MERGED: The Politics Thread

[prinz]

Im more conservative than I was as a young lad thats for sure. I worked 32 years for my pension from the wired line phone company and retired when they were sold.. The handwritting is on the wall for wiredline telephones. Our Gov here in Michigan saw fit to tax my monthy check and take money from school children.   Not happy about this guy or the republican wave that was voted in with him..  Still in the grand scheme of things Im moderatly left of center on social issues and center to center right on economic issues..

        It seems to me with the great republican loss of 2008 the grand old party looked at itself and decided to not broaden its base but to double down and throw everyone who isnt ultra conservative under the bus. With the great recession in full bloom in 2010 and we the people desperate for a fix this strategy payed off for them. Long term this  distilled 150 prof  conservatision is going  to bite them hard.

[rtpoe]

In a way, that might be the best thing for the GOP. The last two times they lost - Bob Dole in 1996, and John McCain in 2008 - they ran a (comparative) moderate. After Dole's defeat, they felt that he wasn't true enough to the party's core ideals and shifted more to the right. Same thing happened after McCain's defeat. It seems as if the more they put up moderates and lose, the further to the right they go. Maybe nominating someone on the extreme right wing, and having them get their ass kicked, will shock some sense into them.

[TheZookie007]

...

[pedonbio]

In only a month we hard-working google-typists have made the primary return for "Romney" on Google

           spreadingromney.com

Originally it related to the way he treated his dog, but now it has become the answer to, "What would he do when the phone rings at 3:00 a.m.?"

[rtpoe]

...

So, they think Christians are being persecuted here?

They should look at Nigeria: "In 2011 [Boko Haram's] members killed at least 510 people and burned down or destroyed more than 350 churches in 10 northern states."

Or Egypt: "On Oct. 9 of last year in the Maspero area of Cairo, Coptic Christians (who make up roughly 11 percent of Egypt’s population of 81 million) marched in protest against a wave of attacks by Islamists—including church burnings, rapes, mutilations, and murders—that followed the overthrow of Hosni Mubarak’s dictatorship. During the protest, Egyptian security forces drove their trucks into the crowd and fired on protesters, crushing and killing at least 24 and wounding more than 300 people. By the end of the year more than 200,000 Copts had fled their homes in anticipation of more attacks."

Or Pakistan, or Iraq, or Indonesia..... That's persecution....not government regulations saying that Catholic businesses (like hospitals) have to let their health insurance plans cover birth control for anyone who wants it, even non-Catholics....

(quotes taken from here)

[pedonbio]

Tomorrow (Saturday, March 3) Washington State Republicans are holding their caucuses. Apparently the Gingrich campaign discovered this about an hour ago because his superpac has been running back-to-back ads tonight. They had run none before. None of the other candidates have run any ads, because they don't work in caucus states.

[SamV]

Yeah, but remember Newt has said he will have gas selling at $2 a gallon if he gets in the White House.

"Hey Rommey, watch me pull a rabbit out of my hat."

"Again? But that trick never works."

"This time for sure. Presto!"

And anyone who has seen Rocky and Bullwinkle knows how that bit always ends.

Sam "knows Repub Prez candidates aren't really cartoon characters, but at times they certainly seem like it" V

[rtpoe]

So the Supreme Court is in the midst of hearing arguments over the constitutionality of the "individual mandate" provision of the Affordable Care Act (a.k.a. "ACA" or "Obamacare").

Now I know very little about the legal niceties of the laws and precedents involved. But I do have a not insignificant concern, in the realm of "unintended consequences".

The "mandate" is the key part of the ACA. Knock it out, and the entire structure is likely to collapse. If it does, will Congress ever be able to get together on health care legislation? The recent "Citizens United" decision by the Supreme Court has pretty much stopped all serious talk of campaign finance reform in Congress. If the ACA goes down, will Congress be afraid to consider any similar sweeping packages of legislation for fear that they will never be able to make them "constitutionally" acceptable?

[TheZookie007]

Wow.

[pedonbio]

The "mandate" is the key part of the ACA. Knock it out, and the entire structure is likely to collapse. If it does, will Congress ever be able to get together on health care legislation? The recent "Citizens United" decision by the Supreme Court has pretty much stopped all serious talk of campaign finance reform in Congress. If the ACA goes down, will Congress be afraid to consider any similar sweeping packages of legislation for fear that they will never be able to make them "constitutionally" acceptable?

The irony in all this is that there are many "mandates" in federal law; but the others, most notably the Seaman's Health law of 1798, mandate that the people involved join a federal program. Had there been a "public option" in the bill, or had it been a "single payer" plan, it would not have the vulnerability. However, Scalia has made it clear that he's going to vote to dump the entire law because he doesn't like it. Despite decades of "conservatives" whining about "activist judges", they really don't care so long as results go their way.

The constitutional problems the law faces are all based on compromises President Obama made with Republicans.

[SamV]

Sorry p, it wasn't just the Repubs who were the pain in the tookas when the health care package was making its way though the legislature.

At that time the Repubs were the minority party and completely out of the picture as the Dems held majorities in both the Congress and the Senate. The only thing they could do was stand on the sidelines and carp about things, and do whatever they could to muddy the waters so the general public would look unfavorably on the bill. In that regard they succeed so well that there are still people who have lots of wrong ideas about what is or isn't in what the Prez signed in to law. (Not counting those people who mistakenly think the courts already shot the whole law down.)

The Prez's major problem was with the Dems in his party who were from conservative districts and states. These members in his own party were leery of pushing though such a major piece of legislation that only one party supported and passed in to law.

Hoping the Congress and Senate could come up with a working package everyone would agree on Obama also made a terrible decision to only get minimally involved in formulating the legislation in the bill. That along with the fact he had campaigned on uniting the two parties in the spirit of compromise in order to get the other things he had promised tripped him up too, as the Repubs were still hurting from their big losses in both '06 and '08, and unwilling to play ball.

So no matter how much Obama, or the Dems gave in to things that the Repubs wanted, the Repubs refused to sign on, preferring to treat the whole thing as a matter of politics rather that actually doing something that might benefit the country as a whole. Their thinking was this whole thing would be something they could hang on the Prez and Dems in the upcoming midterm elections, which is what they did; and are still doing in this election cycle too.  
  

[pedonbio]

Sorry p, it wasn't just the Repubs who were the pain in the tookas when the health care package was making its way though the legislature.
  

Thanks, SamV, but I was being specific: The constitutional problems come from the lack of a government-managed alternative. It was an error for President Obama to drop the public option, period; my recollection of what aspects of the ongoing negotiations were made public included a refusal by the minority Republicans to provide any votes if the public option was included; in the final test, of course, they provided no votes at all. While the Heath Schulers were a lost cause, trying to romance them into supporting the bill in fact weakened it materially.

[3deroticer]

The public option would have strengthen the health care bill instead of a mandate. Now the Supreme court has been challenge to prove their position, even though it has not been officially release to the public of that outcome. We have the most radical judge of my generation and it will be interesting to see if they actually do carry out that challenge to set a precedent for all other health care issue in legal terms. I am not sure if Clarence Thomas is even capable of that challenge, as he really is out of his league in terms of being a real judge versus being a paid off lackey for the party. If they are not able to prove their outcome of the bill to kill health care, then there is a slight chance that things could turn around. I don't have high hopes on this as they did a piss poor performance of the recent campaign finance reform. All they may have accomplish is to drag it out for more time.

I would bet that whatever the outcome will be, would be timed for whatever advantage of the outcome of the election to make it in favor of the right wing party.

[TheZookie007]

These are the people who are going to help decide the next election, in all of their ignorant, bigoted glory.

Real Time with Bill Maher, March 9, 2012: "The South Will Rise Again"

And now that that religious fanatic and out-and-out bigot Rick Santorum has finally dropped out of the race, the stage is set.

On the one hand, we have the incumbent, a Christian who half the population believes is a secret Muslim or -- gasp! -- even an Ay-rab!

On the other hand, we have the challenger, a Mormon who quite a large percentage of Christians (especially of the Santorum ilk) believe is actually not a Christian at all.

Part of me is wishing that Mayans got it right after all...

[gOOber]

Real Time with Bill Maher, March 9, 2012: "The South Will Rise Again"

Also known as Mister gOOber`s neighborhood.

[rtpoe]

Baseball and Politics

Right now, the Washington Nationals are one of the best teams in the National League. Both CBS Sportsline and Fangraphs power rankings have them neck and neck with Atlanta as the best teams in the NL East, and only the Dodgers are ahead of them in the league.

For the longest time, it has been de rigeur for presidents to appear, even in a token role, at games in Washington. Usually it was for throwing out the first pitch to start the season, but when the Senators won the AL pennant in 1924, Calvin Coolidge was there for all twelve innings of Game 7 in the World Series.

As in 1924, this year is a presidential election year. Should the Nationals continue to excel, will President Obama be seen in the stands? He admits to being a White Sox fan; this year interleague play doesn’t bring the White Sox to DC. But what if the Nationals make it into the playoffs? October will be the home stretch of the campaign. Could it be a cheap photo op for him to be seen enjoying our national pastime before a national audience? And what if the Nationals make it to the World Series? Those games will be held just two weeks before the election.

Mitt Romney doesn’t appear to be as much of a fan as President Obama; but if the Red Sox turn things around, will he show up at a few of their games?

[pedonbio]

Mitt Romney doesn’t appear to be as much of a fan as President Obama; but if the Red Sox turn things around, will he show up at a few of their games?

No, but he knows many team owners.

[TheZookie007]

Truth.

[DruulEmpire]

Agreed, Zook.  It's scary, but when I think of what is getting done with America these days, the verb "scuttle," as in "ship," leaps to mind.

[pedonbio]

In case there is anyone here who considers themselves to be "right wing", please note that in the right wing "mega breasts" is considered an insult:

www.politicususa.com/the-girl-power-unity-of-fluke-and-mccain-spawns-a-right-wing-meltdown.html

[rtpoe]

So, political discussion here has devolved into posting photoquotes of notables giving brief opinions on relevant issues?

Oh, well.

At least we've avoided the potential swamp of the Zimmerman - Martin case. Until now... It's not that Zimmerman isn't guilty (he clearly is), it's that there's so much around the whole matter that its all become an uncomfortable shade of gray. A report from Reuters gives some background - the neighborhood had been hit with a wave of break-ins and robberies, which is why Zimmerman was asked to lead a neighborhood watch in the first place:

Though civil rights demonstrators have argued Zimmerman should not have prejudged Martin, one black neighbor of the Zimmermans said recent history should be taken into account.

"Let's talk about the elephant in the room. I'm black, OK?" the woman said, declining to be identified because she anticipated backlash due to her race. She leaned in to look a reporter directly in the eyes. "There were black boys robbing houses in this neighborhood," she said. "That's why George was suspicious of Trayvon Martin."

The "Stand Your Ground" laws are another potential quagmire. Especially since Time reports that the laws seem to be applied at random...

It seems to make sense that a woman who was in a physical fight in her home with an admitted habitual domestic abuser against whom she has legal protection should be entitled to stand her ground. Alexander told officers that she feared for her life. The "Stand your ground" law says, "A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force." That would seem to describe Alexander’s situation. Yet a judge rejected Alexander’s motion to invoke "Stand your ground" because she could have exited the home. What happened to having no duty to retreat? The judge wrote there was "insufficient evidence she reasonably believed that deadly force was needed," and that Alexander’s behavior was "inconsistent with a person who is in genuine fear for his or her life." She is currently in prison awaiting sentencing.

But enough of that. There's a few items buried in the news that ought to gladden the hearts of Americans.

In China, lawyer Chen Guangcheng managed to give the slip to the authorites who had him under house arrest for various "crimes against the state" including working for human rights and allowing himself to be beaten by police. It wasn't easy, since he is blind. Perhaps security team guarding his home included several Ravenous Bugblatter Beasts of Trall... Anyway, having made his getaway, he headed for the US Embassy in Beijing...

Earlier this year, police chief Wang Lijun found himself in hot water when his investigations of organized crime in China started leading to some up and coming Party figures. Where did he go, looking for help if things started to get too ugly? The local US Consulate...

It should be heartening that these two people, from opposite sides of the political spectrum, both see the United States as their best chance for freedom. Not France, not Canada, not Great Britain....

You hear a lot of stuff around that the U.S. is not to be trusted with power. You hear that our presidents lie us into wars. You hear that the U.S. is imperial and aggressive. But we build up our enemies after wars, and we ask not for one acre. What will we get for ourselves after Vietnam? Nothing.

If we retreat from the world scene, who's left? With all our stupidity, with all our impetuousness, what other nation in the world is as idealistic than the United States? - Richard Nixon

[rtpoe]

While you are waiting for President Obama to say that same-sex marriages are a basic civil right and if your church doesn't want to perform any, no one, especially not the government, is going to force them to do so; and while you are waiting for Mitt Romney to explain that he has grown up since he was in high school half a century ago, and even if he honestly doesn't remember attacking a fellow student (after all, it was about half a century ago), such behavior was and is beyond the pale no matter what the circumstances...

So while you are waiting for hell to freeze over:

France elects an openly socialist president (as opposed to our "closet" socialist).

Greece, on the verge of bankruptcy and being kicked off the Euro, can't find anybody who can fix their problems. That bailout package they were given by the rest of the EU turned out to be a really big wooden horse....

Sudan wants its southern part back.

As protests continue, Vladimir Putin was seen running around the Kremlin with his fingers in his ears going "La la la, I can't hear you, la la la..."

[DruulEmpire]

So ... on same-sex issues, Romney's the one to bet on.  Got it.

[pedonbio]

We are in the all-too-brief period between de facto selection of presidential candidates and Labor Day, during which we have a respite from political television advertising. What will the Koch Brothers do to ruin that?

[Robin_K]

pedonbio, I'm shocked by your lapse. The Kochs are of course spending tons trying to influence the Wisconsin recall of Gov. Scott Walker. The airwaves here are filled by their idiocies.

[SamV]

And I don't know how it is where you are p, but in the politically swinging Land of "PA" (not "P-A") that I reside in, there hasn't been a break in political ads on the TV, from either the candidates for the various state or Fed offices, or from the 3rd party political ATMs. The only difference I've seen since the primary has been a slight decrease in the ads, as the primary losers have at least dropped out of the picture, and the primary winners are out raising cash to keep running their ads against their new opponents.

(BTW as I'm typing this, a political ad by candidate Obama just came on the TV. )

[pedonbio]

Very true, gentlemen. I'm in Seattle; there is no question the state will go for Obama, re-elect our Democratic senator, and we have a redistricting commission, so there isn't any gerrymandering. Therefore, the only people advertising are the clueless and those selling soap.

[TheZookie007]

'Nuff said.

[pedonbio]

'Nuff said.

Spot on, Zookie!

[DruulEmpire]

I think it's slightly more complicated -- if someone could have offered the GOP a "Colin Powell winning us a war and all set to sacrifice his dignity and fall on his sword for Dubya, or J.C. Watts if he wasn't busy lobbying, or Herman Cain if he was a serious thoughtful candidate rather than just an ultimate performance artist" type, they might have snapped him up.  I think the specific rules are that you can look black so long as you're a double-cream-filled Oreo, and the filling has to meet exacting GOP guidelines.  To be black, and a Democrat, and have a non-European name -- forget it.

But then I think of the state of my birth, West Virginia, and the Keith Judd phenomenon, and in that instance I have to say: yup, spot on.

[TheZookie007]

Have any of you read this opinion piece in the Washington Post? It's pretty blunt.

"Let’s just say it: The Republicans are the problem."

[Swollen Silicone P H D]

Jimmy Carter LMAO haha
"Taxes are good for you" lol

The lessons of history are stark and obvious.
Only a a leftist, or a fool could ignore!....

We should all at least be able to agree on
individual liberty and freedom!...

This is the BEA not a political site.

ssphd

[pedonbio]

Zookie;

This post is for you!......

how did i know your a marxist?

Jimmy Carter LMAO haha
"Taxes are good for you" lol

The lessons of history are stark and obvious.
Only a a leftist, or a fool could ignore!....

We should all at least be able to agree on
individual liberty and freedom!...

This is the BEA not a political site.

ssphd

Why is it so vital to you to label people with false labels? Are you so tragically insecure and so tragically ignorant that you feel this makes you somehow important?

An indication of your cluelessness is that you come to the political thread of the Off-Topic forum to say that this is not a "political site".

You're on the wrong side of history, and the wrong side of America. You hate; and hate is not what we are about. You have no idea worthy of discussion.

[Swollen Silicone P H D]

Why is it so vital to you to label people with false labels? Are you so tragically insecure and so tragically ignorant that you feel this makes you somehow important?

An indication of your cluelessness is that you come to the political thread of the Off-Topic forum to say that this is not a "political site".

You're on the wrong side of history, and the wrong side of America. You hate; and hate is not what we are about. You have no idea worthy of discussion.

Said: Mussolini from the balcony.

Give your yourself a hand for that remarkably
Fascist answer....
I expect many more.

"You have no idea worthy of discussion"
What time to send me to gulag for Re- education?

"individual liberty and freedom"
how terribly un-cool of me....
Take care All. Over and Out.

ssphd

[DruulEmpire]

Eh, maybe this is someone's idea of a Memorial Day thing.   Sometimes a holiday gets abused.

Druul "who, by the way, is going to remember his parents serving in the Air Force and his grandfather serving in the Pacific theater in WWII" Empire