Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

User information for Arthur Dent

Real Name Arthur Dent   
Search for:
 
Sort results:   Ascending Descending
Limit results:
 
 
 
Nickname Wowbagger_TIP
Email Concealed by request - Send Mail
ICQ None given.
Description
Homepage http://
Signed On Apr 3, 2001, 22:20
Total Comments 3843 (Veteran)
User ID 9540
 
User comment history
< Newer [ 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 ] Older >


News Comments > Out of the Blue
199. Re: Out of the Blue Nov 8, 2012, 17:02 Wowbagger_TIP
 
RollinThundr wrote on Nov 8, 2012, 15:03:
Beamer wrote on Nov 8, 2012, 13:07:
But I think the only places we likely very much disagree are in that:
1) Abortion is a choice we should not make for people
2) Gays are people, too, and deserve equal rights because why the hell not?
3) Our tax policy has destroyed the middle class and needs to be reversed
4) Women that enjoy sex are not sluts

1.agreed
2. agreed just don't throw your life choice in my face every 5 mins
Why not? Others feel free to throw their religion or other beliefs in our face constantly, everywhere. Why the double standard for gay folks?

RollinThundr wrote on Nov 8, 2012, 15:03:
3. along with excessive spending
If you're gonna spend, you gotta tax, but the middle has seen their incomes stagnant for so long you have to admit that that's the wrong place to further tax. The incomes at the top have skyrocketed, but for some reason we cap the amount we tax for them. Maybe they should face the same rate as the rest of us, and maybe we should have actually paid for those wars if we thought they were so damn important.

RollinThundr wrote on Nov 8, 2012, 15:03:
4. They can enjoy sex all they want, on their own dime, if they're being insured through a religious entity that doesn't condone paying for it, tough luck.
As long as they're going to keep subsidizing Viagra and other non-essential stuff for guys, then they sure as hell better do it for women too.

 
Avatar 9540
 
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts." -- Bertrand Russell (I think...)
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Morning Legal Briefs
5. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Nov 8, 2012, 16:53 Wowbagger_TIP
 
Cutter wrote on Nov 8, 2012, 12:39:
When you surrender your rights by being a criminal you don't have anymore say. Particularly as it applies to violent crimes like rape, murder, etc. Honestly those guys should consider themselves lucky because if it were up to me they'd be looking at a death sentence.
I think once you serve your time, you should have your rights reinstated. If you commit a particularly egregious crime, you may be imprisoned for a very long time or even permanently. But if you do eventually get out, I think that you've had your punishment as the law deemed appropriate and you shouldn't be further punished.

Also, given how often the legal system and the people in it screw up and send the wrong person to prison or even death row, I just can't get behind the death penalty anymore. Life imprisonment is both cheaper and less likely to kill an innocent person.
 
Avatar 9540
 
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts." -- Bertrand Russell (I think...)
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Morning Legal Briefs
2. Re: More Big Picture Details Nov 8, 2012, 12:37 Wowbagger_TIP
 
HorrorScope wrote on Nov 8, 2012, 11:48:
"The two plaintiffs argued that forcing them to expose their online identities would violate their First Amendment right to speak anonymously."

Honestly are forefathers were aliens, they were even smart enough to foresee anonymous speakers.

Nothing like putting yet another prop on a ballot, it wins and then it gets challenged. IMO that should have been sorted out prior to going to the voters. Then once voted, it's stone. Less perhaps the supreme court.

California needs to rein in its prop system. I'd start by requiring that all props include some mechanism to pay for themselves. Then that they pass at least some kind of Constitutional sniff test, whether that's a panel of Constitutional lawyers or whatever. They waste too much money on bullshit props that just get struck down later, and pass too many that they can't, or at least don't, pay for.
 
Avatar 9540
 
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts." -- Bertrand Russell (I think...)
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Diablo III Expansion Plans; StarCraft: Heart of the Swarm Early Next Year
39. Re: Diablo III Expansion Plans; StarCraft: Heart of the Swarm Early Next Year Nov 8, 2012, 12:30 Wowbagger_TIP
 
dj LiTh wrote on Nov 8, 2012, 11:52:
Wowbagger_TIP wrote on Nov 8, 2012, 02:13:
I enjoyed SC2 single-player. I'm really not into the multi on it though. I don't like the rushed style of play. I may pick up HotS if the reviews are good for the SP aspect.

Oh, btw, I have a couple of PoE beta keys if anyone wants one.

Wowbagger_TIP if you still have PoE key's i'd really really love one!
You don't seem to have anon email enabled here. Shoot me a message from whatever email and I'll send you a key.
 
Avatar 9540
 
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts." -- Bertrand Russell (I think...)
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Out of the Blue
191. Re: Out of the Blue Nov 8, 2012, 12:27 Wowbagger_TIP
 
RollinThundr wrote on Nov 8, 2012, 12:22:

I don't disagree something needs to be done about healthcare, but I just don't think Obamacare is it. I'm from Ma. I've seen what Mittenscare is costing first hand because I'm dealing with it personally. It isn't pretty

What problems have you seen with the MA program? I'm curious because I am not overly fond of Obamacare either, but think that it's still an improvement over what we've had up until now. There's definitely still a lot of room for improvement though.
 
Avatar 9540
 
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts." -- Bertrand Russell (I think...)
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Diablo III Expansion Plans; StarCraft: Heart of the Swarm Early Next Year
19. Re: Diablo III Expansion Plans; StarCraft: Heart of the Swarm Early Next Year Nov 8, 2012, 03:07 Wowbagger_TIP
 
Prez wrote on Nov 8, 2012, 02:24:
Wowbagger_TIP wrote on Nov 8, 2012, 02:13:
I enjoyed SC2 single-player. I'm really not into the multi on it though. I don't like the rushed style of play. I may pick up HotS if the reviews are good for the SP aspect.

Oh, btw, I have a couple of PoE beta keys if anyone wants one.

Being an action RPG nut I so want to try this game despite the fact that I generally don't like playing betas (or free-to-play games). I'll take one if you still have it.

Just emailed you a key. Just let me know if you have any trouble with it.
 
Avatar 9540
 
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts." -- Bertrand Russell (I think...)
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Diablo III Expansion Plans; StarCraft: Heart of the Swarm Early Next Year
14. Re: Diablo III Expansion Plans; StarCraft: Heart of the Swarm Early Next Year Nov 8, 2012, 02:13 Wowbagger_TIP
 
I enjoyed SC2 single-player. I'm really not into the multi on it though. I don't like the rushed style of play. I may pick up HotS if the reviews are good for the SP aspect.

Oh, btw, I have a couple of PoE beta keys if anyone wants one.
 
Avatar 9540
 
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts." -- Bertrand Russell (I think...)
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Out of the Blue
54. Re: Fast-food Logos Imprinted on Children's Brains Nov 7, 2012, 18:12 Wowbagger_TIP
 
Atomic wrote on Nov 7, 2012, 17:16:
Wowbagger_TIP wrote on Nov 7, 2012, 15:58:
They weren't going to get people covered, they weren't going to deal with the problem of pre-existing conditions. They had no solutions.

Atomic wrote on Nov 7, 2012, 17:05:
None that you heard through traditional media anyway. There were actually several, but most are free market based, so immediately rejected by big government proponents.

- Medical Liability Reform "enact common-sense medical liability reforms to lower costs, rein in junk lawsuits and curb defensive medicine"
- Purchase Health Insurance Across State Lines "spurs competition in the market"
- Expand Health Savings Accounts (HSA's)
- Ensure Access for Patients with Pre-Existing Conditions "make it illegal for an insurance company to deny coverage to someone with prior coverage on the basis of a pre-existing condition, eliminate annual and lifetime spending caps, and prevent insurers from dropping your coverage just because you get sick"

Wowbagger_TIP wrote on Nov 7, 2012, 17:08:
Right, and how were they going to get that last one through? That's what the mandate was for, which was a Republican idea from the 90s. Also, how were they going to reconcile state laws to allow for purchasing across state lines? They never really addressed that either. So these were just sort of ideas thrown out, but without a real explanation of how they could actually be implemented.

My point being you just said none and that is clearly more than none. Yes, the details never got completely worked out, but because they were never allowed to be discussed.
I said none that actually addressed the major problems with the system. Just saying that you're going to cover pre-existing conditions doesn't cut it. Romney couldn't even say that much (or at least his campaign corrected him when he did). Nobody was stopping the Republicans from discussing the issue or figuring out how they planned to actually do these things, but they never offered an actual plan. Brainstorming is not a plan.
 
Avatar 9540
 
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts." -- Bertrand Russell (I think...)
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Out of the Blue
45. Re: Fast-food Logos Imprinted on Children's Brains Nov 7, 2012, 17:08 Wowbagger_TIP
 
Atomic wrote on Nov 7, 2012, 17:05:
Wowbagger_TIP wrote on Nov 7, 2012, 15:58:
They weren't going to get people covered, they weren't going to deal with the problem of pre-existing conditions. They had no solutions.

None that you heard through traditional media anyway. There were actually several, but most are free market based, so immediately rejected by big government proponents.

- Medical Liability Reform "enact common-sense medical liability reforms to lower costs, rein in junk lawsuits and curb defensive medicine"
- Purchase Health Insurance Across State Lines "spurs competition in the market"
- Expand Health Savings Accounts (HSA's)
- Ensure Access for Patients with Pre-Existing Conditions "make it illegal for an insurance company to deny coverage to someone with prior coverage on the basis of a pre-existing condition, eliminate annual and lifetime spending caps, and prevent insurers from dropping your coverage just because you get sick"

Right, and how were they going to get that last one through? That's what the mandate was for, which was a Republican idea from the 90s. Also, how were they going to reconcile state laws to allow for purchasing across state lines? They never really addressed that either. So these were just sort of ideas thrown out, but without a real explanation of how they could actually be implemented.
 
Avatar 9540
 
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts." -- Bertrand Russell (I think...)
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Out of the Blue
43. Re: Out of the Blue Nov 7, 2012, 16:42 Wowbagger_TIP
 
John wrote on Nov 7, 2012, 16:04:
Wowbagger_TIP wrote on Nov 7, 2012, 15:54:
And yet again, no they didn't. With Republicans filibustering everything in sight, and the Dems without a filibuster-proof majority, they really did not have control.
Let me rephrase that, they had the majority in 2008. The way the country is split nowadays you can't expect either side to get complete control.
Mr. Tact already addressed this point, so I'll just say I agree with him.

John wrote on Nov 7, 2012, 16:04:
Wowbagger_TIP wrote on Nov 7, 2012, 15:58:
Too centrist to be very good, unfortunately, but it's still a hell of the lot better than continuing our completely broken and stupidly expensive system the way we have been.
And it's still getting more expensive all the time..

Well, two things about that. First, most of the health care reform hasn't gone into effect yet, and won't until 2014. Second, it's certainly not a total solution, and they are still experimenting with ways to reduce the costs further. That's designed into the law. It should bring costs down, or at least slow the growth significantly, but getting anything else passed was going to be next to impossible.

That said, I am certainly open to other ideas, but other than going full single-payer, I haven't seen any that actually address the major problems with the current system.
 
Avatar 9540
 
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts." -- Bertrand Russell (I think...)
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Out of the Blue
184. Re: Out of the Blue Nov 7, 2012, 16:37 Wowbagger_TIP
 
RollinThundr wrote on Nov 7, 2012, 16:32:
Wowbagger_TIP wrote on Nov 7, 2012, 16:06:
RollinThundr wrote on Nov 7, 2012, 15:57:
I guess being against wealth redistribution, ie stealing to give to those who don't earn it, is a keyword for intolerance these days. Keep living in libtard disney world, it's worked out great for us the last 4 years. When we're 20 trillion in debt and at 15%+ unemployment in 4 years don't say I told ya so.
Lol, I love how you continually fail to respond to the arguments in the posts you reply to, but always try to change the subject. Then that gets rebutted, and you change the subject again. Some people are just incapable of dealing with reality.

What arguments are those? I've consistantly said the same thing in nearly every post when it comes to politics. Stop spending so much money. And all I get back is "you're a racist/anti gay/anti women, socialism is excellent" simply because I believe the economy and the out of control spending that again BOTH parties partake should be made the focal point rather than gay marriage and insurance companies being made to be prophylactic vending machines just because of a few sex crazed idiots like Sandra Fluke don't want to cover it themselves.

Talk about strawman. Consistantly anytime you bring up reducing government spending liberals won't even discuss it, they simply refuse because for whatever reason reducing spending to them is like a cross to a vampire.

This is exactly what I'm talking about. You keep making statements like that. "Liberals won't even discuss it". Yet the democrats were offering 3 or 4 to 1 cuts to revenues and the GOP slapped them away because they couldn't have 100% of what they wanted, which was 0 revenues.

But you'll probably just ignore that again and go on about something else now, or you'll twist what I'm saying and reply to your own made-up argument like you did earlier.
 
Avatar 9540
 
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts." -- Bertrand Russell (I think...)
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Out of the Blue
183. Re: Out of the Blue Nov 7, 2012, 16:34 Wowbagger_TIP
 
Beamer wrote on Nov 7, 2012, 16:25:
Wowbagger_TIP wrote on Nov 7, 2012, 16:06:
RollinThundr wrote on Nov 7, 2012, 15:57:
I guess being against wealth redistribution, ie stealing to give to those who don't earn it, is a keyword for intolerance these days. Keep living in libtard disney world, it's worked out great for us the last 4 years. When we're 20 trillion in debt and at 15%+ unemployment in 4 years don't say I told ya so.
Lol, I love how you continually fail to respond to the arguments in the posts you reply to, but always try to change the subject. Then that gets rebutted, and you change the subject again. Some people are just incapable of dealing with reality.

Essentially.
He also calls redistribution of wealth stealing. He fails to acknowledge that our taxation is a redistribution of wealth. I already posted a graph that showed that the top 1% (I hate that term, due to Occupy Wall Street lunacy) had under 20% of the wealth in the mid 70s and now has about 40%.

What is that if not a redistribution of the wealth? In order for the 1% to gain a higher percentage, other portions had to lose a percentage. And, given that the lower 40% or 50% had nothing to give, that all came from the middle class.

Redistribution of the wealth was fine to him when it went to the few, but when it goes to the many it's a bad thing. Simple fact: wealth has been redistributed in this country twice already. FDR gave it to the middle class, and we went from times like The Jungle to times like the 50s and 60s. Reagan gave it back to the wealthy. I'm not saying that we'll go back to the Jungle, or that it's class warfare, or any of those things.
I'm just saying our economy was strongest and growing quickest when the ultra rich weren't controlling all of the wealth, more people had money to spend, and there was less incentive to not pay your employees as well.

I agree with that. There seems to be a snowball effect as well. They will continually grow wealthier, not only because their current wealth works for them, but also because they have a much greater influence on government policy than middle class people do. You have to get millions of middle class folks on the same page to have any effect. But you've got guys like Sheldon Adelson, George Soros, or the Koch brothers, who can have a major effect for or against your campaign, all on their own. So it's in the interests of politicians to stay on their good side and keep things working in their favor.
 
Avatar 9540
 
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts." -- Bertrand Russell (I think...)
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Out of the Blue
179. Re: Out of the Blue Nov 7, 2012, 16:06 Wowbagger_TIP
 
RollinThundr wrote on Nov 7, 2012, 15:57:
I guess being against wealth redistribution, ie stealing to give to those who don't earn it, is a keyword for intolerance these days. Keep living in libtard disney world, it's worked out great for us the last 4 years. When we're 20 trillion in debt and at 15%+ unemployment in 4 years don't say I told ya so.
Lol, I love how you continually fail to respond to the arguments in the posts you reply to, but always try to change the subject. Then that gets rebutted, and you change the subject again. Some people are just incapable of dealing with reality.
 
Avatar 9540
 
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts." -- Bertrand Russell (I think...)
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Out of the Blue
39. Re: Out of the Blue Nov 7, 2012, 16:02 Wowbagger_TIP
 
jacobvandy wrote on Nov 7, 2012, 13:48:
PHJF wrote on Nov 7, 2012, 10:20:
I don't think the Feds are going to do anything about it. Nobody wants to start another States Rights battle, especially one so large as this would generate. The usual federal-level war on drugs will continue but we aren't going to see anything like a Volstead Act enforcement policy arise in either state.

They already have... There's been loads of federales coming into California over the past few years to shut down marijuana dispensaries, which are perfectly legal by the state's laws, under orders from ol' Barry. And that's just for MEDICAL usage (technically, we all know people get it for "chronic back pain," etc.), who knows what's going to happen in states where it's been approved for recreational use and any adult over 21 can buy it at the corner liquor store? It's good that CO and WA have done this though, so that we can find out. Hopefully in a few more years, after we shed a bunch more old codgers who are still brainwashed by Reefer Madness, we can at least decriminalize it on the federal level. It's mind-boggling how far they've gone with the propaganda over the past century to make people think smoking weed is like sucking the devil's D, to the point where the majority of politicians and/or their constituents are blind to the fact that it would be a massive boon to economies everywhere, on every level.

And this is coming from a guy who never has and probably never will smoke weed... It's just common sense.

As long as it's illegal under Federal law, the DOJ is going to pursue it. All they can do is shift priorities around, but they're still going to have to pursue it. It's kind of the same thing Obama did with immigration. He shifted the priorities around, to focusing on deporting criminals rather than people with jobs or students, but he's still deporting a lot of people. We really need the federal laws to get fixed. I think Obama is going to be pushing hard for immigration reform this term. I'd be surprised to see drug law reform as a priority though.
 
Avatar 9540
 
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts." -- Bertrand Russell (I think...)
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Out of the Blue
38. Re: Fast-food Logos Imprinted on Children's Brains Nov 7, 2012, 15:58 Wowbagger_TIP
 
Atomic wrote on Nov 7, 2012, 15:42:
Cutter wrote on Nov 7, 2012, 15:10:
Yes, because the GOP wouldn't permit anything to get done.

It's not like Obama or the democrats are moving to the middle to meet them either, though. They can only be expected to move so far. If they move all the way, it's not compromise, it's capitulation.

Obamacare is the shining example of his "my way or the highway" approach to policy. Wouldn't even stop to let it be read before it was voted on, for goodness sake.

Democrats did move to the right, offering up something like 3 or 4 to 1 cuts to revenues. GOP wouldn't even consider it unless they agreed to 0 revenue increase. THAT is "my way or the highway".

Obamacare is basically the Republican plan from the 90s. It's certainly centrist. Too centrist to be very good, unfortunately, but it's still a hell of the lot better than continuing our completely broken and stupidly expensive system the way we have been. Republicans weren't offering any better ideas. They weren't going to get people covered, they weren't going to deal with the problem of pre-existing conditions. They had no solutions.
 
Avatar 9540
 
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts." -- Bertrand Russell (I think...)
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Out of the Blue
37. Re: Out of the Blue Nov 7, 2012, 15:54 Wowbagger_TIP
 
John wrote on Nov 7, 2012, 15:17:
Cutter wrote on Nov 7, 2012, 15:10:
Had the Democrats taken control of both houses they'd have everything fixed inside of 4 years. The economy always and only works under the democrats and because of their policies.
The Democrats had control of both houses and Presidency in 2008.

And yet again, no they didn't. With Republicans filibustering everything in sight, and the Dems without a filibuster-proof majority, they really did not have control.
 
Avatar 9540
 
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts." -- Bertrand Russell (I think...)
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Out of the Blue
177. Re: Out of the Blue Nov 7, 2012, 15:48 Wowbagger_TIP
 
RollinThundr wrote on Nov 7, 2012, 13:54:
Wowbagger_TIP wrote on Nov 7, 2012, 12:06:
PHJF wrote on Nov 7, 2012, 11:55:
There are already millions of disenfranchised Americans... they're called people with criminal convictions.

There definitely should be higher standards for voters. My grandmother, for instance, is racist. She wouldn't vote for Obama on the sole fact of his being black. She should absolutely, positively, NOT be allowed to vote. In this day and age every citizen pretty much has access to tools to educate themselves and stay modestly informed... but a startling amount choose not to. I don't want uninformed bigots to have any say in a national election.

I agree that it sucks that uninformed and/or racist/bigoted folks can vote based only on their ignorance and hatred, but there's no good way to screen voters, so we just have to keep trying to educate more people and hope that each generation is at least a little more tolerant and a little less ignorant than the last. I think we're making progress on the tolerance part. Not sure about the ignorance, as there's plenty of that on both sides. I can't even talk to most co-workers, teammates, etc about politics, because they tend to have nothing more than gut reactions and crap they heard on TV/radio to go by.

Yep it totally sucks that voting isn't totally restricted to socialists and those that share the view point that in order to prosper again, America needs to become another Europe.

Keep beating that straw man. That's not remotely what I said.


RollinThundr wrote on Nov 7, 2012, 13:54:
It's hilarious that for a party that prattles on about tolerance so much, libs tend to not tolerate anyone that doesn't share their views, instead falling on the old playbook calling them bigots and racist for not buying into wealth redistribution so that those who make bad life choices can still prosper. It's ok Obama will level the playing field.

Ahh yes, the old "Why can't you be tolerant of my intolerance!?" argument. It's hilarious when people trot this out as a defense of their bigotry.
 
Avatar 9540
 
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts." -- Bertrand Russell (I think...)
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Out of the Blue
167. Re: Out of the Blue Nov 7, 2012, 13:45 Wowbagger_TIP
 
PHJF wrote on Nov 7, 2012, 13:38:
Wish you guys were sensible enough to realize this whole "us vs them" shit propagated by hardline party politics isn't helping anyone. People are always drawing and defending borders between each other; it must be a relic of caveman culture. Your party sucks, your football team sucks, Mexico sucks, Muslims suck, console gamers suck (well I guess I'm guilty there), on and on and on. I think we need a good old-fashioned drug-fueled orgy. Peace love save the trees and shit.

Actually I don't see too many team players here. Not entirely sure about RollinThundr, but I think he just gerrymanders his arguments in such a way as to avoid the inclusion of any facts. Most are arguing issues, and given enough time and attention span, these things could probably be worked out. Hopefully Congress can actually start doing something useful now, but given Boehner's recent statements, I don't hold out much hope.
 
Avatar 9540
 
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts." -- Bertrand Russell (I think...)
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Out of the Blue
163. Re: Out of the Blue Nov 7, 2012, 13:18 Wowbagger_TIP
 
Prez wrote on Nov 7, 2012, 12:12:
Wowbagger_TIP wrote on Nov 7, 2012, 11:44:
Prez wrote on Nov 7, 2012, 09:21:
Yeah I agree with that. What bothered me most about his first term is what he *didn't* get passed - no federal budget in 4 years ( 2 of them while Democrats contolled the Congress and virtually any budget he wanted would have passed with ease)

Please please please stop repeating this nonsense about Democrats controlling Congress for 2 years. It didn't happen.

This is a well-established misinformation campaign that started in the blogospere and has propagated for 2 years now. When both the house and Senate have majority leaders from the same party (as the Democrats did with Harry Reid in the Senate and Nancy Pelosi in the House that party is said to have control of Congress. It has been that way forever. The difference is that they were not "filibuster-proof" (having the necessary 66 seats to break filibuster) , which makes things take longer but the Democrats unequivocally still had control. With the number of moderate Republicans in Congress at the time virtually anything that the President wanted would have passed without issue. If you'll recall, the hold-up on the Health Care vote was because Pelosi did have enough Democrat support for the bill because of their evangelical views. A simple re-write of the section in question and the rest was academic.

I find it pointless that every discussion devolves into semantics, but this has to be addressed. THE DEMOCRATS HAD CONTROL OF CONGRESS THROUGH SIMPLE MAJORITY. They simply lacked the precious 2/3rd's majority. If everyone on the majority side is of a like mind than there is nothing the minority party can do to stop legislation from passing, only delay it via filibuster.

The semantics here are on your part, saying "2 of them while Democrats contolled the Congress and virtually any budget he wanted would have passed with ease". How was he going to pass anything, let alone "with ease", when anything they do can be filibustered? The Republicans were using the filibuster three times as often as we've ever seen before in our history. They openly declared that they weren't going to work with him and that they were going to ensure that his policies failed. There was no secret here. Republicans were fighting him on everything.

How exactly can you say that they had control, let alone the kind of control to pass "virtually any budget he wanted"?
 
Avatar 9540
 
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts." -- Bertrand Russell (I think...)
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Out of the Blue
157. Re: Out of the Blue Nov 7, 2012, 12:06 Wowbagger_TIP
 
PHJF wrote on Nov 7, 2012, 11:55:
There are already millions of disenfranchised Americans... they're called people with criminal convictions.

There definitely should be higher standards for voters. My grandmother, for instance, is racist. She wouldn't vote for Obama on the sole fact of his being black. She should absolutely, positively, NOT be allowed to vote. In this day and age every citizen pretty much has access to tools to educate themselves and stay modestly informed... but a startling amount choose not to. I don't want uninformed bigots to have any say in a national election.

I agree that it sucks that uninformed and/or racist/bigoted folks can vote based only on their ignorance and hatred, but there's no good way to screen voters, so we just have to keep trying to educate more people and hope that each generation is at least a little more tolerant and a little less ignorant than the last. I think we're making progress on the tolerance part. Not sure about the ignorance, as there's plenty of that on both sides. I can't even talk to most co-workers, teammates, etc about politics, because they tend to have nothing more than gut reactions and crap they heard on TV/radio to go by.
 
Avatar 9540
 
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts." -- Bertrand Russell (I think...)
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
3843 Comments. 193 pages. Viewing page 23.
< Newer [ 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 ] Older >


footer

Blue's News logo