Support NeoGAF

[AndyD]

Yeah I don't think this happens.

I have spoken with several past clerks and they all said the SC office is the most leakproof ship there is. They take huge pride in that, clerks and justices together.

 

[Diablos]

I have spoken with several past clerks and they all said the SC office is the most leakproof ship there is. They take huge pride in that, clerks and justices together.

I do remember Ginsburg teasing with confidence that NFIB v. Sebelius was all finished.
I am not seeing any subtle actions or reminders from anyone that the SCOTUS is on the administration's side this time around...

Obama was not being 'professional'. He was really being cautious because you could tell he was pissed off. I think he feels slighted, not just because of the case itself.

 

[PhoenixDark]

I do remember Ginsburg teasing with confidence that NFIB v. Sebelius was all finished.
I am not seeing any subtle actions or reminders from anyone that the SCOTUS is on the administration's side this time around...

Obama was not being 'professional'. He was really being cautious because you could tell he was pissed off. I think he feels slighted, not just because of the case itself.

I said professorial, not professional. He gave a clinical answer on why he's confident in the case, and why he's surprised the case even made it to the SC. How was he supposed to sound?

 

[Wilsongt]

Obama must feel the SCOTUS is gonna fuck him because he's giving a speech on the ACA.

Should he lose, he added: "Congress could fix this whole thing with a one-sentence provision."

Yeah, good luck with that, Bams.

That one sentence you'll get from Congress is "The law is shit and it's invalid."

 

[Aaron Strife]

PPP Ohio: Portman leads Strickland by 2 points

And Sandoval announced he isn't running for Nevada Senate. NRSC has misfired in the two most vulnerable Dem-held seats this year, Nevada and Colorado (when Mike Coffman said he wouldn't run). They could still be competitive but that's a bullet dodged at least.

 

[Macho Madness]

Jeb Bush: "Ultimately, Russia needs to be a European nation. Everything we do should be to isolate its corrupt leadership"

https://twitter.com/mckaycoppins/status/608315851931009027

 

[KingK]

Do we know when the supreme court will announce the ACA decision? I'm really nervous about this. Especially since Obama just went on tv defending the law, which makes me think he's worried about it. My entire family's healthcare is subsidised on the federal exchange. If they strike this down we don't have insurance anymore and i don't know what the fuck we're supposed to do. Republicans aren't going to pass the 5 words that would fix it in that case, they'd just blame Obama and keep calling for the whole thing to get scrapped. And Mike Pence isn't going to start a state exchange.

 

[PhoenixDark]

Do we know when the supreme court will announce the ACA decision? I'm really nervous about this. Especially since Obama just went on tv defending the law, which makes me think he's worried about it. My entire family's healthcare is subsidised on the federal exchange. If they strike this down we don't have insurance anymore and i don't know what the fuck we're supposed to do. Republicans aren't going to pass the 5 words that would fix it in that case, they'd just blame Obama and keep calling for the whole thing to get scrapped. And Mike Pence isn't going to start a state exchange.

What's the political leaning of your family, and do they like (and use) their plans?

 

[HylianTom]

Do we know when the supreme court will announce the ACA decision? I'm really nervous about this. Especially since Obama just went on tv defending the law, which makes me think he's worried about it. My entire family's healthcare is subsidised on the federal exchange. If they strike this down we don't have insurance anymore and i don't know what the fuck we're supposed to do. Republicans aren't going to pass the 5 words that would fix it in that case, they'd just blame Obama and keep calling for the whole thing to get scrapped. And Mike Pence isn't going to start a state exchange.

No way to know for sure. My gut is that we'll know on maybe Thursday the 25th?

My parents would lose their coverage as well, so I'm fretting along with you. Remember the theory floated a few months ago about how SCOTUS lately almost seems to please conservatives on one day and then liberals on another day? There's no concrete evidence to it, but it's still nagging at me.

 

[Metaphoreus]

Do we know when the supreme court will announce the ACA decision? I'm really nervous about this. Especially since Obama just went on tv defending the law, which makes me think he's worried about it. My entire family's healthcare is subsidised on the federal exchange. If they strike this down we don't have insurance anymore and i don't know what the fuck we're supposed to do. Republicans aren't going to pass the 5 words that would fix it in that case, they'd just blame Obama and keep calling for the whole thing to get scrapped. And Mike Pence isn't going to start a state exchange.

By the end of the month or immediately thereafter.

 

[Wilsongt]

Heh.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slat...hreatens_to_defund_judiciary_if_it_rules.html

On Thursday, Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback signed a bill that threatens the entire state's judiciary with destruction if it rules against a law he favors. Brownback has spent much of his tenure attempting to curb the state supreme court and consolidate power in the executive branch. Thursday's startling maneuver suggests the deeply conservative governor has no compunction about simply obliterating separation of powers when another branch of government gets in his way.

The Kansas trouble started in 2014, when the state supreme court ruled that the disparity between school funding in rich and poor districts violated the state constitution. The justices ordered the legislature to fix the problem. Soon after, the legislature passed an administrative law that stripped the supreme court of its authority to appoint local chief judges and set district court budgets. (Instead, district court judges—who are often quite conservative—were allowed to elect their own chief judge.)

Arriving shortly after the school funding ruling, this law was widely seen as a retaliation against the court—and a warning. In their first ruling, the justices stopped short of declaring that the school system as a whole was constitutionally underfunded. But the court acknowledged that it would one day answer that question. And if the justices mandate more school funding, the legislature will have to raise taxes, a step few legislators are eager to take.

The administrative law, then, was likely an effort to scare the court out of issuing a dramatic ruling in favor of greater school funding. Just in case the court didn't get the message, Brownback and the legislature have also threatened the justices with blatantly political reforms, like subjecting them to recall elections, splitting the court in two, lowering the retirement age, and introducing partisan elections. (Currently, a nominating commission creates a pool of candidates, and the governor selects from that bunch.)

Now the court has an opportunity to strike down the administrative law, which probably violates the state constitution. And that's where Brownback's insane new law comes in. The law declares that if the supreme court strikes down the administrative law, the entire state judiciary will lose its funding. Brownback and the legislature are essentially bullying the judiciary: Uphold our law or cease to exist.

Cartoon villain.

 

[AntoneM]

Heh.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slat...hreatens_to_defund_judiciary_if_it_rules.html



Cartoon villain.

Something tells me that Kansas needs a judiciary more than the judges need to live in Kansas.

 

[ivysaur12]

Obama must feel the SCOTUS is gonna fuck him because he's giving a speech on the ACA.



Yeah, good luck with that, Bams.

That one sentence you'll get from Congress is "The law is shit and it's invalid."

I don't think he knows.

 

[BertramCooper]

PPP Ohio: Portman leads Strickland by 2 points

This race is going to be crazy.

Ohio Dems better not fuck up this opportunity, like they fuck up most things.

 

[Black Mamba]

I have spoken with several past clerks and they all said the SC office is the most leakproof ship there is. They take huge pride in that, clerks and justices together.

I've always assumed the justices have told their clerks "if just one of you leak, you are all fired."

Obama must feel the SCOTUS is gonna fuck him because he's giving a speech on the ACA.

He made a big speech before the 2012 ruling, too...

Heh.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slat...hreatens_to_defund_judiciary_if_it_rules.html



Cartoon villain.

But I thought only Obama was a dictator!?!?

 

[Wilsongt]

I've always assumed the justices have told their clerks "if just one of you leak, you are all fired."



He made a big speech before the 2012 ruling, too...



But I thought only Obama was a dictator!?!?

Obama is a dictator, but Brownback is a true American patriot fighting back against librul activist judges and the poor filth of society.

 

[Wilsongt]

World's 3rd largest bank isn't making enough money so it's going to fire 25000 people.

Huh. Must be Tuesday again.

 

[Plinko]

Heh.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slat...hreatens_to_defund_judiciary_if_it_rules.html



Cartoon villain.

Is this seriously the republicans' next step? First Huckabee's comments about how a president shouldn't have to follow the Supreme Court decision and now this? This is an incredibly dangerous precedent to start.

 

[Wilsongt]

Is this seriously the republicans' next step? First Huckabee's comments about how a president shouldn't have to follow the Supreme Court decision and now this? This is an incredibly dangerous precedent to start.

Yet if Obama so much steps a toe out of line all hell breaks loose.

The double standards and hypocracy are absolutely stunning.

 

[CygnusXS]

Yet if Obama so much steps a toe out of line all hell breaks loose.

The double standards and hypocracy are absolutely stunning.

Conservatives in general care far more about the ends than the means. To them this kind of double standard is coherent because all that matters is who's doing it and why. It's just a different way of thinking.

 

[Metaphoreus]

Conservatives in general care far more about the ends than the means. To them this kind of double standard is coherent because all that matters is who's doing it and why. It's just a different way of thinking.

Funny, I think the same thing about liberals. Probably the problem is endemic to people generally, and we're simply blaming it on our political opponents.

 

[Black Mamba]

Funny, I think the same thing about liberals. Probably the problem is endemic to people generally, and we're simply blaming it on our political opponents.

I think this is one of those valid "both sides do it" kind of thing. Or rather, almost all politicians do it. Liberals were calling Bush a dictator, too.

The difference with Obama, however, is the base appeal that is made (it's because he's undemocratic, he's Islamic, etc) that makes it feel a bit different.

 

[cartoon_soldier]

A bad day for liberals in judiciary

NJ SC ruled for Christie's pension cuts
And Texas Abortion law was upheld too

 

[NYCmetsfan]

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/...e-salary-levels-white-house-118688.html?ml=tb

Why is no one talking about this?

The Obama administration is on the verge of possibly doubling the salary levels that would require employers to pay overtime in the most ambitious government intervention on wages in a decade. And it doesn’t need Congress’s permission.

As early as this week, the Labor Department could propose a rule that would raise the current overtime threshold — $23,660 – to as much as $52,000, extending time and a half overtime pay to millions of American workers. The rule has already come under fire from business and Republican opponents who say it will kill jobs and force employers to cut hours for salaried employees.

This is huge. Of course republicans are against it. Its probably bigger than a min wage hike. Since so many people are salaried but have an artificially low wage because of hours worked.

The republican argument is hilarious since they're exempted workers their hours don't count. They'll just have to do less work and they'd need to hire more to get it done!

and I found this bit for meta

One key concern about expanding overtime is that it could prompt employers to reduce the number of hours that individual employees work to avoid paying time-and-a-half. McDonald’s, reportedly, already uses its computer system to record the hours worked by individual fast-food workers, and sends alerts telling franchisees to send this or that worker home when he or she is about to exceed 40 hours. In many instances reducing employees’ hours worked may endanger their eligibility for benefits.

But conspiracy

 

[Wilsongt]

Funny, I think the same thing about liberals. Probably the problem is endemic to people generally, and we're simply blaming it on our political opponents.

o u

Are you salivating over the healthcare case yet?

 

[Fenderputty]

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/...e-salary-levels-white-house-118688.html?ml=tb

Why is no one talking about this?



This is huge. Of course republicans are against it. Its probably bigger than a min wage hike. Since so many people are salaried but have an artificially low wage because of hours worked.

The republican argument is hilarious since they're exempted workers their hours don't count. They'll just have to do less work and they'd need to hire more to get it done!

and I found this bit for meta

But conspiracy

I remember when I was young I used to think Salary meant get your work done. Some days longer some days shorter. Now I realize it just means stay more than 8 hours and get more done than you would if you were hourly.

 

[ivysaur12]

Funny, I think the same thing about liberals. Probably the problem is endemic to people generally, and we're simply blaming it on our political opponents.

Of course. We all want to see our own biases win out, and those biases inform more of our choices than we'd probably care to admit.

 

[Oblivion]

Funny, I think the same thing about liberals. Probably the problem is endemic to people generally, and we're simply blaming it on our political opponents.

Um, I think there's a slight difference. When liberals worried about the potential for tyranny from Bush, it was cause he was doing shit like torture, wire taps, Guantanamo, etc.

Obama on the other hand? Conservatives worry about the potential for tyranny cause of...universal health care.

A rather large distinction, imo.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/...e-salary-levels-white-house-118688.html?ml=tb

Why is no one talking about this?



This is huge. Of course republicans are against it. Its probably bigger than a min wage hike. Since so many people are salaried but have an artificially low wage because of hours worked.

The republican argument is hilarious since they're exempted workers their hours don't count. They'll just have to do less work and they'd need to hire more to get it done!

and I found this bit for meta

But conspiracy

Yeah, this is pretty huge. Hillary could then use this to campaign on saying that if Republicans take over the White House, they'll lower pay for a huge section of working class Americans.

 

[Oblivion]

Also, your LOL for the day:

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/...t-one-voter-turnout-118774.html#ixzz3cZRmLjfY

tl;dr Santorum holds an event in Iowa and only one person shows up. Even better than that? Said person says she's not even necessarily going to vote for him.

 

[Fenderputty]

Um, I think there's a slight difference. When liberals worried about the potential for tyranny from Bush, it was cause he was doing shit like torture, wire taps, Guantanamo, etc.

Obama on the other hand? Conservatives worry about the potential for tyranny cause of...universal health care.

A rather large distinction, imo.

.

While I agree, it's your already existing perspective that allows you to see this. If you were a conservative you might genuinely feel universal healthcare is forced governmental tyranny and that torture was protecting your safety from the nebulous terrorism.

These arguments are funny because they always devolve into the definition of liberty / tyranny and their abstract meanings. Even then our biases come through.

 

[B-Dubs]

Also, your LOL for the day:

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/...t-one-voter-turnout-118774.html#ixzz3cZRmLjfY

tl;dr Santorum holds an event in Iowa and only one person shows up. Even better than that? Said person says she's not even necessarily going to vote for him.

What, he couldn't even afford to bus some supporters out?

 

[Poodlestrike]

Heh.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slat...hreatens_to_defund_judiciary_if_it_rules.html



Cartoon villain.

I... he can't actually do that, can he? That seems like a fairly major loophole in the whole "balance of powers" thing.

Funny, I think the same thing about liberals. Probably the problem is endemic to people generally, and we're simply blaming it on our political opponents.

This is true. Both parties may not be the same, but they're both pretty hypocritical in general.

Personally, I don't get the big deal about hypocrisy. So long as the right things get done, who cares what they say? And if the wrong things get done, blast them for doing the wrong things.

 

[Jack Remington]

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/...e-salary-levels-white-house-118688.html?ml=tb

Why is no one talking about this?



This is huge. Of course republicans are against it. Its probably bigger than a min wage hike. Since so many people are salaried but have an artificially low wage because of hours worked.

The republican argument is hilarious since they're exempted workers their hours don't count. They'll just have to do less work and they'd need to hire more to get it done!

and I found this bit for meta

But conspiracy

Huge. This would probably end up creating a lot of jobs, since it'll be a lot more expensive to have one person do the work of 2-3 people.

 

[Roland_Gunner]

What, he couldn't even afford to bus some supporters out?

In 2008 Santorum ran a total bootstrap campaign, with basically one rich guy funding him. He would only open offices a couple of weeks before the vote started whereas Romney had people in key states for months ahead of time. The fact Santorum was able to hang on until the end tells you what a weak candidate Romney was.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

Anyone wanna post the wage hike thread or should I do the honors when I get home?

I think the biggest thing about this is dems really are starting to listen to progressive voices on economic issues, especially wage.

I think its unlikely anytime soon for them to push for higher taxes or unionization of workers but they at least seem to be cornering the right on pretty much spouting nonsense that nobody that doesn't already buy their talking points is going to carry water for.

 

[B-Dubs]

Anyone wanna post the wage hike thread or should I do the honors when I get home?

I think the biggest thing about this is dems really are starting to listen to progressive voices on economic issues, especially wage.

I think its unlikely anytime soon for them to push for higher taxes or unionization of workers but they at least seem to be cornering the right on pretty much spouting nonsense that nobody that doesn't already buy their talking points is going to carry water for.

Go for it. I'd do it but I'm in Manhattan all day today.

Its really getting me kinda hyped, the idea that things might finally swing back toward labor again would have been unthinkable a year or two back. No fucks Obama is best Obama.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

Go for it. I'd do it but I'm in Manhattan all day today.

Its really getting me kinda hyped, the idea that things might finally swing back toward labor again would have been unthinkable a year or two back. No fucks Obama is best Obama.

I don't think things are "swinging back to labor". The real problem for most of these things is employers feels most of worker protections are guidelines and things to trample all over. Your never gonna get the government to actually protect these rights, their needs to be a stronger labor movement and large organization drives. But you don't see anything to prohibit right to work laws (lets call them Contract-Freedom Laws or Get the Government Regulation Out of the Work Place) or protections against scabs being used and unlawful interference in organizing drives.

A union is always going to be much more responsive to issues in the work place than the labor department.

Its a step back to where we should be but this isn't even getting us back to the 80s when it comes to labor rights. Repeal most of taft-hartley! I know its a 40s law but still.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

Yeah.

I have the feeling that we often go with our gut instinct first and then try to invent a rationalization for it later on.

Yes, which was my entire point a few days ago. which now meta agrees with.

Always with the conspiracy theories. And the ad hominems. I had hoped we cleared up the latter issue way back when I was still a PoliGAF newcomer, but I guess not. Suffice to say on this point that if we adopted your preferred jurisprudence--whereby we decide cases based on whether we like the plaintiff--we'd probably have to jettison a substantial part of our existing First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Eighth amendment rights. To start.

Conspiracy theory? The man from his own mouth stated this was about race.

And my preferred jurisprudence isn't to judge based on if we like the person bring the suit, I've never said that. Its that we decide these questions on many different things, like context, outcomes, prejudices, motives. That we govern and make laws not on abstract logic but rather on using them as tools to enact the world we desire.

What I oppose and what I'm arguing we do is not have the law be this mythical otherworldly thing that is divorced from everyday life, its not the ten commandments. Its not the word of god. Its not math or science, it doesn't have logical rules that allow us to discover the most perfect way to govern ourselves. Its based on our prejudices, our desires and our background. Its a game of power. and how to organize it

Your idea to pretend somehow lawyers and people in the legal profession (this isn't meant as a personal rebuke) think they can divine this logic and cooly decide these questions without those other things creeping in is absurd and divorced from all experience and history. But the lie that is constantly told that this is what lawyers, judges and lawmakers do enables them to better hide these prejudices and naked power plays in legalistic language and arguments that aren't induced from common principles but backwardly deduced from a desired outcome. I don't necessarily think this is always bad as I think the human mind tends to work that way but we should be more upfront that that is what these arguments are about. Conservatives want a certain world, liberals, progressives and socialists want there. All i'm saying is we can dispense with the ridiculous pretension that this isn't what is actually happening and being debated and get to the heart of the matter which isn't about equality of representation, but rather about who holds power and who governs.

I contend one side has as its goal the increased white, rural landowner's power and the respective decrease of the minority, non-white, debtor, wage-earners's power. The argument you want to have is just to hide that basic equation in big words and lofty ideas that neither side really cares about.

 

[Jack Remington]

Yeah.

I have the feeling that we often go with our gut instinct first and then try to invent a rationalization for it later on.

I am very much opposed to this and would much rather take an L and stand corrected than yammer on in foolishness just because it fit my preconceived ideas.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

“Texas’ stated purpose for enacting H.B. 2 was to provide the highest quality of care to women seeking abortions and to protect the health and welfare of women seeking abortions,” read the Fifth Circuit ruling. “There is no question that this is a legitimate purpose that supports regulating physicians and the facilities in which they perform abortions.”

From the abortion decision. Its amazingly stupid.

Just lie about your stated purpose and created some alternative theory on why your enacting a law and its golden!

 

[Wilsongt]

Lol

Billy Graham's son wants Christains to boycott any business that support LGBT individuals.

That leaves them with, what? One place to eat and like one place to shop?

 

[AntoneM]

Lol

Billy Graham's son wants Christains to boycott any business that support LGBT individuals.

That leaves them with, what? One place to eat and like one place to shop?

That bubble though.

I'm sure he would be shocked to see the companies in the ads in the human rights campaign's magazine for one.

 

[Jooney]

From the abortion decision. Its amazingly stupid.

Just lie about your stated purpose and created some alternative theory on why your enacting a law and its golden!

But I thought that Texans hated regulation

 

[NYCmetsfan]

But I thought that Texans hated regulation

but unborn

 

[Jooney]

IQ2 Debate: The EPC does not require states to licence same-sex marriages

For those interested.

but unborn

 

[KingK]

What's the political leaning of your family, and do they like (and use) their plans?

I think the only time my sister ever voted was in the 08 primary for Hilary, and she's since become completely apathetic towards politics.

My mom is an "independent." She voted for Bush twice and then Obama twice. She's said how much she likes Regan before but also thinks Obama is one of the best presidents since Kennedy so idk. I don't think she's voted republican on the national level since 04 though and has a pretty negative opinion of republicans right now. My mom is a cancer survivor and uses the plan pretty frequently. She has some complaints about her plan but considers it an improvement (it saves her a few hundred a month compared to before the exchanges) and really likes the law overall.

 

[Jooney]

Feel that compassion.

btw that number can likely go down to 7 after the decision

 

[Fenderputty]

Feel that compassion.

btw that number can likely go down to 7 after the decision

At the very least it looks like the more urban areas will still have centers while the more rural areas are more affected. Not that this is great, but it means less people will be negatively impacted by this than if say most of the closures happened in Houston and San Antonio areas.

EDIT: I'm trying think positively here since that's about all I can do.

 

[Wilsongt]

K.

Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback (R) on Monday signed Senate Bill 34 (SB 34) into law, expanding Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach's (R) power to prosecute voter fraud cases.

According to The Wichita Eagle, the new law allows Kobach, one of the most outspoken conservative champions of cracking down on voter fraud, the ability to prosecute voter fraud cases even if local prosecutors opt against advancing those cases.

Kobach, according to the Eagle, said his office had already identified over 100 cases of potential voter fraud, and had begun taking preliminary steps toward investigating those cases.

"Once you have matched that, you have a slam dunk," Kobach said. "We'll see what the ultimate number is. It's hard to guess. I'm guessing that it'll be an all-time high in double voting [in 2014], because Kansas was on the national news so much because of the tight governor's race and Senate race. I think people were just tempted to cast [multiple] ballots."

As TPM noted, under the law, Kobach isn't the only one with prosecuting power on election law violations. County attorneys and the Kansas attorney general already had it before the new law was passed. Previously, Kobach had to refer cases to those local prosecutors. Now Kobach can move on criminal charges independently.

"Kris Kobach ran for office this last time on this bill," Brownback said of the law, which Kobach helped create and pushed for. "So he took this issue to the people, and the people of Kansas looked at it and they want to make sure you don't have voter fraud."

I have run out of fucks to give about Kansas. This is just becoming comical.

 

[Fenderputty]

What happens when the Secretary of State doesn't find any fraud?