U.S. Politics

Page 409 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Jul 4, 2009
340
0
0
VeloCity said:
But conservatives don't like an activist SC! Oh wait, yes, they do, if it means being able to crack down on minority voting rights. Easier to just prevent them from voting than, say, refashioning your policies and ideology to be more attractive to minority voters.
Well I try to stay out of the SC rulings, But I think I can quote you saying a couple of amendments that were out dated and need to be removed in wake of the current times not when they were written. Let it go back to congress and have a rewrite, let it be a precedence for outdated laws and amendments. Let the people decide
 
Jun 22, 2009
4,991
0
0
L29205 said:
......Let it go back to congress....Let the people decide
Does not compute. The utterly dysfunctional bunch of crooks we know as 'the Congress' are incapable of looking after anyone but themselves, and the interests of their major campaign contributors. The have no ****ing clue what "the people" might want, nor do they care.

I can't speak for Velo, but as someone who absolutely would like to see a Constitutional convention to revamp, rewrite, change, update, or whatever, that ancient document that has led to so much animosity, division, bitterness and misinterpretation - my principal requirement for participation in any such convention would be that no one who currently holds elected office, or has held such office in the past, should be allowed to participate.
 
May 13, 2009
3,093
0
0
Amsterhammer said:
Does not compute. The utterly dysfunctional bunch of crooks we know as 'the Congress' are incapable of looking after anyone but themselves, and the interests of their major campaign contributors. The have no ****ing clue what "the people" might want, nor do they care.

I can't speak for Velo, but as someone who absolutely would like to see a Constitutional convention to revamp, rewrite, change, update, or whatever, that ancient document that has led to so much animosity, division, bitterness and misinterpretation - my principal requirement for participation in any such convention would be that no one who currently holds elected office, or has held such office in the past, should be allowed to participate.
Revamp the whole constitution? That would just spoil it. Think of 4. july fireworks. You don't launch all of it at once. Let them reword one amendment per year. Guaranteed entertainment for decades to come.
 
Dec 7, 2010
8,773
1
0
Amsterhammer said:
Does not compute. The utterly dysfunctional bunch of crooks we know as 'the Congress' are incapable of looking after anyone but themselves, and the interests of their major campaign contributors. The have no ****ing clue what "the people" might want, nor do they care.

I can't speak for Velo, but as someone who absolutely would like to see a Constitutional convention to revamp, rewrite, change, update, or whatever, that ancient document that has led to so much animosity, division, bitterness and misinterpretation - my principal requirement for participation in any such convention would be that no one who currently holds elected office, or has held such office in the past, should be allowed to participate.
I was going to reply to your post regarding the Supreme Court vote on “voting rights”.
Since I did not get a chance and I’m just now reading your rewrite the constitution post.

We will disagree on the Voters rights change. I have thought or hold the opinion that those laws were outdated. Punishing people for racist bigots of the past, times have changed in the south. Yes there are still racist and bigots there, but the voting turnout is not in the white man’s favor any longer. It will continue to change that is just a fact,,, Especially now with the influx of Latin Americans from down south of the border.

I have never seen any problem with the states effected having a law that shows proof of ID along with the voter registration card. What is wrong with that? Other states not affected by the Voters Rights act were able to do exactly that.

So I just disagree that it is a bad thing to get rid of the Voters rights act. I think because you grew up and participated in times where change was something you fought for either by demonstration or other means. That is just my opinion, and I don’t disagree with your rights to demonstrate and protest.

The constitution might need some changing. I’m not sure now is the time but I do understand and appreciate your opinion. Not sure what is required but changing the constitution would be one drastic step.
 
Jun 16, 2009
19,657
0
0
You think US Politics is bad...come over to Australia. Your politicians look like Albert Einstein in comparison to ours in Australia. ****ing hopeless.
 
May 13, 2009
3,093
0
0
auscyclefan94 said:
You think US Politics is bad...come over to Australia. Your politicians look like Albert Einstein in comparison to ours in Australia. ****ing hopeless.
It seems very fortunate then that Australian politics is utterly inconsequential for the rest of the world. You guys may consider sending your leaders to a re-education camp in Alabama or similar place of higher learning.
 
Nov 8, 2012
12,104
0
0
VeloCity said:
So another "scandal" fizzles out.
Fournier weighs in;

If forced to guess, I would say that the IRS and its White House masters are guilty of gross incompetence, but not corruption. I based that only on my personal knowledge of – and respect for – Obama and his team. But I shouldn't have to guess. More importantly, most Americans don't have a professional relationship with Obama and his team. Many don't respect or trust government. They deserve what Obama promised nearly six weeks ago – accountability. They need a thorough investigation conducted by somebody other than demagogic Republicans and White House allies.

Somebody like …. a special prosecutor.
Yep.

http://www.nationaljournal.com/politics/why-the-irs-scandal-needs-a-special-prosecutor-20130625
 
Nov 8, 2012
12,104
0
0
Economy on fire.

1st quarter GDP slashed from an original report of 2.4% annualized, which was meager, to 1.8%, which is pathetic.

http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/gdp/gdpnewsrelease.htm

Now would probably be a great time for the (King) president to sign some executive orders that significantly increase the cost of energy. :rolleyes:

Good, old fashioned, regressive taxation. Laying wood to those he claims he supports.

Meanwhile, the king clown's approval rating is falling like a stone. Five years in, even dems (with a brain) are cluing in. Joe Manchin? He's pissed.

My. Popcorn. Is. On.
 
Sep 10, 2009
5,663
0
0
Well, well. What a surprise.

The Treasury inspector general whose report helped drive the IRS targeting controversy says it limited its examination to conservative groups because of a request from House Republicans.

A spokesman for Russell George, Treasury’s inspector general for tax administration, said they were asked – by House Oversight Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) – “to narrowly focus on Tea Party organizations.”
So ol' Darrell tried yet again to manufacture a scandal. Isn't withholding evidence from Congress a federal offense?

http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/domestic-taxes/307813-irs-ig-says-audit-limited-to-tea-party-groups

And now Issa is backtracking as fast as his little lying legs can carry him.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/06/26/the-morning-plum-darrell-issa-backtracks-on-irs-scandal/

In a key moment, Rep. Darrell Issa — the chair of the Oversight Committee and a lead investigator into the IRS scandal — is now claiming he never, ever said the White House or the Obama campaign was behind the targeting. In an interview with CNN’s Dana Bash (at the 1:30 mark), he said this:

“I’ve never said it came out of the office of the President or his campaign. What I’ve said is, it comes out of Washington.”

As for Issa’s suggestion that he never made any such charge, here’s what he said in mid-May:

“This was a targeting of the president’s political enemies, effectively, and lies [sic] about it during the election year so that it wasn’t discovered until afterwards.”
And people wonder why the Republican Congress' approval rating is about 6%.
 
Sep 10, 2009
5,663
0
0
Scott SoCal said:
Cali prop 8 crashed and burned too.
They mostly punted on prop 8, actually.

Yesterday they were bums, today heros:D
The liberal wing were heroes yesterday too. The conservatives, on the other hand: yesterday they voted to gut the VRA, today they voted against overturning DOMA. Odd that Roberts and the conservatives yesterday based their decision on how the VRA is no longer needed because "the country has changed" and yet one day later "the country has changed" doesn't apply to homosexuals who want to get married. Huh. Anyway, you should be very proud of your SC'ers, if nothing else they're extremely non-progressive.

And so it begins.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/republicans-south-voting-rights-act-supreme-court.php?ref=fpb

Across the South, Republicans are working to take advantage of a new political landscape after a divided U.S. Supreme Court freed all or part of 15 states, many of them in the old Confederacy, from having to ask Washington’s permission before changing election procedures in jurisdictions with histories of discrimination.

After the high court announced its momentous ruling Tuesday, officials in Texas and Mississippi pledged to immediately implement laws requiring voters to show photo identification before getting a ballot. North Carolina Republicans promised they would quickly try to adopt a similar law. Florida now appears free to set its early voting hours however Gov. Rick Scott and the GOP Legislature please. And Georgia’s most populous county likely will use county commission districts that Republican state legislators drew over the objections of local Democrats.

Texas will "immediately" enact a voter ID law that a panel of federal judges ruled last year would impose “strict, unforgiving burdens on the poor," a top state official said Tuesday. The decision to go forward with a measure that those federal judges called “the most stringent in the country" comes after the Supreme Court ruled that a key provision of the landmark Voting Rights Act was unconstitutional.

“With today’s decision, the State’s voter ID law will take effect immediately," Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott said in a statement. "Redistricting maps passed by the Legislature may also take effect without approval from the federal government.”

In blocking those redistricting maps last year, a separate panel of federal judges ruled that the government "provided more evidence of discriminatory intent than we have space, or need, to address" in their opinion.
"You’d think after years of claiming that Section 4 and Section 5 were unnecessary, they’d pause a decent interval before proving the point of voting rights advocates that prior review of voting changes in the Deep South were a practical necessity." You would think.

Still, in the long run Rs are shooting themselves in the foot by alienating minority voters even further. But so much easier to suppress minority voters than to reevaluate policies and ideology.
 
Sep 10, 2009
5,663
0
0
Antonin Scalia in the DOMA case today:

We have no power to decide this case. And even if we did, we have no power under the Constitution to invalidate this democratically adopted legislation.
Antonin Scalia in the VRA case yesterday:

Sure, let's invalidate this democratically adopted legislation
Ah now it makes sense:

Scalia also touched on topics as varied as his viewpoint on the Constitution and opposition of Section 5 of the 1965 Voting Rights Act. The section requires that states and regions that have previously discriminated against minority voters such as African Americans gain federal approval when they want to change voting regulations in their states. Scalia called the act one of “racial preferment,” which would continue to be reauthorized by Congress unless the high court took action. Congress last reauthorized the act for another 25 years in 2006. The Supreme Court decision on the act’s constitutionality is expected in late June. In February, when the act was last brought before the Supreme Court, Scalia had said Congressional support was based in part on what he called “racial entitlement.”
“I think it is attributable, very likely attributable, to a phenomenon that is called perpetuation of racial entitlement. It’s been written about,” Scalia said. “Whenever a society adopts racial entitlements, it is very difficult to get out of them through the normal political processes.”
In other words, Congress wasn't going to do it so the SC had to. If that's not the very definition of judicial activism, I don't know what is.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/04/scalia-talks-race-homosexuality-boredom/
 
Jul 4, 2009
9,666
0
0
Scott SoCal said:

....they often say that old habits die hard.....and this one is certainly old as it goes back several years and a couple of galaxies away to my days in academia....at that point in my life's work it was prudent, nay, required to check footnotes....especially on stuff that didn't quite pass the smell test ( sorta like everything that SoWrong has ever regurgitated onto this forum....)


....so following old habits I went to check the background to the latest bit of flotsam our dear SoWrong has used to prop up his latest leaky argument.... what I found was quite interesting....apart from the usual mob of media hacks filling valuable bandwidth with really important stuff were some ads I had never seen before.....they were ads for the F35 Lightning, arguably the biggest waste of tax payers money of all time, or to paraphrase America's old Middle East friend, Saddam Hussein, the mother of all pork barrels....


....so when you look at this latest work that SoWrong has presented to us....remember who paid for it....the pork barrel by which all future pork barrels will henceforth be measured....the F35 Lightning Team.....


Cheers
 
Nov 8, 2012
12,104
0
0
blutto said:
....they often say that old habits die hard.....and this one is certainly old as it goes back several years and a couple of galaxies away to my days in academia....at that point in my life's work it was prudent, nay, required to check footnotes....especially on stuff that didn't quite pass the smell test ( sorta like everything that SoWrong has ever regurgitated onto this forum....)


....so following old habits I went to check the background to the latest bit of flotsam our dear SoWrong has used to prop up his latest leaky argument.... what I found was quite interesting....apart from the usual mob of media hacks filling valuable bandwidth with really important stuff were some ads I had never seen before.....they were ads for the F35 Lightning, arguably the biggest waste of tax payers money of all time, or to paraphrase America's old Middle East friend, Saddam Hussein, the mother of all pork barrels....


....so when you look at this latest work that SoWrong has presented to us....remember who paid for it....the pork barrel by which all future pork barrels will henceforth be measured....the F35 Lightning Team.....


Cheers
Oh my. So you are reduced to criticizing the advertisers. Must be extremely humbling.
 
Jul 4, 2009
9,666
0
0
Scott SoCal said:
Oh my. So you are reduced to criticizing the advertisers. Must be extremely humbling.
....naw....just doing what any reasonable person would do when doing a critical analysis, following the money.....its a wonderfully simple way to answer the question, who, says what, about whom, and why...its the first step to figure out the players without having access to an accurate programme...its how grown-ups do it ( which is probably why you didn't recognize it for what it was...)....

....its also the most efficient way of avoid slipping and sliding in the B$ that seems to always soil your arguments....

Cheers
 
Nov 8, 2012
12,104
0
0
blutto said:
....naw....just doing what any reasonable person would do when doing a critical analysis, following the money.....its a wonderfully simple way to answer the question, who, says what, about whom, and why...its the first step to figure out the players without having access to an accurate programme...its how grown-ups do it ( which is probably why you didn't recognize it for what it was...)....

....its also the most efficient way of avoid slipping and sliding in the BS that seems to always soil your arguments....

Cheers
O, I dunno. Fournier seem like a pretty straight shooter. Lots of experience writing about the govt inner-workings.

Maybe comment on the article instead of the superfluous crap?
 
Jul 4, 2009
9,666
0
0
Scott SoCal said:
O, I dunno. Fournier seem like a pretty straight shooter. Lots of experience writing about the govt inner-workings.

Maybe comment on the article instead of the superfluous crap?
....$uperfluou$ crap?.....now that is funny.....almost as funny as the idea that the owner of that rag, is a former White House intern in the Nixon White House, considers himself a neocon and most funny, has his company headquarters in the Watergate....and oddly enough has ads on his rag from one of the royalty in the military industrial complex ( of which,if I'm not mistaken the NSA is a big part of.....)

...yup, yup, nothing to see here behind these curtains, just keep reading....

Cheers
 
Sep 10, 2009
5,663
0
0
Scott SoCal said:
O, I dunno. Fournier seem like a pretty straight shooter. Lots of experience writing about the govt inner-workings.
The same Fournier who privately emailed Karl Rove during the 2004 election encouraging him to "keep up the fight"? The guy who interviewed for a position in John McCain's 2008 election campaign team? The guy who wrote critical stories about Edwards, Clinton, and Obama in 2008 but nothing critical about McCain? The guy who wrote in 2008 that Barack and Michele Obama "ooze a sense of entitlement"? The guy who blamed Obama for the current gridlock in Washington because he is "unwilling or unable to overcome stubborn GOP opposition"? Who just a few months ago said on air that Obama was "raising a jihad" against the press? This Ron Fournier?

http://firedoglake.com/2008/03/28/late-night-fdl-the-enemy-of-your-enemy-might-not-be-your-friend/

Yeah right, a straight shooter.

Maybe comment on the article instead of the superfluous crap?
Wasn't it you who kept saying "follow the money" when the topic was climate change? :rolleyes:
 
Sep 10, 2009
5,663
0
0
http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/cruz-will-block-all-state-deptartment-nominees?ref=fpb

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) vowed Wednesday to block all State Department nominations until President Barack Obama taps an inspector general to investigate matters such as the deadly attack in Benghazi, Libya. Cruz added that he's notified both Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) that he will "will place a hold on all State Department nominations" until an IG is nominated.
Obstructionism just for the sake of obstructionism. Almost to the point where just being R should automatically disqualify you from holding office, since the only goal is to burn it all down.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
MarieDGarzai Non-Cycling Discussions 2
Similar threads
The Politics of Sport

ASK THE COMMUNITY

Latest posts