• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF 2013 |OT1| Never mind, Wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

Status
Not open for further replies.
C

ClovingWestbrook

Banned
RDreamer said:
He called Obama "Lord and savior"
Click to expand...

Well, to Jamie he is.

anti.jpg
 
Link

Link

The Autumn Wind
867-5309 said:
The theme of the complaints I saw is that Michelle Obama believes she is 'entitled' to appear at the Oscars and can do anything she wants because she is the queen.
Click to expand...
Somewhere, Ann Romney is crying and screaming "That should have been me!"
 
empty vessel

empty vessel

Member
GaimeGuy said:
The problem isn't cuts to defense, but the lack of reinvestment into America with the savings.

The scientists and manual laborers that work on military equipment as contractors would be put to better use redesigning our cities and our infrastructure domestically.

Jobs for the sake of jobs, and cuts for the sake of cuts, are equally stupid.
Click to expand...

It's not really true that jobs for the sake of jobs is stupid. Work can permit the building and retention of skills, even if it accomplishes nothing substantive and creates no new net wealth for society (e.g., a person digging and re-filling holes might learn how to operate a tractor in the process). Moreover, jobs lead to income, and income leads to individual, family, and, ultimately, social stability, i.e., less criminal and antisocial behavior. So jobs for the sake of jobs actually can benefit society, at least compared to its alternative, which is unemployment and which has substantive negative effects on society.
 
B

bomma_man

Member
Huge article about Cantor on The New Yorker

Ramesh Ponnuru, a senior editor for National Review, was asked to explain why the Republicans’ economic agenda had failed. “I said to them, ‘Don’t kid yourself that this was a close election; face the facts that this is in a lot of ways a very weak party,’ ” Ponnuru told me. He argued that too many voters believe that the Party’s economic agenda helps nobody except rich people and big business.
Click to expand...

At the January retreat, a halfway point in the midst of these budget battles, Cantor sounded chastened, or, at least, like a man wanting to appear chastened. “We’ve got to understand that people don’t think Republicans have their back,” he said. “Whether it’s the middle class, whether it’s the Latino or the Asian vote.” It was not “necessarily our policies” but, rather, how “we’ve been portrayed.” He added, “It goes to that axiom about how people don’t really care how much you know until they know you care. So we’ve got to take that to heart and, I think, look to be able to communicate why we’re doing what we’re doing.”
Click to expand...

Cantor had been struck by one presentation at the retreat. Patrick Doyle, the president and C.E.O. of Domino’s, had given a talk called “Turning It Around,” in which he explained that he revived the failing company after conducting extensive research that led him to conclude that Domino’s pizza was terrible. But Cantor seemed more interested in Doyle’s sales advice than in his point about his product.
“There was a discussion about features and benefits,” he said. “Marketing 101, right? If you’re selling detergent and you put a new blue dot in a detergent block, that’s a feature. But the benefit is it gets your clothes cleaned.” He paused to let the lesson sink in.
“Well, we have features that we’re for, whether it’s balanced budgets, whether it’s fiscal prudence or reforming entitlements,” he said. “Those are features—those aren’t ends in themselves. But they’re going to produce a stronger America. They’re going to save the safety-net programs for those who need them. We have to apply our principles in a way that translates to understanding that we actually are focussing and trying to help people and meet the needs that they have.”
Since the 2012 elections, the Republicans have been divided between those who believe their policies are the problem and those who believe they just need better marketing—between those who believe they need to make better pizza and those who think they just need a more attractive box. Cantor, who is known among his colleagues as someone with strategic intelligence and a knack for political positioning, argues that it’s the box.
Click to expand...

Tom Price, an orthopedic surgeon from Georgia, who holds Newt Gingrich’s old congressional seat and is seen as a leader of the most conservative House Republicans, said that, during a recent debate over taxes, “we talked past each other oftentimes as much as Republicans and Democrats talk past each other.” He explained how surprised he was when one of his colleagues from a Northern state told him that he favored a tax increase on millionaires. “It hit me that what he was hearing when he’s going home to a Republican district in a blue state is completely different than what I’m hearing when I go home to a Republican district in a red state,” he said. “My folks are livid about this stuff. His folks clearly weren’t. And so we weren’t even starting from the same premise.”
Click to expand...

In a previous era, when House leaders punished errant members, there was little recourse for the congressmen; party committees could withhold campaign funds. But Huelskamp said that he was immune to such pressure, since his support came not from House leaders but from grass-roots conservatives. “They will say, ‘Either vote this way or we’ll shut your money off,’ ” he said. “But nobody in Washington elected me, nobody in leadership. Outside groups came and helped me.”
Click to expand...

Labrador was still irked by the Purge. “I thought it was a mistake for anybody to be punished for their votes or for their actions or for their attitudes,” he said. Worse, he added, was that Boehner had insisted on personally trying to cut a deal with Obama after the election and then agreed to raise taxes. “I agree that the President won, and I agree that the President had a mandate to propose what he wanted to propose. It doesn’t mean that my mandate is the same as his mandate. I won my election as well.” Many House Republicans said the same thing after the election. “We’re the first branch of government,” Labrador said. “We don’t have a king. We don’t have an emperor.”
Click to expand...

So did Tom Cole. He was dumbfounded that so many of his colleagues voted against the fiscal-cliff deal. “These guys have no endgame,” he said. “I mean, they just are so desperate to do something that they don’t think past their nose. And that’s the dangerous part of this.” He added that he couldn’t understand what the opponents of the deal believed they were accomplishing: “I saw one of them on television who said, ‘Well, Obama will cave.’ Really? With all the polls running in his direction, his popularity moving up, ours in the tank? He’s not going to cave. Some of these guys will hold a political gun to their head and threaten the President: ‘Do what I want or I’ll pull the trigger!’ Like he cares?”
Click to expand...

Cantor had also come to see that when House Republicans returned to power in 2011 they were unrealistic about their expectations. “The job right now is, first of all, accepting the fact that although we’re a majority in the House, we are a minority in Washington,” he said. “It’s run by the Democrats, and so we’ve got to be smart about how we go forward.” Boehner repeatedly reminds House Republicans that they control only “one-half of one-third of Washington.” Similarly, at the retreat, Paul Ryan told reporters that Republicans “have to recognize the realities of the divided government that we have.”
Click to expand...

Shucosky talked about the arthritis in her neck and the costly surgery that she had had. She hoped that the government would help bring down health-care costs rather than increase them. The comment piqued the interest of Kelley. “If I heard correctly, certain other countries, they get free medical?” he asked. “Is that true?”
Cantor sighed. Free health care was not on his list of issues. “Well, it’s different in every country,” he explained. “There are a lot of people who don’t have insurance here and can’t access it, and that’s why the President’s health-care bill that passed attempts to go in and allow for everyone to have health care. And we’re grappling with the expense.”
Click to expand...

The real trouble is that the Republican Party cannot be transformed by the leadership of the House of Representatives. House Republicans as a group are farther to the right than they have ever been. The overwhelming majority still fear a primary challenge from a more conservative rival more than a general-election campaign against a Democrat. They may hope that the Party’s national brand improves enough to help win the White House in 2016, but there is little incentive for the average member of the House to moderate his image.
The House is rarely the source of renewal for a political party. In the nineteen-eighties, during a low point for the Democrats, it was Democratic governors like Bill Clinton, not the unpopular Democratic-controlled House, who pointed the way out of the wilderness for the Party. Major change almost always comes from a party’s aspiring Presidential candidates, and almost never from the House.
Click to expand...
 
Link

Link

The Autumn Wind
Patrick Doyle, the president and C.E.O. of Domino’s, had given a talk called “Turning It Around,” in which he explained that he revived the failing company after conducting extensive research that led him to conclude that Domino’s pizza was terrible.
Click to expand...
This got a good laugh out of me.
 
A

Aaron

Member
Eric Cantor is one of the few people that if I met him in real life I don't think I could resist the urge to spit on him.
 
B

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
jamesinclair said:
Ill read this tomorrow.

Does it cover his newest evil plan to fuck over america?


Eric Cantor will propose Federal Law that Ends Overtime Pay for hourly workers
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/...Law-that-Ends-Overtime-Pay-for-hourly-workers


Time and a half? Please, think of the job creators!
Click to expand...

Yes it mentions the law, how he wants to turn overtime pay into extra-vacation time. Personally, I'd rather have the money. We do need to have a national conversation about how we view work though. People see it as the end-all be-all sometimes and that's just wrong. But that's a talk for another time.

It's a very interesting article. He really does seem to think he's got a branding problem on his hands when it's really deeper than that. The part where the guy asks if it's true that other countries have free healthcare is telling. The increase in taxes to pay for single payer would probably be less than we actually pay for the insurance we get now.

Piecake said:
Are these people idiots?
Click to expand...

Probably yes.
 
B

Black Mamba

Member
bomma_man said:
The message that Cantor got out of it is even funnier
Click to expand...

yup, he completely ignores that Dominoes completely changed their pizza, lol. They had a massive campaign about how they changed the sauce and everything.

In fairness to Cantor, this is the conservative conundrum. By definition, conservatives are unchanging (at least within their time) so how do you change if you can't change at all?
 
B

Black Mamba

Member
75 Prominent Republicans sign Amacus Brief in Prop 8 Case in favor of legalizing same-sex marriage

Among them are Meg Whitman, who supported Proposition 8 when she ran for California governor; Representatives Ileana Ros-Lehtinen of Florida and Richard Hanna of New York; Stephen J. Hadley, a Bush national security adviser; Carlos Gutierrez, a commerce secretary to Mr. Bush; James B. Comey, a top Bush Justice Department official; David A. Stockman, President Ronald Reagan’s first budget director; and Deborah Pryce, a former member of the House Republican leadership from Ohio who is retired from Congress.
Click to expand...

I'm starting to think more and more the SCOTUS is going to legalize it across the country. Still surprised they took the case this year rather than in like 4 years or so but I feel like it's happening.
 
F

FyreWulff

Member
B-Dubs said:
Yes it mentions the law, how he wants to turn overtime pay into extra-vacation time. Personally, I'd rather have the money. We do need to have a national conversation about how we view work though. People see it as the end-all be-all sometimes and that's just wrong. But that's a talk for another time.
Click to expand...

And then of course you'd never actually get to use the vacation time (union or not) because you'd be replaced by someone who's willing to keep working and never burn it.
 
S

sc0la

Unconfirmed Member
Wouldn't mind a change like that to overtime IF:

You got paid time and a half, regardless of whether you chose overtime pay or comp time off (CTO), upon meeting the existing OT thresholds.

If you choose CTO it appears on your next paycheck exactly like overtime.

When you may use CTO is treated exactly as any other vacation or sick time per company policy.

CTO does not expire.

You are paid out your remaining CTO at your current wage upon separation for any reason.

There was a reasonable cap on the amount of CTO you could accrue (120-240). You can use it, cash it out or take OT pay when you are at your ceiling.

Somehow I doubt that's what their plan is...
 
N

NYCmetsfan

Banned
Black Mamba said:
75 Prominent Republicans sign Amacus Brief in Prop 8 Case in favor of legalizing same-sex marriage



I'm starting to think more and more the SCOTUS is going to legalize it across the country. Still surprised they took the case this year rather than in like 4 years or so but I feel like it's happening.
Click to expand...
I hope so but didn't the appeals court narrow the ruling. It would give Roberts cover to overturn AA and the VRA though and not completely hate civil rights. Just stuff the affects white people.
 
B

Black Mamba

Member
APKmetsfan said:
I hope so but didn't the appeals court narrow the ruling. It would give Roberts cover to overturn AA and the VRA though and not completely hate civil rights. Just stuff the affects white people.
Click to expand...

I've long held the belief that they wouldn't take the case unless to overturn it nation-wide. Since the previous ruling was narrow why bother to take it?

Usually the SCOTUS takes a case for 2 reasons

1. Overturn

2. Uphold and set as standard across the nation

Upholding a very narrow ruling like the previous one by the Cali Supreme Court fulfills neither. And while there are some narrow rulings by the Court, they are usually making previous rulings more narrow, not upholding already narrow ones.

If they wanted to uphold a very narrow ruling in a the same narrow way which only applied to a single state to begin with, why bother taking up the case when just not granting cert accomplishes the same thing? They'd be wasting their time which for them is a big deal since they take so few cases a year. Had the Cali court been expansive, then I think they may have taken the case to narrow it or something...maybe.

Between the trends in the States and what I believe is a lock to end DOMA, I really believe the SCOTUS will legalize same-sex marriage. I'm not completely confident of it (as I am of DOMA) but as I said, I was always under the impression the Court was biding their time with the issue until the national trend changed. I figured in 4 years or so and not now so that confused me but I guess they want to be ahead of the curve here. Especially since I can't see how they ignore the 14th Amendment issue. The legal twisting around it would make Raich seem like Griswold.
 
B

Black Mamba

Member
Jooney said:
My understanding was that the scope of the SCOTUS decision was limited to California. Is there a possibility that their ruling could apply to all 50 states?

EDIT:



That was the longest 1:44 of my life.
Click to expand...

The Cali court was narrow. The scotus doesn't need to be. There will be arguments based on the Cali constitution as well as the 14th amendment along with the narrow argument.

The Supreme Court is rarely limited in how broad it's rulings can be and generally tries to avoid narrow rulings unless necessary. Their goal is to set precedent and standards for the nation.
 
B

bomma_man

Member
Black Mamba said:
yup, he completely ignores that Dominoes completely changed their pizza, lol. They had a massive campaign about how they changed the sauce and everything.

In fairness to Cantor, this is the conservative conundrum. By definition, conservatives are unchanging (at least within their time) so how do you change if you can't change at all?
Click to expand...

Well I'd say the current Republican Party is reactionary rather than straight up conservative, and it's a pretty extreme form at that. The moderates want to go back to the 50's, the extremists the Gilded Age. They certainly want change, but it's the opposite of progressive change.
 
B

Black Republican

Member
Remember Christie Veto'ing that gay marriage bill sent to his desk a year or two back, is it possible for him to resign it a couple months before reelection or does it have to go through the house and senate in NJ again?
 
C

Carpe Libertatem

Member
Black Mamba said:
75 Prominent Republicans sign Amacus Brief in Prop 8 Case in favor of legalizing same-sex marriage



I'm starting to think more and more the SCOTUS is going to legalize it across the country. Still surprised they took the case this year rather than in like 4 years or so but I feel like it's happening.
Click to expand...

Well, I would guess that the decision will be 6-3 (maybe one of the three conservatives will surprise us, too, who knows) and because Roberts is writing the decision, he can limit the scope of it. Strike down DOMA, get same-sex marriage back in California.

I don't think Roberts will vote no because the case will come back to the court eventually - probably - and he's still young so he's got plenty of time left on the court. A 5-4 with Kennedy, though, could universally legalize it. I can't imagine what the GOP would be going through if that happened (especially if Roberts "betrayed" them again after ACA). Double down on marriage amendment?
 
C

Clevinger

Member
Carpe Libertatem said:
I don't think Roberts will vote no because the case will come back to the court eventually - probably - and he's still young so he's got plenty of time left on the court. A 5-4 with Kennedy, though, could universally legalize it. I can't imagine what the GOP would be going through if that happened (especially if Roberts "betrayed" them again after ACA). Double down on marriage amendment?
Click to expand...

They'll like him again once he strikes down part of the Voting Rights Act.
 
P

PhoenixDark

Banned
jamesinclair said:
Ill read this tomorrow.

Does it cover his newest evil plan to fuck over america?


Eric Cantor will propose Federal Law that Ends Overtime Pay for hourly workers
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/...Law-that-Ends-Overtime-Pay-for-hourly-workers


Time and a half? Please, think of the job creators!
Click to expand...
Where does he say he wants to repeal FLSA; he merely states he wants to give people the choice to transfer some (I'm assuming not all) overtime hours to time off. I like Kos but this seems like a stupid attack.
 
G

gcubed

Member
Black Republican said:
Remember Christie Veto'ing that gay marriage bill sent to his desk a year or two back, is it possible for him to resign it a couple months before reelection or does it have to go through the house and senate in NJ again?
Click to expand...

they just need a referendum vote on it. He said he wouldn't stop it if it came from a vote.


Copernicus said:
Christie gets snubbed from CPAC.


I'm guessing he's letting out a sigh of relief he doesn't have to be associated with that loser fest.

http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/chris-christie-snubbed-not-invited-to-cpac
Click to expand...

another plus for him leading into 2016. I expect 2014 to be the peak of infighting and purity tests
 
R

RustyNails

Member
gcubed said:
another plus for him leading into 2016. I expect 2014 to be the peak of infighting and purity tests
Click to expand...
But another negative for his chances of winning out of primaries. There's this weird fever in GOP circles that they are losing because they keep nominating moderates. McCain, Romney, and even W (moderate by today's standards) who barely eked out wins. How will they justify themselves by nominating another northeastern moderate?
 
G

gcubed

Member
RustyNails said:
But another negative for his chances of winning out of primaries. There's this weird fever in GOP circles that they are losing because they keep nominating moderates. McCain, Romney, and even W (moderate by today's standards) who barely eked out wins. How will they justify themselves by nominating another northeastern moderate?
Click to expand...

Once they lose the house and a handful of governor seats in 2014? That's the only thing that will do it. I didn't expect it to be even remotely possible, but they have continued to do themselves no favors, and continue to double down on the stupid.
 
K

kehs

Banned
Dozens of prominent Republicans — including top advisers to former President George W. Bush, four former governors and two members of Congress — have signed a legal brief arguing that gay people have a constitutional right to marry, a position that amounts to a direct challenge to Speaker John A. Boehner and reflects the civil war in the party since the November election.

...

The list of signers includes a string of Republican officials and influential thinkers — 75 as of Monday evening — who are not ordinarily associated with gay rights advocacy, including some who are speaking out for the first time and others who have changed their previous positions.

...

Among them are Meg Whitman, who supported Proposition 8 when she ran for California governor; Representatives Ileana Ros-Lehtinen of Florida and Richard Hanna of New York; Stephen J. Hadley, a Bush national security adviser; Carlos Gutierrez, a commerce secretary to Mr. Bush; James B. Comey, a top Bush Justice Department official; David A. Stockman, President Ronald Reagan’s first budget director; and Deborah Pryce, a former member of the House Republican leadership from Ohio who is retired from Congress.
Click to expand...

Functional republican party getting their act together?

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/26/u...gn-brief-in-support-of-gay-marriage.html?_r=0

To summarize, the coparenting agreement before us cannot be construed as a prohibited sale of the children because the biological mother retains her parental duties and responsibilities. The agreement is not injurious to the public because it provides the children with the resources of two persons, rather than leaving them as the fatherless children of an artificially inseminated mother. No societal interest has been harmed; no mischief has been done. Like the contract in Shirk, the coparenting agreement here contains “no element of immorality or illegality and did not violate public policy,” but rather “the contract was for the advantage and welfare of the child[ren].”
Click to expand...


Kansas Supreme Court Rules In Favor Of Same-Sex Adoption

n5122ec3f5b20c.gif
 
P

pigeon

Banned
Copernicus said:
Functional republican party getting their act together?

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/26/u...gn-brief-in-support-of-gay-marriage.html?_r=0
Click to expand...

They're desperate. Gay marriage is a done deal -- that's why Obama came out so strongly for it in his inaugural and SOTU. By grabbing it as part of his agenda, he gets to claim victory whenever it passes -- and if it gets blocked somehow, the GOP takes the blame because of their obstructionist behavior. Same deal as with immigration. So the sane GOP has to support it, not because they'll get credit (they will not), but because otherwise the GOP will be portrayed as taking a huge loss on this issue. Note, however, that no Republicans with ambitions of advancing in the party signed onto it. Except possibly Huntsman, but you know what I think there.
 
T

Troll

Banned
If you back at the last 20 years of popular voting in presidential elections, you're going to notice that Republicans have won the popular vote exactly one time since 1992. Hmm.
 
P

PhoenixDark

Banned
It's amazing how quickly the marriage equality movement rebounded after Prop 8, which was a crushing defeat on such a historic night. Gay marriage was inevitable even then, but I thought it wouldn't arrive until 2016-2020; it could easily happen this year. And if it doesn't, many more states will pass it in 2014. Amazing.

Which leaves the GOP in a bind. If it becomes law, will they double down on a constitutional amendment? I'd imagine there will be a Bachman type in the 2016 primary: will he/she manage to pressure moderate candidates to sign it? I just don't see this working as a Roe v Wade lightning rod for for the movement. Abortion will always instill passions in people, change people's mind once they see their first kid's ultrasound, it's more religious of an issue, etc. whereas many young Christians today have gay friends and see no harm in gay marriage.

The religious right is effectively fucked in the short and long term. A welcome development for those who watched the W Bush years and wondered when the fuck was that stuff going to end.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Kid these days will never...
Social 2 3 4
174
5K
Agent_Nobody replied
How is it that I own a bunch of Xbox 360 games I never bought digitally?
9
949
dragonyeuw replied
The Drunk GAF Containment Thread
Social Community 7 8 9 10 11
521
11K
ForAcademicPurposes replied
What are you thankful for this turkey day?
17
850
MaestroMike replied
Bad games with redeeming qualities
2 3
116
5K
Koenigssee replied
Top Bottom