Jump to content



Photo
- - - - -

PLEASE VOTE!!


  • Please log in to reply
229 replies to this topic

#151 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 18,741 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 07:52 PM

i disagree with you regarding the goals of liberals in that last characterization.

this is our current system. the court is in play and whomever becomes president makes the nomination. personally, i would rather we have 4 or 5 robust parties, that would either win outright or be able to form governing coalitions.


Of course you do, cur. :lol:

We've been going over this stuff for months. You happen to be partisan. Nothing wrong there, but i've been doing this for years, and this last four years has truly solidified that reality for me. People are far more partisan and playing teams as opposed to looking at individual initiatives objectively.

I've hollered about it regarding foreign policy on this board to nothing but crickets for years now from those who opposed the imperial presidency of Bush. It's just the way it is. It's a team sport, not an elected representative republic anymore. People are opposed to, or in favor of things simply based on party. That's why I can't bare to do it any longer. it's too frustrating to watch. This election is the end of the attention I'm willing to pay to this embarrassment of a government, and in many cases, the constituency as well.

#152 insolent cur

insolent cur

    VibeGuide

  • VibeGuide
  • 471 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 07:56 PM

Of course you do, cur. :lol:

We've been going over this stuff for months. You happen to be partisan. Nothing wrong there, but i've been doing this for years, and this last four years has truly solidified that reality for me. People are far more partisan and playing teams as opposed to looking at individual initiatives objectively.

I've hollered about it regarding foreign policy on this board to nothing but crickets for years now from those who opposed the imperial presidency of Bush. It's just the way it is. It's a team sport, not an elected representative republic anymore. People are opposed to, or in favor of things simply based on party. That's why I can't bare to do it any longer. it's too frustrating to watch. This election is the end of the attention I'm willing to pay to this embarrassment of a government, and in many cases, the constituency as well.


dude, i'm not partisan. i'm neither d nor r. i'm a pragmatic progressive.

#153 Spidergawd

Spidergawd
  • VibeTribe
  • 14,786 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 07:59 PM

That is appalling. Pretty sure I can't sandbag for the first 4 years of a new job.


Sandbagging?? Really??

Here are just two examples of many:

Grover Norquist – “We will make it so that a Democrat cannot govern as a Democrat.”
From : http://www.washingto...UlsH_story.html

Senator Mitch McConnell – “Our #1 priority is to make President Obama a one term president”
From : http://www.zimbio.co...iating Party No

Their stated goal was to obstruct anything the President and the democrats tried to do by filibuster and other tactics. This has been well documented. Dozens of initiatives were halted in this manner. All while the house voted THIRTY-THREE times to repeal Obamacare. Talk about a sandbagging waste of time, especially since they knew damn well there was no way it would pass.

You know better and can do better than that Rene.

#154 Spidergawd

Spidergawd
  • VibeTribe
  • 14,786 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 08:03 PM

And again TASB reminds us how much smarter and more educated he is, and how anyone who dares disagree is just a "partisan". Man, you've just been insufferable lately.

#155 TEO

TEO

    VibeGuide

  • VibeGuide
  • 23,145 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 08:04 PM

Seems the country is run by whoever is pulling the lobbyists strings.

#156 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 18,741 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 08:04 PM

dude, i'm not partisan. i'm neither d nor r. i'm a pragmatic progressive.

Then perhaps you missed this answer to a question you asked? Or was it just that you didn't want to see it?

Posse Comitatus and Habeas corpus by signing NDAA 2012 and then fighting a court ruling to have the provisions in question of this bill removed and considered unconstitutional.

http://rt.com/usa/ne...ffs-hedges-143/


A simple question. Because I've seen this from my friends for months. The memes regarding romney, many of which are funny an sometimes true,. but is that same level of critique offered tot he incumbent? Not that i have seen.

Cur, we have a mutual friend (not on this board that i know of) that absolutely refused to admit that Obama lied even after I pointed out, in quotes, cite source, the lies! That is a frustrating thing, and I feel that it is common place whether llolberal or psuedo-con when it comes to their teams respectively.

#157 TEO

TEO

    VibeGuide

  • VibeGuide
  • 23,145 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 08:05 PM

(((thin skin)))

#158 Spidergawd

Spidergawd
  • VibeTribe
  • 14,786 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 08:06 PM

Seems the country is run by whoever is pulling the lobbyists strings.


I won't disagree with this one. Lobbyists are one of the scourges of our country.

#159 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 18,741 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 08:07 PM

And again TASB reminds us how much smarter and more educated he is, and how anyone who dares disagree is just a "partisan". Man, you've just been insufferable lately.


You can always use the ignore feature if you like. I'm pointing it out how I see it. How I have seen it adn how it continues. If that somehow makes you feel like I'm belittleing you, then perhaps that feature would suit you. Because that isn't the case. But I will call it out like I see it.

#160 SunshineDrummer

SunshineDrummer

    VibeGuide

  • VibeGuide
  • 12,347 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 08:07 PM

I won't disagree with this one. Lobbyists are one of the scourges of our country.


I think most of us would agree with this, regardless of affiliation.

#161 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 18,741 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 08:08 PM

Obama did promise no lobbyists in his admin. Just sayin'.

#162 Spidergawd

Spidergawd
  • VibeTribe
  • 14,786 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 08:09 PM

You can always use the ignore feature if you like. I'm pointing it out how I see it. How I have seen it adn how it continues. If that somehow makes you feel like I'm belittleing you, then perhaps that feature would suit you. Because that isn't the case. But I will call it out like I see it.


I respect your opinions and you have every right to express them. Your delivery, however, is getting more and more abrasive. Not to PF levals yet, but on the way. FWIW.

#163 TEO

TEO

    VibeGuide

  • VibeGuide
  • 23,145 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 08:09 PM

Obama did promise no lobbyists in his admin. Just sayin'.


Yes he did.

#164 MeOmYo

MeOmYo
  • VibeTribe
  • 7,533 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 08:11 PM

I'm thinking voting will make TASB feel better.

#165 Joker

Joker
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,626 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 08:14 PM

we're close to going from two to three or four already.

We were close back in the 90's when Perot was running but that's probably only because he was loaded.

I'd love to see it but there's not a doubt in my mind the other two will do whatever it takes to make sure it doesn't happen.

There's some interesting stuff here including how they've pretty much rigged the debates


How Presidential Debates Work

http://people.howstu...com/debate3.htm

#166 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 18,741 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 08:16 PM

I'm thinking voting will make TASB feel better.


Nope. What will make me feel better is washing this habitual tendency to give a fuck about politics off tomorrow in the shower before work. It has consumed too much of my time, put me at odds with too many friends adn ultimately has been all for naught...unless the realization this sucker is really in bad shape can be considered a good expenditure of time.

#167 Joker

Joker
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,626 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 08:17 PM

Obama did promise no lobbyists in his admin. Just sayin'.

Pretty sure THAT lasted for less than a week after he was sworn in

#168 Mind Left Body

Mind Left Body
  • VibeTribe
  • 1,794 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 08:17 PM

I respect your opinions and you have every right to express them. Your delivery, however, is getting more and more abrasive. Not to PF levals yet, but on the way. FWIW.


Thank you for stating exactly what I said yesterday. Abrasive is the perfect word. The holier than thou stuff gets old fast.

#169 TEO

TEO

    VibeGuide

  • VibeGuide
  • 23,145 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 08:19 PM

Man some people read with voices in their heads.

#170 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 18,741 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 08:20 PM

Pretty sure THAT lasted for less than a week after he was sworn in


But you wont hear any supporters complaining, or even bringing it up. it's all water under the bridge.

#171 MeOmYo

MeOmYo
  • VibeTribe
  • 7,533 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 08:23 PM

Nope. What will make me feel better is washing this habitual tendency to give a fuck about politics off tomorrow in the shower before work. It has consumed too much of my time, put me at odds with too many friends adn ultimately has been all for naught...unless the realization this sucker is really in bad shape can be considered a good expenditure of time.


tell me it wouldn't make you feel good to go write in Daffy Duck?

#172 Joker

Joker
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,626 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 08:23 PM

But you wont hear any supporters complaining, or even bringing it up. it's all water under the bridge.

That's what I don't get.

Much of the argument is Romney would do bad things if he got in and we can't have that, meanwhile Obama IS doing bad things and they're just being ignored

#173 MeOmYo

MeOmYo
  • VibeTribe
  • 7,533 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 08:24 PM

Yosemite Sam?

#174 MeOmYo

MeOmYo
  • VibeTribe
  • 7,533 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 08:25 PM

Sam Bush

"I never exhaled"

#175 TEO

TEO

    VibeGuide

  • VibeGuide
  • 23,145 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 08:26 PM

Taz :smile:

#176 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 18,741 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 08:28 PM

tell me it wouldn't make you feel good to go write in Daffy Duck?


You mean wait in line to ballot a prank I wont even get to see a reaction from? :rolling:

#177 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 18,741 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 08:29 PM

That's what I don't get.

Much of the argument is Romney would do bad things if he got in and we can't have that, meanwhile Obama IS doing bad things and they're just being ignored


If Romney wins, it'll go the other way in the same fashion. That's why i have to just walk away from it.

#178 MeOmYo

MeOmYo
  • VibeTribe
  • 7,533 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 08:31 PM

ABSOFUCKINGLUTELY

#179 Joker

Joker
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,626 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 08:31 PM

I'm sure it will :bang:

#180 syd_25

syd_25
  • VibeTribe
  • 1,057 posts
  • LocationNorthwest Ct

Posted 06 November 2012 - 08:33 PM

Seems the country is run by whos strings the lobbyists are pulling.


fixed

#181 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 18,741 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 08:33 PM

We can say though, that romney has basically promised......wait, what is the promise of the week? :lol:

#182 TEO

TEO

    VibeGuide

  • VibeGuide
  • 23,145 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 08:38 PM

fixed


Perhaps, however I figure the lobbyists are not necessarily pushing for their own interests. :wink:

#183 Joker

Joker
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,626 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 08:43 PM

We can say though, that romney has basically promised......wait, what is the promise of the week? :lol:

Something something tax break for the rich something

#184 china cat

china cat
  • VibeTribe
  • 14,993 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 08:50 PM

Posted Image

#185 syd_25

syd_25
  • VibeTribe
  • 1,057 posts
  • LocationNorthwest Ct

Posted 06 November 2012 - 08:53 PM

Perhaps, however I figure the lobbyists are not necessarily pushing for their own interests. :wink:


True dat.... I misinterpreted it.

#186 Jwheelz

Jwheelz
  • VibeTribe
  • 5,867 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 08:54 PM

Well I voted, that's all I'm going to say... definitely not wading any deeper into that subject here :lol:

#187 elder

elder
  • VibeTribe
  • 4,519 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 09:02 PM

Actually voting did make me feel better (in a small way)
I'm proud of my write in. I'm proud of my Governor.

This country needs leaders.

#188 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 18,741 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 09:03 PM

Sure, just throw your vote away, elder. :funny1:

#189 elder

elder
  • VibeTribe
  • 4,519 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 09:17 PM

Sure, just throw your vote away, elder. :funny1:


proud not to vote for either of the 2 turd sammiches ;)

#190 SunshineDrummer

SunshineDrummer

    VibeGuide

  • VibeGuide
  • 12,347 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 09:23 PM

proud not to vote for either of the 2 turd sammiches ;)


So you voted for Giant Douche? :lol:

#191 elder

elder
  • VibeTribe
  • 4,519 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 09:32 PM

They call him The Bully around here. I'm good with that.

#192 PeaceFrog

PeaceFrog
  • VibeTribe
  • 8,284 posts
  • LocationWhisky a Go Go

Posted 06 November 2012 - 09:51 PM

that was in '92. I believe they changed that rule after Ross Perot


After Ross Perot, they changed the requirements for participating in the debates from 5% support in polls to 10%. Just now I Googled it and found they changed it again in 2000 to 15%.

However, the Federal Funding requirement remains at only 5%. This is the part that I was unaware of. Thanks for bringing it to my attention.

In closing, your vote counts. So, just do it.

Write yourself in if you think you can do a better job.

#193 melissaphish

melissaphish
  • VibeTribe
  • 2,033 posts
  • LocationHawleyville, MA

Posted 06 November 2012 - 10:15 PM



Lesser of twoevils

#194 insolent cur

insolent cur

    VibeGuide

  • VibeGuide
  • 471 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 10:48 PM

Then perhaps you missed this answer to a question you asked? Or was it just that you didn't want to see it?



A simple question. Because I've seen this from my friends for months. The memes regarding romney, many of which are funny an sometimes true,. but is that same level of critique offered tot he incumbent? Not that i have seen.

Cur, we have a mutual friend (not on this board that i know of) that absolutely refused to admit that Obama lied even after I pointed out, in quotes, cite source, the lies! That is a frustrating thing, and I feel that it is common place whether llolberal or psuedo-con when it comes to their teams respectively.


did some campaign promises go unfulfilled? of course.

does the act to which you refer encompass the claims you make? no. that would be an overly broad reading of the law.

#195 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 18,741 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 10:50 PM

On other notes:

http://www.npr.org/b...win?ft=1&f=1001

Since 1984, Guam has been conducting a non-binding presidential 'straw poll' on the same date as the presidential election. And each time since 1984, the Guam Straw Poll has correctly predicted who will be the next president.
"Because Guam votes so early and has a perfect track record in picking the winner, Guam is the new bellwether in presidential politics. Traditionally, those seeking an early indication of things to come on Election Day have looked to Dixville Notch, and a couple other tiny New Hampshire towns which vote just past midnight on Election Day and then proceed to count a handful of ballots. However, these early returns have had little predictive value historically.

"Guam, on the other hand, has predicted the presidential winner every time. In fact, the only time Guam arguably got it wrong it still predicted the ultimate winner. In 2000, Guam narrowly favored Bush over Gore. Of course, Bush lost the popular vote nationwide in 2000, but he still managed to become president."



#196 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 18,741 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 11:01 PM

did some campaign promises go unfulfilled? of course.

does the act to which you refer encompass the claims you make? no. that would be an overly broad reading of the law.


http://rt.com/usa/ne...-ndaa-stay-414/

Last week, a federal judge ruled that an temporary injunction on section 1021 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 must be made permanent, essentially barring the White House from ever enforcing a clause in the NDAA that can let them put any US citizen behind bars indefinitely over mere allegations of terrorist associations. On Monday, the US Justice Department asked for an emergency stay on that order, and hours later US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit Judge Raymond Lohier agreed to intervene and place a hold on the injunction.
.......

A lawsuit against the administration was filed shortly thereafter on behalf of Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Chris Hedges and others, and Judge Forrest agreed with them in district court last week after months of debate. With the stay issued on Monday night, however, that justice’s decision has been destroyed.
With only Judge Lohier’s single ruling on Monday, the federal government has been once again granted the go ahead to imprison any person "who was part of or substantially supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners" until a poorly defined deadline described as merely “the end of the hostilities.” The ruling comes despite Judge Forrest's earlier decision that the NDAA fails to“pass constitutional muster” and that the legislation contained elements that had a "chilling impact on First Amendment rights”

Because alleged terrorists are so broadly defined as to include anyone with simple associations with enemy forces, some members of the press have feared that simply speaking with adversaries of the state can land them behind bars.

"First Amendment rights are guaranteed by the Constitution and cannot be legislated away," Judge Forrest wrote last week. "This Court rejects the Government's suggestion that American citizens can be placed in military detention indefinitely, for acts they could not predict might subject them to detention."

Bruce Afran, a co-counsel representing the plaintiffs in the case Hedges v Obama, said Monday that he suspects the White House has been relentless in this case because they are already employing the NDAA to imprison Americans, or plan to shortly.

http://www.gpo.gov/f...12hr1540enr.pdf

There are judges and lawyers that disagree. Either way, that right, as we've seen with every other infringement, can and most likely will be abused. You're playing word chess with me, brother. The question was which rights were taken away and this is another example of that. Even by appeals court the WH found it necessary to secure these provisions of the bill that have many questioning the motive. Whether you think the provisions are OK, or not, does not mean that they are not infringements Otherwise it's fair game all the way based arbitrarily on perspective...which is kind of the whole problem here.

#197 Geminimoon

Geminimoon
  • VibeTribe
  • 2,648 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 11:03 PM

I've been seeing a lot of people say that on Facebook. I can't say I'm that surprised.


me either :confused1:

It is just one of the small things that makes the experience memorable and fun.

#198 Geminimoon

Geminimoon
  • VibeTribe
  • 2,648 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 11:06 PM

Posted ImageMy voting sticker!

#199 insolent cur

insolent cur

    VibeGuide

  • VibeGuide
  • 471 posts

Posted 07 November 2012 - 12:38 AM

http://rt.com/usa/ne...-ndaa-stay-414/

Last week, a federal judge ruled that an temporary injunction on section 1021 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 must be made permanent, essentially barring the White House from ever enforcing a clause in the NDAA that can let them put any US citizen behind bars indefinitely over mere allegations of terrorist associations. On Monday, the US Justice Department asked for an emergency stay on that order, and hours later US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit Judge Raymond Lohier agreed to intervene and place a hold on the injunction.
.......

A lawsuit against the administration was filed shortly thereafter on behalf of Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Chris Hedges and others, and Judge Forrest agreed with them in district court last week after months of debate. With the stay issued on Monday night, however, that justice’s decision has been destroyed.
With only Judge Lohier’s single ruling on Monday, the federal government has been once again granted the go ahead to imprison any person "who was part of or substantially supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners" until a poorly defined deadline described as merely “the end of the hostilities.” The ruling comes despite Judge Forrest's earlier decision that the NDAA fails to“pass constitutional muster” and that the legislation contained elements that had a "chilling impact on First Amendment rights”
Because alleged terrorists are so broadly defined as to include anyone with simple associations with enemy forces, some members of the press have feared that simply speaking with adversaries of the state can land them behind bars.
"First Amendment rights are guaranteed by the Constitution and cannot be legislated away," Judge Forrest wrote last week. "This Court rejects the Government's suggestion that American citizens can be placed in military detention indefinitely, for acts they could not predict might subject them to detention."
Bruce Afran, a co-counsel representing the plaintiffs in the case Hedges v Obama, said Monday that he suspects the White House has been relentless in this case because they are already employing the NDAA to imprison Americans, or plan to shortly.
http://www.gpo.gov/f...12hr1540enr.pdf
There are judges and lawyers that disagree. Either way, that right, as we've seen with every other infringement, can and most likely will be abused. You're playing word chess with me, brother. The question was which rights were taken away and this is another example of that. Even by appeals court the WH found it necessary to secure these provisions of the bill that have many questioning the motive. Whether you think the provisions are OK, or not, does not mean that they are not infringements Otherwise it's fair game all the way based arbitrarily on perspective...which is kind of the whole problem here.


that is one whacked, fringe website (rt)!! yeah, i *may* disagree with their positions.

#200 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 18,741 posts

Posted 07 November 2012 - 12:41 AM

Is the information whacked? Because I can give that over from several aves...

But really, it's kind of late int he game for old debates.

:cowboy: