safe when it is inert, ie, sitting dry on the wall. It's only a hazard if you mess with it, start to sand it or you have a house fire for example. Does the video debunk this? Just living in a house with lead paint is harmful?
Your impression is wrong then. Lead paint is dangerous at all times because paint can chip and turn in to dust and be inhaled. Just because you are not actively messing with the paint on your walls does not mean it is not breaking down and entering the air around you.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/04/18 22:38:40
2016/04/18 22:37:15
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
feeder wrote: I don't have time to watch the video, but i am under the impression that lead paint is safe when it is inert, ie, sitting dry on the wall. It's only a hazard if you mess with it, start to sand it or you have a house fire for example. Does the video debunk this? Just living in a house with lead paint is harmful?
Your impression is wrong then. Lead paint is dangerous at all times because paint can chip and turn in to dust and be inhaled. Just because you are not actively messing with the paint on your walls does not mean it is not breaking down and entering the air around you.
Well that makes sense. Living in a house with lead paint for long term isn't a great idea then.
We were once so close to heaven, St. Peter came out and gave us medals; declaring us "The nicest of the damned".
“Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'”
2016/04/18 23:13:18
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
Ehh.... going back to the Gold Standard is fairly normal rhetoric for that side, and is just as dumb coming from Cruz as it is the others.
He said "ideally" back by gold standard.
He's driving the point to encourage more stable monetary policies. The funny thing is... The President doesn't "set" that policy's. Only the Feds and hypothetically something from Congress.
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
2016/04/18 23:45:42
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
whembly wrote: He's driving the point to encourage more stable monetary policies.
When you are done with those rose colored glasses you should share them. I'm also not sure Cruz has an honest concept of what actual stable monetary policies are so I doubt he can make a point about them. Then again he is an American Hero so maybe that gives him magical insight.
Amidst the mists and coldest frosts he thrusts his fists against the posts and still insists he sees the ghosts.
2016/04/18 23:51:40
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
whembly wrote: He's driving the point to encourage more stable monetary policies.
When you are done with those rose colored glasses you should share them. I'm also not sure Cruz has an honest concept of what actual stable monetary policies are so I doubt he can make a point about them. Then again he is an American Hero so maybe that gives him magical insight.
My glasses are fine thankyhouverymuch!!
Cruz is a much better politician than the blowhard Trump, corrupt Clinton and Marxist-wannabe Sanders.
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
2016/04/18 23:55:29
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
This makes me think you don't actually know anything about Marx or Sanders. Hell, makes me think you know almost nothing about socialism when you conflate it with Marxism. On the other hand it does make you useful to Republican strategists trying to get a vote, so you have that going for you.
Amidst the mists and coldest frosts he thrusts his fists against the posts and still insists he sees the ghosts.
