Author Topic: US Politics Thread |OT| THE DARKEST TIMELINE  (Read 939139 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

TakingBackSunday

  • Banana Grabber
  • Senior Member
I quite dislike Holder as well
püp

brawndolicious

  • Senior Member
Holder is easily one of my least favorite people in the administration as well. The guy is a disgrace.

Someone whose favorite tv show is The Wire couldn't find a Major Colvin type to install as Attorney General?

I don't think that's the image Colorado and Washington are going for. They like the idea of responsible drug use rather than a libertarian paradise.

Eric P

  • I DESERVE the gold. I will GET the gold!
  • Icon
http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/02/21/unlocking-the-conspiracy-mindset/

Quote
It all started last year, when a social scientist named Stephan Lewandowsky, of the University of Western Australia, and two colleagues published a rather provocative paper. It was based on an anonymous Internet survey of the readers of climate blogs.

The title alone will give you a sense of the findings: “NASA Faked the Moon Landings – Therefore (Climate) Science is a Hoax.” The subtitle was “An Anatomy of the Motivated Rejection of Science.”

The strongest finding in the survey was that ideological belief in an unregulated free market tended to be a predictor of someone’s willingness to reject the findings of mainstream climate research. No great surprise there. It was the secondary findings that set off a brouhaha.

Dr. Lewandowsky’s survey results suggested that people who rejected climate science were more likely than other respondents to reject other scientific or official findings and buy into assorted fringe theories: that NASA faked the moon landing, that the Central Intelligence Agency killed Martin Luther King Jr., that the AIDS virus was unleashed by the government, and so forth.

This piece of research appeared in a specialized journal in psychological science, but it did not take long to find its way onto climate skeptics’ blogs, setting off howls of derision.

A theory quickly emerged: that believers in climate science had been the main people taking Dr. Lewandowsky’s survey, but instead of answering honestly, had decided en masse to impersonate climate contrarians, giving the craziest possible answers so as to make the contrarians look like whack jobs.

So, a paper about a tendency among this group to believe in conspiracy theories was met by … a conspiracy theory.
Tonya

Joe Molotov

  • I'm much more humble than you would understand.
  • Administrator
http://www.kxii.com/news/ok/headlines/Bill-protecting-children-dies-in-House-committee-192092611.html

My state. I dunno, man. I didn't know that asking priests not to diddle 16 y/o's was a partisan issue.
©@©™


Eric P

  • I DESERVE the gold. I will GET the gold!
  • Icon
dubstep officially over, will the last bro please turn out the lights?

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/22/opinion/brooks-the-dc-dubstep.html?_r=1&

Tonya

Mandark

  • Icon
He's going to model his columns after dubstep.  The inevitable sentence in the third or fourth paragraph that enrages me will be the equivalent of the drop.  The subsequent amateur-hour sociological explanation for why we shouldn't help poor people more will be the wub-wub-wub.

Human Snorenado

  • Stay out of Malibu, Lebowski
  • Icon
Thanks Eric, I'm forwarding that to every dubstep dj I know.  Trying to get them back on drum and bass, futile but somebody's gotta do it.
yar

Phoenix Dark

  • The only nicca Sade dated
  • Senior Member


incitement

A Waco type situation (in the south) with Obama as president would be a nightmare for this country. There are so many people just waiting for that opportunity to really go nuts.
« Last Edit: February 22, 2013, 10:53:42 PM by Phoenix Dark »
010

Phoenix Dark

  • The only nicca Sade dated
  • Senior Member
Holy shit Brooks got ethered tonight

Quote
Second Update: Brooks does an interview with Ezra Klein, which ends up as a total takedown. Brooks admits Obama does have a plan, but takes refuge in the claim that the Congressional Budget Office didn't score it. Klein informs him that the CBO doesn't score informal negotiating offers, but did score the elements as they appeared in Obama's budget. The best part is when Brooks asserts that a centrist Democrat like Robert Rubin would be proposing something way more moderate than what Obama is offering:

    Brooks: In my ideal world, the Obama administration would do something Clintonesque: They’d govern from the center; they’d have a budget policy that looked a lot more like what Robert Rubin would describe, and if the Republicans rejected that, moderates like me would say that’s awful, the White House really did come out with a centrist plan.

    Klein: But I’ve read Robert Rubin’s tax plan. He wants $1.8 trillion in new revenues.

That is a brutal bluff-calling.
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2013/02/david-brooks-obama-plan-birther.html
:rofl

The interview is basically the political equivalent of When Mark Cuban Met Skip Bayless
010

Great Rumbler

  • Dab on the sinners
  • Global Moderator
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2013/02/ted-cruz-responds-harvard-law-was-full-of-communists.html

Ted Cruz has only been a Senator for all of one month, but he's already the most obnoxious Senator in history.
dog

Phoenix Dark

  • The only nicca Sade dated
  • Senior Member
Quote
Cruz’s spokesman called it “curious” that The New Yorker would cover Cruz’s speech “three years” after he gave it.
You mean like how Cruz is demanding every speech Chuck Hagel ever gave is thoroughly investigated?
010

Great Rumbler

  • Dab on the sinners
  • Global Moderator
"That happened THREE years ago, I was a different person back then! You can't use that against me, because I say so!"

Obama's birth certificate, the school Obama went to in Indonesia, Obama's college records, ect. ect.
dog

Great Rumbler

  • Dab on the sinners
  • Global Moderator
dog

Positive Touch

  • Woo Papa
  • Senior Member
that christian spirit
pcp

Positive Touch

  • Woo Papa
  • Senior Member
.
pcp

Phoenix Dark

  • The only nicca Sade dated
  • Senior Member
So bros any plans for the upcoming recession? I'm stocking up on pretzels and cheese dip. Dat sequestration
010

Great Rumbler

  • Dab on the sinners
  • Global Moderator
I'm stocking up on Steam games to keep me nourished and entertained.
« Last Edit: February 24, 2013, 10:05:00 PM by Great Rumbler »
dog

Barry Egan

  • The neurotic is nailed to the cross of his fiction.
  • Senior Member
I'm chucking all my Hillary 2016 merchandise  :'(

Oblivion

  • Senior Member
Right wing radio host: That goddamn socialist Obama loves the rich too much!  :maf

Quote
"Yes, seven out of the top ten richest people in congress happen to be Democrats. President Barack Obama is the one who got us into this crisis that we're in right now with these budget cuts as you just mentioned statistically and he's sitting there playing this rich vs. poor man card when he's the one that allowed the payroll tax to go up that takes away sixteen bags of groceries for an average working family right now in this country.

“So I look at the stats and say, look at Nancy Pelosi, she didn’t want to get a pay cut. In fact, she wanted a pay increase, even talking about lowering her salary right now is beneath the dignity of her job. So you tell me who actually is a rich person looking out for rich people. Republicans are looking out for average Americans.

Oblivion

  • Senior Member

Joe Molotov

  • I'm much more humble than you would understand.
  • Administrator
Repubicans are all over the map on the Sequester. The Sequester is Obama's fault, he invented it, but we want spending cuts too so we want credit for those, but we don't want all the bad parts to happen, but it's probably not gonna be that bad anyway so we want it to go ahead and happen, but if it is bad, you should definitely blame Obama, who is lying about how bad it's gonna be and he needs to stop campaigning and come back to Washington to negotiate over the Sequester, but we might not want to negotiate anyway because maybe we kinda want it to happen, but we're still mad that Obama invented it and it's all his fault.
©@©™

AdmiralViscen

  • Murdered in the digital realm
  • Senior Member
Repubicans are all over the map on the Sequester. The Sequester is Obama's fault, he invented it, but we want spending cuts too so we want credit for those, but we don't want all the bad parts to happen, but it's probably not gonna be that bad anyway so we want it to go ahead and happen, but if it is bad, you should definitely blame Obama, who is lying about how bad it's gonna be and he needs to stop campaigning and come back to Washington to negotiate over the Sequester, but we might not want to negotiate anyway because maybe we kinda want it to happen, but we're still mad that Obama invented it and it's all his fault.

Don't forget that Obama wants to increase spending like a Socialist

Joe Molotov

  • I'm much more humble than you would understand.
  • Administrator
Except when he's cutting spending because it's wrong kind of spending cuts. THERE'S A SMARTER WAY TO CUT SPENDING! (don't ask us what it is)
©@©™

Phoenix Dark

  • The only nicca Sade dated
  • Senior Member
010

Olivia Wilde Homo

  • Proud Kinkshamer
  • Senior Member
8===D

Great Rumbler

  • Dab on the sinners
  • Global Moderator
Can something please happen to Scalia? I don't mean, like, DIE or anything, but just...go away. Can he be made to go away? I'm not a Constitutional law scholar, but it just seems like the kind of thing that should be possible somehow.
dog

TakingBackSunday

  • Banana Grabber
  • Senior Member
nah pretty sure I want him to fucking die
püp

Steve Contra

  • Space is lonely
  • Senior Member
He would need to impeached.  His quote today was something you expect tohear tossed off at a tea party rally, and not from a supreme court justice.

Also how many times has Clerence Thomas asked questions in court?  Is there somewhere I could find this out?
vin

Great Rumbler

  • Dab on the sinners
  • Global Moderator
Also how many times has Clerence Thomas asked questions in court?  Is there somewhere I could find this out?

He uttered a sentence a few months ago and it was major news. That kind of tells you all you need to know, really.
dog

Mandark

  • Icon
Thomas has basically had a moratorium for years now on asking questions.  Though at least in these politically charged cases the "questions" are mostly thinly-veiled arguments from justices whose votes are already decided.

If I had one wish to inflict on Scalia, it's that he would wake up realizing with perfect clarity that he's much less smart than the bullshit self-aggrandizing image he spent decades cultivating, and bereft of the ability to rationalize it or keep on fooling himself.

Conservatives trying to retcon the civil rights movement should be funny, but it always gets my jimmies super-rustled.

Phoenix Dark

  • The only nicca Sade dated
  • Senior Member
He would need to impeached.  His quote today was something you expect tohear tossed off at a tea party rally, and not from a supreme court justice.

Also how many times has Clerence Thomas asked questions in court?  Is there somewhere I could find this out?

He told a joke in court earlier this year, breaking a years long silence.

Sotomayor was very taken aback by the comment apparently. It's quite the stunning admission I'd expect from Glen Beck, not a supreme justice
010

Great Rumbler

  • Dab on the sinners
  • Global Moderator
For those unaware, this is what Scalia said:

“I don’t think there is anything to be gained by any Senator to vote against continuation of this act,” Scalia said during oral arguments in Shelby County v. Holder. “They are going to lose votes if they do not reenact the Voting Rights Act. Even the name of it is wonderful — the Voting Rights Act. Who is going to vote against that in the future?”

At issue was the constitutionality of Section 5 of the 1965 law, which requires state and local governments with a history of racial discrimination to pre-clear any changes to their voting laws with the Justice Department prior to enacting them.

Congress has renewed the law four times, most recently in 2006 for a period of 25 years. The margin of victory was 99-0 in the Senate and 390-33 in the House.

Scalia attributed the repeated renewal of Section 5 to a “perpetuation of racial entitlement.” He said, “Whenever a society adopts racial entitlements, it is very difficult to get out of them through the normal political processes.”

Quote
“This is not the kind of question you can leave to Congress,” he said.
dog

Mandark

  • Icon
He does understand that this doesn't actually give any race or ethnicity extra rights, it just safeguards a universal benefit of citizenship in areas where it was historically abrogated?

It's not like black people got to bank that unused 2/5ths of a vote and then spent it to elect Obama.

Phoenix Dark

  • The only nicca Sade dated
  • Senior Member
On one hand I can't get too down on the general direction of oral arguments and the tea leaf readings it produces; after all the ACA looked DOA in oral arguments, and most journalists totally ignored the signals Roberts was sending (I remember Brian Beutler seeing Roberts' path months before the ruling). But this time I'm less confident in anything other than a 5-4 curb stomp. Roberts has been fighting the VRA since the Reagan era, he's going to shoot this down.

Unless Kennedy changes course, which I haven't seen any evidence of, it's going to get struck down. This was a pretty fucking frivolous case too.
010

Great Rumbler

  • Dab on the sinners
  • Global Moderator
Is there any good reason why the Voting Rights Act shouldn't just be extended to the entire country?
dog

TakingBackSunday

  • Banana Grabber
  • Senior Member
gubmint co-rupsion, dude
püp

Human Snorenado

  • Stay out of Malibu, Lebowski
  • Icon
Is there any good reason why the Voting Rights Act shouldn't just be extended to the entire country?

If we keep protecting the rights of blacks to vote, they'll keep voting.  It's just like feeding wild animals!

yar

Joe Molotov

  • I'm much more humble than you would understand.
  • Administrator
It's not like the right to vote is in the constitution like guns are, or anything!
©@©™

Brehvolution

  • Until at last, I threw down my enemy and smote his ruin upon the mountainside.
  • Senior Member
Is there any good reason why the Voting Rights Act shouldn't just be extended to the entire country?

If we keep protecting the rights of blacks to vote, they'll keep voting.  It's just like feeding wild animals!

But that same right would be protecting whites in the future, hedging against black, socialist rule.  :babylawd
©ZH

Brehvolution

  • Until at last, I threw down my enemy and smote his ruin upon the mountainside.
  • Senior Member
©ZH

Great Rumbler

  • Dab on the sinners
  • Global Moderator
The history books 100+ years from now are going to give Reagan a beating, I think.
dog

Phoenix Dark

  • The only nicca Sade dated
  • Senior Member

 :larry
010

Great Rumbler

  • Dab on the sinners
  • Global Moderator
Somebody at Bloomberg is getting fired this week.
dog

Joe Molotov

  • I'm much more humble than you would understand.
  • Administrator
lol, minorities :lol
©@©™

Mandark

  • Icon
My favorite part is the dog that's trippin ballz.

Phoenix Dark

  • The only nicca Sade dated
  • Senior Member
Somebody at Bloomberg is getting fired this week.

Shouldn't they fire a black person as well as a white person? #BalancedApproach #equality #tcot #ObamaAmerica
010

Barry Egan

  • The neurotic is nailed to the cross of his fiction.
  • Senior Member
t-minus 1 hour until SEQUESTMAGEDDON.

TakingBackSunday

  • Banana Grabber
  • Senior Member
oh shit I completely forgot about that

so is that shit actually happening?
püp

TakingBackSunday

  • Banana Grabber
  • Senior Member
christ, it is.  fucking congress, assholes.
püp

Great Rumbler

  • Dab on the sinners
  • Global Moderator
oh shit I completely forgot about that

so is that shit actually happening?

Congess already skipped town without a deal being made. Of course, most people are ready to blame Republicans for anything bad resulting from the sequester, so I'm not sure how shooting down the last chance to avoid the sequester really helped them.
dog

Phoenix Dark

  • The only nicca Sade dated
  • Senior Member
RIP economic recovery, hello UK austerity
010

TakingBackSunday

  • Banana Grabber
  • Senior Member
Can't they just, like, come back and kick the can more?

christ just get rid of the sequester, period.  no one fucking likes it.

Although I'm okay with decreased military spending
püp

Barry Egan

  • The neurotic is nailed to the cross of his fiction.
  • Senior Member
Quote
RIP economic recovery, hello UK austerity

if this were the fiscal cliff that would be true, yes. 

The Walrus

  • Coo coo kachoo
  • Senior Member
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/02/sequestration-senate-bills-fail-as-cuts-looms-88256.html?hp=l2

Quote
The chief Democratic option — substituting alternative savings and new revenues to try to buy more time for deficit talks — fared much better, 51 to 49.

Awesome, so it passed, right?

Quote
In fact the true margin was 52 to 48 since Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) switched his vote to “nay” at the end so he is better positioned to reconsider the bill in the future.

Wait, I'm confused, isn't 51 more than 49? And I know damn well 52 is more than 48.

Quote
Nonetheless given the political divide over taxes, Reid won no Republican support. And with three Southern Democrats voting no — Sens. Kay Hagan of North Carolina, Mark Pryor of Arkansas, and Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, he remains well short of the 60 votes needed to clear the chamber.

What if he didn't need 60 votes to clear the chamber?

Reid has thoroughly eclipsed Jimmy Carter for the title of history's greatest monster at this point.

Brehvolution

  • Until at last, I threw down my enemy and smote his ruin upon the mountainside.
  • Senior Member
Obama's reckless spending is now replaced by his reckless cutting. You can have it both ways.
©ZH

Oblivion

  • Senior Member
Quote
RIP economic recovery, hello UK austerity

if this were the fiscal cliff that would be true, yes.

750k jobs lost will still have a pretty profound impact, though.

The Walrus

  • Coo coo kachoo
  • Senior Member
I love how nobody in the media is reporting that Republicans filibustered legislation that would have averted the sequester. At this point, Average Joe must think that the Senate needs 60 votes to pass things by default. This is a pretty good argument against the existence of a liberal media, actually.

Mandark

  • Icon
The Senate bill was pointless either way cause it wouldn't have come to the floor in the House, no?  It was basically a symbolic bill from the Dems so they could show they were trying to solve the problem and point to a benchmark of what their version would look like.  Or did I miss something in negotiations?

Phoenix Dark

  • The only nicca Sade dated
  • Senior Member
The Senate bill was pointless either way cause it wouldn't have come to the floor in the House, no?  It was basically a symbolic bill from the Dems so they could show they were trying to solve the problem and point to a benchmark of what their version would look like.  Or did I miss something in negotiations?

You're correct. It's just a hot potato blame game. Eventually something needs to be done because removing 750k jobs from an already weak economy is a recipe for recession. I heard Obama on the radio rhetorically asking wtf he's supposed to do when GOP leadership won't pass anything he proposes. Why not get McCain, Graham, and some other hawks from the senate and House in a room and come up with $82b in spending cuts and revenue to replace the sequester. It would pass the senate, and then use that to bludgeon Boehner with if he refuses to bring it to the floor.
010