Umm... All hail king Barry?
-
Na, Jose represents the great metropolis of NYC (and part times as the Puerto Rican / Latin American at large rep). Latins in Florida are mostly of Cuban extraction, and have little sympathy for removing term limits, given their memories of Castro). Interstingly, his web page doesn't even mention this, so I guess his constituents don't even know what Jose is up to.
Yeah I found his web site last night and was reminded that he represents NY. But I'd forgoten about this post. And I knew that Florida's hispanic population is primarily make up of Cubans who left for a reason. I can't imagine what his constituents were thinking, but he may do this kind of crap 'quietly' every time. I looked up most of his previous attempts to present this bill, and it's never come to a vote, but he may have a new audience this time. Time will tell.
Visit BoneSoft.com for code generation tools (XML & XSD -> C#, VB, etc...) and some free developer tools as well.
-
I'm not sure I'd go quite that far. But we obviously need to stop our own bleeding before we consider continuing to concentrate so much on other countries. What I was referring to though, was more about the economy of the world, which I think would be best served by us concentrating on fixing our own (if that's even possible). That said, as we all know, there are some things that start to unfold in the world that really do need intervention. Like the possibility of nukes in Iran and the DPRK for instance. But when we do step outside our borders, I think we need to give a little more thought to the possible outcomes and to insuring that what we do really is in the best interest of everyone involved. We need to pick our battles a little better. Iraq needed to happen, but I think most of us would agree that the timing and planning were pretty horrible.
Visit BoneSoft.com for code generation tools (XML & XSD -> C#, VB, etc...) and some free developer tools as well.
BoneSoft wrote:
What I was referring to though, was more about the economy of the world, which I think would be best served by us concentrating on fixing our own
It isn't. Our money is valueless and our government is doing everything in its power to go from inflation to hyperinflation.
BoneSoft wrote:
That said, as we all know, there are some things that start to unfold in the world that really do need intervention. Like the possibility of nukes in Iran and the DPRK for instance.
Iran's nukes threaten Europe far more than they do the US - let them worry about it.
BoneSoft wrote:
DPRK
N Koreas's nukes threan Japan far more than the US, let them worry about it.
BoneSoft wrote:
I think most of us would agree that the timing and planning were pretty horrible.
I think the word is criminal (even though Stan wants to nominate Bush as a "national Hero," because of his masterful showing as a war president.)
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.
modified on Tuesday, February 17, 2009 11:31 AM
-
H. J. Res. 5: Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the twenty-second amendment[^], thereby removing the limitation on the number of terms an individual may serve as President. You've got to be f@#kin kidding me... What the hell is happening? :confused: We're taking our ques from Hugo now? Why has the news not reported anything about this one? More talk on fairness Doctrine[^], census control, giant big fat "stimulus" bill to pay for God knows what, and now this. What's next? Rep. José Serrano is a notorious Castro, Chavez, and other commies supporter. Apparently this guy does this every session starting in 1999 and refiles every time Congress enters a new session. Put on the table by a complete nut bag, but with a Congress full of nut bags, nothing would surprise me.
Visit BoneSoft.com for code generation tools (XML & XSD -> C#, VB, etc...) and some free developer tools as well.
BoneSoft wrote:
Rep. José Serrano is a notorious Castro, Chavez, and other commies supporter. Apparently this guy does this every session starting in 1999 and refiles every time Congress enters a new session.
This does undermine your title to this thread, you know?
This statement is false
-
John Carson wrote:
But that is not the same thing as vulnerable to becoming a dictatorship.
Anyone who can stay in power as long as he likes by buying off groups of voters is a dictator, democracy or no democracy.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
-
Dalek Dave wrote:
Dear Margaret Thatcher Ruled for 11 years and three terms, and NEVER lost a vote, not one, ever!
Not sure what point you are making.
John Carson
-
Talk radio is the one place where conservative voices have flourished. And liberals can't manage to keep a talk radio audience for some reason. So they feel a need to try to shut it down. The guise is to claim that radio needs to present both perspectives evenly. Of course it has nothing to do with fairness, otherwise they'd work on TV and print first.
Visit BoneSoft.com for code generation tools (XML & XSD -> C#, VB, etc...) and some free developer tools as well.
BoneSoft wrote:
And liberals can't manage to keep a talk radio audience for some reason.
Liberal, yes; progressive, no. One host I can think of manages just fine at maintaining 4 million listeners. Fox News lost millions initially. The conservative radio programs are pretty good at self-marketing and trumpeting the horn when they have successes. Unfortunately most of the radio stations that progressive radio airs on is owned by the media conglomerates that are mostly conservative. So, the need to not anger the bosses play in. Its an interesting dynamic. I'm not sure I'd apply the same cavalier view you do, but it is interesting.
This statement is false
-
BoneSoft wrote:
What I was referring to though, was more about the economy of the world, which I think would be best served by us concentrating on fixing our own
It isn't. Our money is valueless and our government is doing everything in its power to go from inflation to hyperinflation.
BoneSoft wrote:
That said, as we all know, there are some things that start to unfold in the world that really do need intervention. Like the possibility of nukes in Iran and the DPRK for instance.
Iran's nukes threaten Europe far more than they do the US - let them worry about it.
BoneSoft wrote:
DPRK
N Koreas's nukes threan Japan far more than the US, let them worry about it.
BoneSoft wrote:
I think most of us would agree that the timing and planning were pretty horrible.
I think the word is criminal (even though Stan wants to nominate Bush as a "national Hero," because of his masterful showing as a war president.)
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.
modified on Tuesday, February 17, 2009 11:31 AM
Oakman wrote:
N Koreas's nukes threan Japan far more than the US, let them worry about it.
Can't personally. I have family there. And if the US keeps it up, I'll have to consider my "Taco Stand in Japan" as less of a joke and more of a business plan. ;) I'm a poet and didn't even know it!
Visit BoneSoft.com for code generation tools (XML & XSD -> C#, VB, etc...) and some free developer tools as well.
-
BoneSoft wrote:
And liberals can't manage to keep a talk radio audience for some reason.
Liberal, yes; progressive, no. One host I can think of manages just fine at maintaining 4 million listeners. Fox News lost millions initially. The conservative radio programs are pretty good at self-marketing and trumpeting the horn when they have successes. Unfortunately most of the radio stations that progressive radio airs on is owned by the media conglomerates that are mostly conservative. So, the need to not anger the bosses play in. Its an interesting dynamic. I'm not sure I'd apply the same cavalier view you do, but it is interesting.
This statement is false
Synaptrik wrote:
cavalier view
How so? What makes me think the entire issue is completely dishonest, is the fact that they only want to impose this on radio. Because of course radio is the only place that conservatives hold a majority. TV and print are FAR more dangerous. People have to actively decide to go listen to radio specifically for the views it represents. Most people want news, and get heavily liberal news almost by default. Which is why FNC is so vilified. If they really wanted fairness, they'd suggest cleaning up "news" and set all the partisan commentary aside somewhere where you would have to seek it to get it, like radio. Of course the left would never go for that, because they'd mostly fail, as they have with radio. Propaganda pisses me off no matter where it's coming from. I disdain somebody telling me what to think even when I agree with most of it. When I want to be encouraged in my own views, I want Rush and Hannity. When I want to be enraged by the enemy, I want Maddow and Olberman. When I want news, I want news. I suppose 2 out of 3 ain't bad, but number three is extremely important, especially for those who are easily swayed by propoganda.
Visit BoneSoft.com for code generation tools (XML & XSD -> C#, VB, etc...) and some free developer tools as well.
-
BoneSoft wrote:
Rep. José Serrano is a notorious Castro, Chavez, and other commies supporter. Apparently this guy does this every session starting in 1999 and refiles every time Congress enters a new session.
This does undermine your title to this thread, you know?
This statement is false
No, it softens it. It recognizes that this wasn't cooked up specifically for Barry. The title refers to the devistating possibility that exists nonetheless. All I'm saying is, every time this moron has proposed this in the past it's never made it to vote (made it to committee the first time only), but that it may have a more sympathetic audience this go round.
Visit BoneSoft.com for code generation tools (XML & XSD -> C#, VB, etc...) and some free developer tools as well.
-
Oakman wrote:
N Koreas's nukes threan Japan far more than the US, let them worry about it.
Can't personally. I have family there. And if the US keeps it up, I'll have to consider my "Taco Stand in Japan" as less of a joke and more of a business plan. ;) I'm a poet and didn't even know it!
Visit BoneSoft.com for code generation tools (XML & XSD -> C#, VB, etc...) and some free developer tools as well.
BoneSoft wrote:
And if the US keeps it up, I'll have to consider my "Taco Stand in Japan" as less of a joke and more of a business plan.
Sorry, friend, but your taco stand is not a good reason for us to spend billions of dollars buying off N Korea. However, If you need a stateside representative, let me know.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.
-
fat_boy wrote:
The UK has no limitaiton on the number of terms a PM can serve
I don't know how to break it to you, but the U.S. doesn't have a Prime Minister. We have a President who has far more power and far less responsibility to the legislature than does the UK's Prime Minister.
fat_boy wrote:
In fact, limiting it is actually UN democratic since it FORBIDS people voting for who they want.
But a minute ago you were comparing the president of the US who at least is elected by people from all over the land, with the UK's Prime Minister who is elected by 50%+1 of one house of Parliament. Kindly make up your mind as to what method of electing a national leader works best and get back to me. The real truth is that ultimately it doesn't matter. Presidents and Prime Ministers and Glorious Leaders are all selected by a relatively small group of people who then arrange to have them put into power. This is as true of the U.S. as it is of Venezuela or France. I did grow up in a time and place where this was hidden better than it is today, but now it is pretty clear that voting rearranges the deck chairs on the Titanic, it doesn't change its course. That's up to the captain and his officers.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.
Oakman wrote:
the UK's Prime Minister who is elected by 50%+1 of one house of Parliament
Incorrect. In the UK we have members elected to parliament using a "first past the post" system. The UK Prime Minister is the leader of the political party that has gained the most members of parliament in the Westminster general election, however, there are notable exceptions. The political party gaining the most members elected to parliament is not usually the political party that has gained the most amount of votes in said general election or indeed percentage of votes. The leader of most political parties at Westminster gain that role usually after some convoluted procedures and rules that are peculiar to said political party with each political party having their own rules and procedures that they follow, and are not subjected to any vote by any ordinary members of the public.
-
Synaptrik wrote:
cavalier view
How so? What makes me think the entire issue is completely dishonest, is the fact that they only want to impose this on radio. Because of course radio is the only place that conservatives hold a majority. TV and print are FAR more dangerous. People have to actively decide to go listen to radio specifically for the views it represents. Most people want news, and get heavily liberal news almost by default. Which is why FNC is so vilified. If they really wanted fairness, they'd suggest cleaning up "news" and set all the partisan commentary aside somewhere where you would have to seek it to get it, like radio. Of course the left would never go for that, because they'd mostly fail, as they have with radio. Propaganda pisses me off no matter where it's coming from. I disdain somebody telling me what to think even when I agree with most of it. When I want to be encouraged in my own views, I want Rush and Hannity. When I want to be enraged by the enemy, I want Maddow and Olberman. When I want news, I want news. I suppose 2 out of 3 ain't bad, but number three is extremely important, especially for those who are easily swayed by propoganda.
Visit BoneSoft.com for code generation tools (XML & XSD -> C#, VB, etc...) and some free developer tools as well.
Well, I should first clarify my position in not supporting the fairness doctrine. Its stupid to say the least. I only meant cavalier in assuming that liberal talk radio doesn't have the audience. They do, but they don't champion their successes and numbers the way conservatives do. I consider this a fault on their part and a quality on the conservatives. Such that it tends to skew the numbers a bit when measuring success.
This statement is false
-
No, it softens it. It recognizes that this wasn't cooked up specifically for Barry. The title refers to the devistating possibility that exists nonetheless. All I'm saying is, every time this moron has proposed this in the past it's never made it to vote (made it to committee the first time only), but that it may have a more sympathetic audience this go round.
Visit BoneSoft.com for code generation tools (XML & XSD -> C#, VB, etc...) and some free developer tools as well.
Understood. One thing though... the colorization of Obama as Barry, Uhbama, etc... it seems that if the conservative position is solid enough, these would be completely unnecessary and might in fact detract some... just my opinion though.
This statement is false
-
Understood. One thing though... the colorization of Obama as Barry, Uhbama, etc... it seems that if the conservative position is solid enough, these would be completely unnecessary and might in fact detract some... just my opinion though.
This statement is false
I believe you are right. It betrays my personal distaste for having him in office. Which is somewhat childish, which is never helpful. And now that I say that, I can really see it. Thanks for pointing that out. I have nothing against the guy personally. Hell, I assume he's a nice guy. I just think that everything he wants to do will be destructive. My personal feelings are further compounded by the belief that there is a good possibility that he doesn't even hold the office legally. My biggest personal weakness is that complaining tends to be my favorite outlet for dealing with stress induced by situations I have no control over. And this administration fits that scenario. Point taken, and not lightly.
Visit BoneSoft.com for code generation tools (XML & XSD -> C#, VB, etc...) and some free developer tools as well.
-
Oakman wrote:
the UK's Prime Minister who is elected by 50%+1 of one house of Parliament
Incorrect. In the UK we have members elected to parliament using a "first past the post" system. The UK Prime Minister is the leader of the political party that has gained the most members of parliament in the Westminster general election, however, there are notable exceptions. The political party gaining the most members elected to parliament is not usually the political party that has gained the most amount of votes in said general election or indeed percentage of votes. The leader of most political parties at Westminster gain that role usually after some convoluted procedures and rules that are peculiar to said political party with each political party having their own rules and procedures that they follow, and are not subjected to any vote by any ordinary members of the public.
Richard A. Abbott wrote:
are not subjected to any vote by any ordinary members of the public.
That's what I said, Richard. Hesjhe's elected by a majority of the lower house. I just said it in American.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.
-
I believe you are right. It betrays my personal distaste for having him in office. Which is somewhat childish, which is never helpful. And now that I say that, I can really see it. Thanks for pointing that out. I have nothing against the guy personally. Hell, I assume he's a nice guy. I just think that everything he wants to do will be destructive. My personal feelings are further compounded by the belief that there is a good possibility that he doesn't even hold the office legally. My biggest personal weakness is that complaining tends to be my favorite outlet for dealing with stress induced by situations I have no control over. And this administration fits that scenario. Point taken, and not lightly.
Visit BoneSoft.com for code generation tools (XML & XSD -> C#, VB, etc...) and some free developer tools as well.
Well, you set the bar for people on all sides of these issues. Myself included. If we're not careful we might just end up with some respectful debates. :laugh: But the top 4 threads remind me that we'll still only be part way there. [addition]
BoneSoft wrote:
I have nothing against the guy personally. Hell, I assume he's a nice guy. I just think that everything he wants to do will be destructive.
I truly believe that we all love America and really just want it to be better, but differ on the route to take and the model of what that means. One of the things I thought was truly remarkable following 911 was how it crystallized that. People who had been at odds bonded behind being American. I think we need more of that, but its a shame that it might take a tragedy to get it. [/addition]
This statement is false
-
John Carson wrote:
Noone can "stay in power as long as he likes" merely because of the absence of term limits.
Nope, but if there is an absence of term limits, it makes it easier to stay in power for a long time. No-one has said that this and this alone will make all the difference. And your attempts at claiming that someone did so reflect badly on your arguments, not ours.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.
Oakman wrote:
Nope, but if there is an absence of term limits, it makes it easier to stay in power for a long time. No-one has said that this and this alone will make all the difference. And your attempts at claiming that someone did so reflect badly on your arguments, not ours.
I never denied that an absence of term limits makes it easier to stay in power for a long time. In the one case is is (legally) impossible. In the other it is possible and FDR proved it. And your attempts at claiming that I did so reflect badly on your arguments, not mine.
John Carson
-
Synaptrik wrote:
That 11 divided by 3 is irrational.
A rational number, by definition, is a number expressible as a ratio of two integers. Rational is rational.
John Carson
-
Synaptrik wrote:
That 11 divided by 3 is irrational.
A rational number, by definition, is a number expressible as a ratio of two integers. Rational is rational.
John Carson
Well, if you insist on ruining some light hearted humor, you've succeeded. You might also find, now that you decided to turn the pedant onto me, that you would get a better reception with your viewpoint if you left biting insulting comments out of your posts. I, in fact would probably side with you more, except that you come off like a childish disrespectful jerk and that nullifies any argument you present. In fact, I've had to remind myself that I agreed with one of your views after your attitude put me off of it. Quite the success story there if your aim is to get any kind of message across. Keep up the good work.
This statement is false
-
Well, you set the bar for people on all sides of these issues. Myself included. If we're not careful we might just end up with some respectful debates. :laugh: But the top 4 threads remind me that we'll still only be part way there. [addition]
BoneSoft wrote:
I have nothing against the guy personally. Hell, I assume he's a nice guy. I just think that everything he wants to do will be destructive.
I truly believe that we all love America and really just want it to be better, but differ on the route to take and the model of what that means. One of the things I thought was truly remarkable following 911 was how it crystallized that. People who had been at odds bonded behind being American. I think we need more of that, but its a shame that it might take a tragedy to get it. [/addition]
This statement is false
Synaptrik wrote:
I truly believe that we all love America and really just want it to be better
I used to. And for the most part I still do. However, there are some Americans that not only hate America, but want to change in fundamentally or destroy it trying. I don't think many of those people are public, but I don't know who they are. And I believe most of them are using the Democrat party to try to do this. People like the Institute for Policy Change (Cora Weiss), Samuel Rubin Foundation, National Lawyers Guild, and IPCs many many other satellite affiliates. But that's another story. For the most part, I'm with you, and believe that most Americans truely have the countries best interests at heart but just have vastly different ideas of how to make things better. But the rift between the two main camps seems to be widening, which is not a good thing since most people can't understand at all how the other side thinks already. More people are going to have to be able to realize that we are all on the same side, and that people who disagree aren't their enemy just because they disagree. I don't know what it will take to make more people come to that realization though. I kind of wish I'd been here after 9/11, all I got were second hand stories of how people had come together. I moved to Japan on 9/16/01 and didn't come back until early 2003.
Visit BoneSoft.com for code generation tools (XML & XSD -> C#, VB, etc...) and some free developer tools as well.