lokisnow Posted February 11, 2016 Share Posted February 11, 2016 Calculated risk updated their famous chart. http://www.calculatedriskblog.com/2016/02/update-scariest-jobs-chart-ever.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TerraPrime Posted February 11, 2016 Share Posted February 11, 2016 2 hours ago, DanteGabriel said: one has to wonder why these Republicans are such America-hating traitors. One has to wonder, but only if one has been drinking bleach for the past 7 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alguien Posted February 11, 2016 Share Posted February 11, 2016 3 hours ago, DanteGabriel said: Republicans can't seem to resist dipping into the old Reagan playbook, it seems. Hell, that's the Nixon playbook, that Reagan just inherited. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThinkerX Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 Ok people. Given the nature of this site, you REALLY should have caught this one earlier: http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/dallas-worried-about-citys-reputation-bans-erotica-convention/ar-BBpmFEG The city of Dallas voted on Wednesday to ban an erotica expo featuring porn stars, sex toy sales and a whipping dungeon from a city-owned convention center, with event opponents saying it could taint the city's image. Supporters countered by saying the "Exxxotica Expo" has been held without major incident for years in various locations, adding worries about reputation are weakened by the city allowing numerous strip clubs to operate for years within a few miles of the downtown venue where the event was planed. A divided Dallas city council voted 8-7 on a resolution by Mayor Mike Rawlings to prevent the Exxxotica Expo from returning to the Kay Bailey Hutchinson Convention Center in 2016. It was held in Dallas in 2015. Especially since I suspect a few boarders here are former attendees of the banned event in question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paladin of Ice Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 On February 10, 2016 at 9:47 PM, davos said: While the Michigan government is currently controlled by a bunch of vile human beings, this is not what actually happened. What did occur was that the state legislature passed a revision to the Michigan penal to better address animal cruelty. In the same section of the penal code was old language prohibiting sodomy. since they only revised the portion related to animal cruelty, the bill contained the unrevised portions of that section as well, including that pertaining to sodomy. While if would have been nice if the had removed the unenforceable sodomy language but the bill was related to something completely different. they weren't looking to clean out all the old junk on the penal code but to address one specific issue. the language should be removed but it is not new law and is not enforceable. Snopea has more details: http://www.snopes.com/michigan-senate-crime-against-nature/ Apologies for the mistake, the original person who linked me to this story and the story made me believe that it was a new development. (I do think it's B.S. that they didn't take an unconstitutional law off the books earlier or now when they were touching up the law, but the rank assholishness that I thought was at work wasn't, and apologies to the forum for accidentally being misleading on the issue.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lany Freelove Cassandra Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 My 13 yr old son watched some of the debate with me last night and expressed an interest in politics and such. I was really surprised, but very pleased. I plan on helping him develop his own thoughts on canidates this weekend. It will be hard to not put my own views on some of the issues, but he's a smart kid and I think he could come to his own decisions on them. (I think abortion would be the hardest for him, as he's pretty sensitive, and more emotional than logical). He also wants to come with me when I vote, and I think that will be a great experience for him. Does anyone have any suggestions for sites that do good, easy to understand breakdowns of the major national issues? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DireWolfSpirit Posted February 12, 2016 Author Share Posted February 12, 2016 3 hours ago, Lany Freelove Strangeways said: My 13 yr old son watched some of the debate with me last night and expressed an interest in politics and such. I was really surprised, but very pleased. I plan on helping him develop his own thoughts on canidates this weekend. It will be hard to not put my own views on some of the issues, but he's a smart kid and I think he could come to his own decisions on them. (I think abortion would be the hardest for him, as he's pretty sensitive, and more emotional than logical). He also wants to come with me when I vote, and I think that will be a great experience for him. Does anyone have any suggestions for sites that do good, easy to understand breakdowns of the major national issues? http://www.democracynow.org/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TerraPrime Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 League of Women Voters also put out nonpartisan summaries on candidate's platforms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonesy Posted February 13, 2016 Share Posted February 13, 2016 http://www.isidewith.com That may be helpfull. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lany Freelove Cassandra Posted February 13, 2016 Share Posted February 13, 2016 Thanks! Hopefully the info/overview I gave him from several of the sites was mostly non-biased. Before we started he didn't know if he would be a Democrat or Republican I was able to put the info into a chart with the candidates He didn't have an opinion on a couple of the issues (one of which I was disappointed on, but he has to come to some things in his own time), but those he did, he agreed with the Democrats. On this chart, the only difference between the two was on "Avoid Foreign Entanglements" with Hilary disagreeing and Bernie Strongly Agreeing. He is a Bernie supporter and seems rather happy about it. (But I think he wanted to be a Hilary supported as that was the one he wanted to compare himself with) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted February 13, 2016 Share Posted February 13, 2016 Justice Scalia has died: http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/antonin-scalia-dead_us_56bfa5f7e4b0b40245c6f0d9?ir=Politics§ion=us_politics&utm_campaign=021316&utm_content=FullStory&utm_medium=email&utm_source=Alert-politics Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lany Freelove Cassandra Posted February 13, 2016 Share Posted February 13, 2016 This could make things very interesting. Going to be a wild few months Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Altherion Posted February 13, 2016 Share Posted February 13, 2016 What are the rules for the appointment of a Supreme Court Justice? That is, I know that the President proposes a person and the Senate must approve, but what happens if the Senate either refuses to act or turns down proposal after proposal? Can they stretch this out until the election? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnionAhaiReborn Posted February 13, 2016 Share Posted February 13, 2016 It will not look good for them to block a qualified nominee to a high profile position, and it carries risk in an election year, particularly for blue state Senate Republicans fighting to hold onto their seats. The media might ignore the under secretary for whatever being held up for a year, but not a Supreme Court nominee. But they might do it anyway, we'll see I guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fez Posted February 13, 2016 Share Posted February 13, 2016 3 minutes ago, Altherion said: What are the rules for the appointment of a Supreme Court Justice? That is, I know that the President proposes a person and the Senate must approve, but what happens if the Senate either refuses to act or turns down proposal after proposal? Can they stretch this out until the election? They could if they want to. The Supreme Court will continue to operate as it always does, and the same rule applies as when a justice recuses themself from a case; in 4-4 ties the lower court ruling stands. Since must of the big cases the court is hearing this year are conservative appeals of Democratic-appointee held lower court rulings, it means liberals are going to have a good court term this year. McConnell and company may wait and see how the primaries play out. If in April it looks inevitable that Trump is the nominee they may cut a deal with Obama to confirm an absolute-center nominee, but otherwise they'll probably hold out. Or maybe if the election looks razor-close in September/October a deal will be cut for an absolute-center nominee, just so both sides can hedge their bets. Unless the public pressure is too great and someone gets confirmed earlier. But because Supreme Court nominations CAN still be filibustered that means 14 Republicans would need to break ranks rather than just 4. And that's a pretty tall order. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commodore Posted February 13, 2016 Share Posted February 13, 2016 best stock up on guns and ammo now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Marquis de Leech Posted February 13, 2016 Share Posted February 13, 2016 Blocking every Supreme Court nominee from now until next January would be terrible public relations for the Republicans, especially if they want to try and hold the Senate with a Democratic-friendly map. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commodore Posted February 13, 2016 Share Posted February 13, 2016 "Have the courage to have your wisdom regarded as stupidity." — Justice Antonin Scalia Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Marquis de Leech Posted February 13, 2016 Share Posted February 13, 2016 I don't think anyone considered Scalia stupid. Evil, yes, but not stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Mance Posted February 13, 2016 Share Posted February 13, 2016 11 minutes ago, Commodore said: "Have the courage to have your wisdom regarded as stupidity." — Justice Antonin Scalia Sounds like a recipe for clinging to unexamined self-assurance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.