Jump to content

Kalbear

Members
  • Posts

    58,016
  • Joined

  • Last visited

2 Followers

About Kalbear

  • Birthday 10/26/1974

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://addictedtoquack.com

Profile Information

  • 69 warning points
  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    The worst BwB meetup area EVER

Recent Profile Visitors

25,320 profile views

Kalbear's Achievements

Council Member

Council Member (8/8)

  1. New England? Now that'd be super funny. I was kind of surprised how decent Wilson ended up being last year; he wasn't nearly as horrifyingly bad as I thought he would have been.
  2. There's some horribly masochistic part of me that really wants the Bears to go after him, but knows it'd be a bad idea.
  3. Wilson was cut by the Broncos. Not a huge surprise given the cost of him, but wow what a horrible trade that was.
  4. Just to be clear this is not correct - or at least, was not correct until this morning. Now, what it means is that unless Trump (or anyone else) is convicted of that specific charge, they will be perfectly eligible to have office at any Federal level. And the only ways to make them ineligible outside of that is if congress passes additional laws to ban that specific action. And that's assuming that it would hold up, because that law does not mention the 14th amendment explicitly. That is not how many people interpreted the 14th amendment (specifically note that the 14th does not explicitly mention that someone need be convicted of a crime or that even a crime was committed), and it was also not something that was asked about in this trial. The trial was whether or not a state can restrict someone running at the federal level, not how the federal level should be enforced or any test for it. I guess at the end of the day this just cuts out a middle step that we were likely going to hit in November anyway, so maybe that's good? But it's also another shitting on the standards and practices by this court, making something explicit that wasn't asked and extending their power and reach whenever it suits them.
  5. You can take it up with the liberal court justices and Barrett then, because they disagree.
  6. Of course it's significant; it means that there is effectively no bar for Trump or any other insurrectionist from holding office as long as they reasonably succeed in taking over one of the parties. Again, it means effectively that it is just another form of impeachment, toothless and useless in all but the most absurd scenarios. From the decision's dissent by the liberals: That it hilariously quotes the Dobbs decision in showing why the majority is full of shit is awesome but not surprising; the majority is once again not interested in consistency in application of rulings or law but only in power, and has never been particularly subtle about it.
  7. No, it isn't how it should be; in particular, congress by itself is not a requirement. I agree that the federal government should establish how they want to do it; what I disagree with strongly is that SCOTUS tells the federal government specifically how they should establish it and what they must do in order to determine whether or not an insurrection as defined by the 14th applies. That was overreach and effectively obliterates any power the 14th has, making it another type of impeachment. I already agreed that states should not have the power and said so before. SCOTUS not only made that clear, they made it clear that there will be no effective way to deny Trump the office regardless of the result of his criminal trials or any other information. Okay, but who cares? That wasn't part of the issue anyway. If you think that that's a bigger deal than Trump or any other person ever being denied office because they led a rebellion against the US I think that's on you.
  8. The first topic is well past 400 posts and it's good to mark the topic as being able to be spoilers or not. Note that spoilers for the movies should be fine and open here, but if you're going to talk about major plot points past the movies please mark them accordingly. On this being a masterpiece: I absolutely think it is. That doesn't mean there are no flaws but it is a technically amazing, visually stunning, emotive movie. It is deep, it is serious, it is creative, and it is full of great acting and visualizations. It's also quite cinematically inventive; in particular the sequence on Giedi Prime where they filmed the whole thing in infrared is something that I don't think we've ever really seen, and made it pop in a way that pure black and white do not.
  9. Because they wanted to rule that the states couldn't decide by themselves. They specifically said that they absolutely do not agree with SCOTUS deciding the specific mechanism for how the federal government makes this decision and that that made it far too broad. Barrett also thought it was too broad but took a bonus action to yell at the liberals for disagreeing openly. I think you're simply incorrect for any federal office. States can choose how they deal with any state-office however they please, but for any federal office SCOTUS has laid out specifically what needs to be done for that person to be ruled ineligible - it is an act of congress to say under section five specifically how the 14th amendment should be enforced. And if there is not legislation passed by congress to do so...it doesn't get enforced. So now, the only way that the 14th amendment can be used is by either a federal crime that specifically states an insurrection or rebellion happened, or congress stating that.
  10. This is a huge win for Trump. It means that anyone can participate in an insurrection and then run for office, and only congress can determine whether or not they actually did participate in an official insurrection and make them invalid. This does, interestngly, two things in my mind: - it absolutely makes sure that no Republican will ever be taken off a ballot or considered invalid for now and in the future. - It can be used to ensure that a given democrat could be taken off a ballot or considered invalid in the future.
  11. Yeah, I'm not talking about in general, just for that part of Act 3. Interesting to me that in act 3 you have to rescue florrick (again, jeez) quickly or they'll die. But that's the only one. The other supposed urgent events are not actually timed. Which is pretty funny to me to think about.
  12. While the game implies a sense of urgency it is basically a lie. Take as long as you need. What really pissed me off js a weird combo of events;
  13. Oh, I talked with them all first. And then I found out he was in league with gortash AND was firing good reporters, so the boss and his guards died. The rest of the reporters didn't care. I was able to add a good story to the press without any issue either. In any case the point is that the quest is as hard as you choose it to be.
  14. Stop the presses is pretty easy to complete - especially if you just kill every reporter.
×
×
  • Create New...