• 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 2015 |OT| Keep Calm and Diablos On

Status
Not open for further replies.
B

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
Trouble said:
Courtesy of Megasoum in the @POTUS thread.

lx2W0a0.png
Click to expand...

E4T10Ob.gif
 
K

kirblar

Member
Randomly came across Fox News coverage of the Waco shootings, and they had a (white) guy out who actively called people out re: romanticizing white organized crime (Mafia, Biker Gangs) while demonizing black organized crime. Was a (good) shock.
 
F

FyreWulff

Member
Honest question: similar to not having term restrictions until FDR went for 4, does anyone think Congress will try to amend the constitution counting spouse terms as President against the limit to block any future 'power couples' from chaining presidencies if Hilary wins?

Besides the fact it's probably mathematically impossible to amend anything for the next few decades or so.
 
M

Mike M

Nick N
FyreWulff said:
Honest question: similar to not having term restrictions until FDR went for 4, does anyone think Congress will try to amend the constitution counting spouse terms as President against the limit to block any future 'power couples' from chaining presidencies if Hilary wins?

Besides the fact it's probably mathematically impossible to amend anything for the next few decades or so.
Click to expand...
Depends on how we're defining "try."

Someone will probably write something and try to introduce it, but I doubt it would be voted on.
 
G

Gotchaye

Member
FyreWulff said:
Honest question: similar to not having term restrictions until FDR went for 4, does anyone think Congress will try to amend the constitution counting spouse terms as President against the limit to block any future 'power couples' from chaining presidencies if Hilary wins?

Besides the fact it's probably mathematically impossible to amend anything for the next few decades or so.
Click to expand...

This seems like it'd be really hard to sell. It's immediately partisan and the focus on that one particular kind of relationship would make the whole thing look hugely sexist - "it's fine when you're the son of a former president but not when you're the wife of a former president".
 
F

FyreWulff

Member
Gotchaye said:
This seems like it'd be really hard to sell. It's immediately partisan and the focus on that one particular kind of relationship would make the whole thing look hugely sexist - "it's fine when you're the son of a former president but not when you're the wife of a former president".
Click to expand...

Yeah. That would stop it in it's tracks. Just wondering if there'd be enough salt in the salt mines.
 
P

PhoenixDark

Banned
RustyNails said:
ISIS was created the moment we landed in Iraq...All the ISIS documentaries tell us that ISIS command, control and battlefield leadership is made up of ex-Baathists. Do you really think Maliki would have given a crap about what US told him after 2009? Fuck no. As far as he's concerned, the Americans are leaving in 2011 and the only superpower that is gonna stay is Iran. Maliki took his marching orders from Tehran, not DC.

The fuckup was Bush alone from authorizing the war to debaathification of the army to the shitty government that was created according to the charlatan Ahmed Chalabi. Textbook recipe for an insurgent revolution from the sunni minority. They should have created a government that looked like Lebenon's confessionalism form, with its varied and intricate structure that gives almost equal representation to all the religions, sects and ethnicities and everyone lives in a delicate balance of equal success. Instead they did it in a basic way that only Shias could come to power because 80% of Iraq is Shi'ite.

Hindsight is 20/20 and no way Obama could have fixed their government. All we could do was leave Iraq the fuck alone. Obama's fault lies in his dismissal of ISIS as non serious militia. But even if we took ISIS seriously way back when, who knows what wouldve popped up down the road because institutionally the Sunnis were still fucked.
Click to expand...

He couldn't fix their government but certainly you aren't saying that nothing could have been done. Or that the absence of leadership within Iraq didn't contribute to the rise of ISIS.
 
P

pigeon

Banned
FyreWulff said:
Honest question: similar to not having term restrictions until FDR went for 4, does anyone think Congress will try to amend the constitution counting spouse terms as President against the limit to block any future 'power couples' from chaining presidencies if Hilary wins?

Besides the fact it's probably mathematically impossible to amend anything for the next few decades or so.
Click to expand...

Seems pretty unlikely.

You have to understand that, while it's only recently been constitutional law that presidents could only serve two terms, it's always been the constitutional norm, going back to Washington. When FDR served four terms, it was a flouting of a hundred years of precedent. It was kind of a miniature constitutional crisis, really! Because if he hadn't died, what would have stopped him from just continuing to run and probably win, turning it into a de facto dictatorship?

So when they amended the constitution immediately afterwards, it's best understood as the resolution of that constitutional crisis, responding to the violation of a norm by creating new constitutional law and/or norm to prevent the same uncertainty in future.

There's no real constitutional norms around presidential spouses, because up until quite recently it was basically unthinkable that a woman could be president (or that a president's spouse wouldn't be a woman). So there's no pre-existing balance to restore. Nor is there any real danger that a president and his wife would take over the executive branch permanently, because after all, there are only two of them. (There won't be any polygamist presidents any time soon either.)
 
Rhomega Beta

Rhomega Beta

Member
Come to Arizona, where you can only have welfare for one year for your whole lifetime.
http://www.azfamily.com/story/29095121/facing-1-billion-deficit-arizona-sharply-limits-welfare

PHOENIX (AP) -Facing a $1 billion budget deficit, Arizona's Republican-led Legislature has reduced the lifetime limit for welfare recipients to the shortest window in the nation.

Low-income families on welfare will now have their benefits cut off after just 12 months.

As a result, the Arizona Department of Economic Security will drop at least 1,600 families - including more than 2,700 children - from the state's federally funded welfare program when the budget year begins in July.

The cuts of at least $4 million reflect a prevailing mood among the lawmakers in control in Arizona, that welfare, Medicaid and other public assistance programs are crutches that keep the poor from getting back on their feet and achieving their potential.

"I tell my kids all the time that the decisions we make have rewards or consequences, and if I don't ever let them face those consequences, they can't get back on the path to rewards," Republican Sen. Kelli Ward, R-Lake Havasu City, said during debate on the budget. "As a society, we are encouraging people at times to make poor decisions and then we reward them."

Cutting off these benefits after just one year isn't fair, said Jessica Lopez, 23, who gave birth to her son while living in a domestic violence shelter and has struggled to hold onto jobs because she has dyslexia and didn't finish high school.

"We're all human," said Lopez, who got $133 per month for about a year until she qualified for a larger federal disability check. "Everybody has problems. Everybody is different. When people ask for help, we should be able to get it without having to be looked at wrong."

Most states impose a five-year limit on welfare benefits. Thirteen states limit it to two years or less, and Texas has a tiered time limit that can be as little as 12 months but allows children to continue to receive funding even after the parents have been cut, welfare policy analyst Liz Schott said.

Long-term welfare recipients are often the most vulnerable, suffering from mental and physical disabilities, poor job histories and little education, she said. But without welfare, they'll likely show up in other ways that will cost taxpayers, from emergency rooms to shelters to the criminal justice system, Schott said.

"The reason they are on public assistance is because many of them are not really succeeding in the workforce," said Schott, a senior fellow at the Center of Budget and Policy Priorities, a non-partisan research organization.

Arizona's Legislature cut the budgets of an array of programs to meet the governor's no-tax-increase pledge. The bill that included the welfare cuts received overwhelming support earlier this spring from Republicans, with just one Democrat voting in favor.

The Legislature also passed a law seeking to force anyone getting Medicaid to have a job, and cutting off those benefits after five years. And Republican leaders are suing their own state to block a centerpiece of President Barack Obama's health care law, which expanded Medicaid to give more poor people health insurance.

If they prevail, more than 300,000 poor Arizonans could lose their coverage.

Republican Gov. Doug Ducey's office called all these cuts necessary to protect taxpayers and K-12 classrooms - even though the source of the money is the federal government.

Arizona's welfare is entirely federally funded through the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program, but that money comes in a block grant, and Republicans want to use it instead for agencies such as the state's Department of Child Safety.

"The bipartisan, balanced budget passed by the Legislature and signed by the governor protects Arizona's most vulnerable, while avoiding a tax increase," said Daniel Scarpinato, governor's office spokesman.

Democratic Rep. Andrew Sherwood, D-Tempe, said the Republicans made these cuts hastily, voting in the middle of the night in March to avoid transparency.

"This is a very small investment, but it is critical to people who need it the most," Sherwood said. "You're talking about desperate families, those who are unemployed and underemployed. Single mothers and parents with kids."

Former President Bill Clinton signed the block grant law in 1997, making good on a campaign promise to "end welfare as we know it." The federal government still requires states to make sure recipients have a job, are looking for work, going to school or trying to go to school, but states retain broad discretion in imposing restrictions.
Click to expand...
 
K

KingK

Member
RustyNails said:
Oddly enough Jeb Bush is Stannis because he believes the presidency belongs to him because his brother was the President and his Poppa was the President before. Hence, it's his birthright.
Click to expand...
Yeah, Jeb is definitely Stannis. Does that make Rubio Renly then?

Obviously Hilary is Danaerys and the electoral college is her trio of dragons.


I guess Romney was Tywin, and Obama is Robb, but in this world the red wedding failed.
 
B

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
KingK said:
Yeah, Jeb is definitely Stannis. Does that make Rubio Renly then?

Obviously Hilary is Danaerys and the electoral college is her trio of dragons.


I guess Romney was Tywin, and Obama is Robb, but in this world the red wedding failed.
Click to expand...

If Hilary is Dany then Biden would be Jon Snow. Which fits.
 
R

RustyNails

Member
KingK said:
Yeah, Jeb is definitely Stannis. Does that make Rubio Renly then?

Obviously Hilary is Danaerys and the electoral college is her trio of dragons.


I guess Romney was Tywin, and Obama is Robb, but in this world the red wedding failed.
Click to expand...
Yeah Hillary is Danaerys just because of the sheer inevitability. But that makes Bill Clinton Khal-Drogo, yet I'm perfectly fine with that.

George W Bush is Joffrey. Mitt Romney would be more Renly because he did have a good claim to the throne after Bush. Tywin is someone who works the GOP from the background, like Karl Rove or Reince Priebus.

Marco Rubio is Lommy.
 
P

Poodlestrike

Banned
...

I really don't want to be dropping book spoilers in here, but, uh...

These are not comparisons y'all want to be making.

That's pretty vague, right?
 
P

PhoenixDark

Banned
Sarah Palin is Victarion Greyjoy. The dumbest person in the room but still entertaining as hell. And they have similar views on gay people.
 
K

KingK

Member
PhoenixDark said:
Sarah Palin is Victarion Greyjoy. The dumbest person in the room but still entertaining as hell. And they have similar views on gay people.
Click to expand...
Lol yes. I was trying to think of who the Greyjoys would be. I was leaning towards Rick Perry for Victarion but Palin works. Santorum is the Damphair for sure though.
 
K

KingK

Member
Macho Madness said:
Actual news: Governor Pence seemingly not running for president.

https://twitter.com/WTHRcom/status/600438488685772801
Click to expand...
Not surprising after the RFA backlash and the AIDS outbreak making our state a national joke as a direct result of his decisions. At this point he needs to be worried about winning re-election as governor(which should have been a sure thing in a pretty solidly republican state with a gradually improving economy), since his approvals have plummeted last i checked.

Fuck Pence. I didn't much care for Daniels either, but he was at least one of the more sensible and pragmatic republican governors in the country. Pence is an idiot.
 
C

Chichikov

Member
Poodlestrike said:
...

I really don't want to be dropping book spoilers in here, but, uh...

These are not comparisons y'all want to be making.

That's pretty vague, right?
Click to expand...
I know nothing, just speculating, tagging because people are super sensitive about spoilers -
Dear Jeebus, I hope you implied that Daneaeaeary, AKA the human pee break is going to fucking die along with her pointless and boring story thread.
I hope captain friendszone gives her stone herpes.
 
B

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
Chichikov said:
I know nothing, just speculating, tagging because people are super sensitive about spoilers -
Dear Jeebus, I hope you implied that Daneaeaeary, AKA the human pee break is going to fucking die along with her pointless and boring story thread.
I hope captain friendszone gives her stone herpes.
Click to expand...

That would be my shit dude, I want this to happen so bad.
 
C

Chichikov

Member
B-Dubs said:
That would be my shit dude, I want this to happen so bad.
Click to expand...
(again, not actual spoilers) -
The writing on her story-line was sooooooooooooo bad this season. For real, that shit is like something from a bioware game:

OMG TOUGH MORAL DILEMMA, do you
1. side with nobles
2. side with common people.
3. MY DRAGONS
4. show tits oh wait, she said she won't do that no more.

I was half expecting to see "you gained 5 nobility loyalty points" popping on the screen.
 
P

Poodlestrike

Banned
Chichikov said:
I know nothing, just speculating, tagging because people are super sensitive about spoilers -
Dear Jeebus, I hope you implied that Daneaeaeary, AKA the human pee break is going to fucking die along with her pointless and boring story thread.
I hope captain friendszone gives her stone herpes.
Click to expand...

These ARE actual spoilers for Book 5: A Dance of Dragons. You have been warned.

Worse than that, if you can believe it. Her plot thread is not only not wrapped up, it's effectively unwrappupable except in a mass die-off. She's stuck in a permanent quagmire trying to rule... whatever the name of that city is, her dragons have become more of a liability than an asset (one's basically gone berserk, she keeps the other two chained at the bottom of a pit all the time and is increasingly terrified of them. She basically spends all 1000 pages of the book stuck like that, with no chance of victory in sight. I won't even say what's going on with Jon Snow/Joe Biden.
 
P

PhoenixDark

Banned
Poodlestrike said:
These ARE actual spoilers for Book 5: A Dance of Dragons. You have been warned.

Worse than that, if you can believe it. Her plot thread is not only not wrapped up, it's effectively unwrappupable except in a mass die-off. She's stuck in a permanent quagmire trying to rule... whatever the name of that city is, her dragons have become more of a liability than an asset (one's basically gone berserk, she keeps the other two chained at the bottom of a pit all the time and is increasingly terrified of them. She basically spends all 1000 pages of the book stuck like that, with no chance of victory in sight. I won't even say what's going on with Jon Snow/Joe Biden.
Click to expand...
And that's why you don't invade/occupy Afghanistan.
 
R

RustyNails

Member
Also Tywin should be Roger Ailes. He is not really the king but he is the king.

And if Dany is Hillary, then Martin O Malley or Bernie Sanders can be Jorah Fedora, Daario or Ser Barristen.
 
W

watershed

Banned
I suppose I am really late to this but Jeb Bush seems like he's purposefully positioning himself as a throwback republican on Iraq and gay rights. What an idiot.
 
A

AndyD

aka andydumi
watershed said:
I suppose I am really late to this but Jeb Bush seems like he's purposefully positioning himself as a throwback republican on Iraq and gay rights. What an idiot.
Click to expand...

It may be on purpose. I imagine there is a good number of the Republican base that who believe we should never have left Iraq and the war was good for us and for them, and also who believe in strong religious rights over civil rights. While it may seem a throwback, it could be targeted at a large voting block.
 
P

PhoenixDark

Banned
Yellowtail said:
We have our first Bushism:

"And I admired the men and women -- mostly men -- that made the ultimate sacrifice"

- Jeb Bush on Iraq.
Click to expand...

I assume he meant mainly men made the ultimate sacrifice, which is true obviously. But the wording is so amateur that it sounds like he was saying he admires the men more than the women. I've noticed he does a lot of thinking while he speaks, like Obama. You can hear him amending his statements live, like a lawyer or professor. But unlike Obama he clearly isn't a charismatic figure.
 
T

The Technomancer

card-carrying scientician
Yellowtail said:
We have our first Bushism:

"And I admired the men and women -- mostly men -- that made the ultimate sacrifice"

- Jeb Bush on Iraq.
Click to expand...

I mean...like, okay, lets give him the benefit of the doubt and say that he meant that mostly men laid down their lives, not that he mostly admired the men. I do actually believe that's the case

Still why would you use that qualifier? What does emphasizing that the military is mostly men in this context actually do for you rhetorically other than stoke some nasty flame?
 
R

RustyNails

Member
"Mostly men" is such a weird qualifier to have. What are you insinuating? I dont see Jeb as being a guy hung up on technicalities like a scientist.

Yea he stepped in it now, no matter his intention. If you're explaining you're losing.
 
A

AndyD

aka andydumi
The Technomancer said:
I mean...like, okay, lets give him the benefit of the doubt and say that he meant that mostly men laid down their lives, not that he mostly admired the men. I do actually believe that's the case

Still why would you use that qualifier? What does emphasizing that the military is mostly men in this context actually do for you rhetorically other than stoke some nasty flame?
Click to expand...

I see it as the reverse. The focus being on mostly men losing their lives, because people are more sensitive to women losing their lives. So to alleviate those concerns, he is emphasizing that not many women died.
 
N

NeoXChaos

Member
All this fighting over the debates in an attempt to show the party has "diversity" is so stupid. Your probably going to end up nominating another white male regardless if its not Rubio.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

GAF Museum - The Greatest OTs of All Time (or at least, some of the great ones)
|OT|
4
2K
Komatsu replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT6| Made this thread during Harvey because the ratings would be higher
338 339 340 341 342
17K
2M
UselessNapkin replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT5| The Man In the High Chair
395 396 397 398 399
20K
2M
RDreamer replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT4| The leaks are coming from inside the white house
396 397 398 399 400
20K
2M
ShironRedshift replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT3| 13 Treasons Why
393 394 395 396 397
20K
2M
Zaraki_Kenpachi replied
Top Bottom