ExiledInIllinois
-
Posts
48,277 -
Joined
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by ExiledInIllinois
-
-
-
-
-
Did you ever stop and think the problem is in your thinking?
"Naaaaa... It is always someone else's fault. All fine here."
AD=Right, Everybody else=Bad!
-
"Virtual fillibuster" is my name for it (though I'm sure I heard it somewhere else before I started using it). It basically describes what they do now: they effectively just declare "Fillibuster!", and everything stops on that one particular fillibustered issue. Reasoning behind doing it that way, I suppose, being that it doesn't block other Congressional work, and they can the get around to important issues like voting on motions to congratulate Idaho's Miss Potato runner-up. I call it "virtual" simply because it isn't a real fillibuster...and it also makes it too easy. If you believe stopping business is important enough to fillibuster, you should commit yourself to wasting your time standing on the Senate floor reading nursery rhymes and "The Joy of Cooking" out loud until you drop.
The phone book...you're right, they probably couldn't do it these days. But when fillibusters were real fillibusters, they used to. There's probably hundreds of pages of phone numbers read into old congressional records...
Thanks!
That is lame. The fillibuster tool should be used the way it was intended... AND SHOULD STOP EVERYTHING. When the legis is close (50-50), it can be a viable tool.
This new fillibuster is kinda like yelling at your kid then rewarding them with candy? We just can't sacrifice anything in society, can we?
-
If would be far more laughable if there wasn't constitutional precedent for it. Ever notice that certain things require more than a simple majority?
I just think that the fillibuster rules should be changed to disallow this "virtual fillibuster" crap. You want to fillibuster? Fine, get up there and read from the phone book for 12 hours. You shouldn't be able to just declare "Fillibuster!" and walk away...
I agree. The fillibuster is a viable tool that shouldn't be eliminated. I never knew there was this "virtual fillibuster?"... Explain that and how it works?
Like you said... I wish they were reading from the phone book... It would have made good CSPAN viewing... How exactly would the privacy act mesh into that?
-
Follow with me class.
You do something bad somewhere else... It follows with you. It is called CREDIBILITY. To build that CREDIBILITY up you have to be ACCOUNTABLE for your actions. Unfortunately, people aren't buying. But, feel free to whine about Newsweek. We made our bed a long time ago. Seems we are being profiled?
Right now America's credibility is low. Is there any doubt that this incident DIDN'T take place?
I know a lot of you out there wake up every morning thinking it is a "brand new day"... So what if yesterday was a bad... By God, we will have a better day today... It is all good!
Sign me up for some of that lemonade! Talk about signing Kumbaya?
-
This is gonna sound crazy... What if the story was planted by the administration or pro-administration?
Why?
To make the press look worse and push through pro-censorship ideas.
I do admit, this would be out of AD "black helicopter" type scenarios... Yet, in politics, would be an easy play.
Plant something that you know is untrue, so you can later debunk it. Sure fits the way some do business?
Anyway... Exactly how do you flush such a large document down the toilet without it jamming up?
I have no doubt that some form of abuse took place.
It is their burden to prove otherwise because of such dubious credibilty (because of tactics used in the past).
-
-
Is it totally beyond belief that the story was true and that Newsweek is backing off at the request of the government?
Considering how many people here are calling for reinstituting full-fledged censorship of the media, it wouldn't be totally out of the question for something like that to occur, would it?
I thought of that but wouldn't Newsweek want to blow the cover on this type of government intrusion?
I would rather be honest in the end.
They can't prove it as fact? They have to back off?
There is a lot of stuff floating out there, they should be careful not to fall into a propaganda trap that is aimed at making the media out to be worse than it already is.
-
-
-
What I am saying is I would want to do it myself. It brings me no satisfaction if someone else does it... If somebody else was going to do it, I would want them to live.
I am not a simple person.
-
No you didnt answer them;
Simple.
If someone killed your son, would you kill them or want them killed ? _______
If someone killed your wife, would you kill them or want them killed?_________
If someone killed your daughter, would you kill them or want them killed?________
These are Yes or No answers.
I thought I answered it.
Here goes.
Kill them
Kill them
Kill them
Like I said I would want to do the honors.
-
Touche!
Yet... Your subjective behavior was thinking the information was not worthy.
Can't fault the people floating it out there, just the guys who think it is stupid.
It is a one-way street as I see... Can't have too much crazy info out there... Kinda like dismissing 4 long shots coming in 1,2,3, and 4 in the derby.
The burden falls on the guy who dismisses!
-
The reaction on TSW interests me. I don't have kids so its hard to say what I would do (early on in my relationship with my wife of 15+ years one ofus mentioned (we are pretty sure it was me) that I fully expected to have kids one day because it would be a wonderful thing to share with the woman I loved, but left to my own devices I really had little desire to be a parent. My wife-to-be (though we had no idea at the time) said that she actually felt the same way. The conversation then turned to other important things like our latest class assignment or this weekend's party as this conversation had nothing to do with us as a pair. Fast forward 5 or so years and she asked me whether I remembered a conversation we had way back when about having kids. I said I sure do. She asked if I still felt the same way (now that it was clear that parenting conversations were about us). I said I sure felt the same way. Dhe said good and about three years later we got married).
At any rate, the reactions of folks which seems virtually unanimous that taping the kids mouth shut was a fine thing to do I actually think back to my parents.
If a teacher taped my mouth shut and kept me that way for virtually any lengthy time, I'm pretty sure one of my parents (probably my Mom) would have come down to the school when she heard about it and kicked the tar (or at least read the riot act if she thought she might get arrested) out of the teacher.
The she would have went home and if she thought I had mouthed off or acted up and deserved it, kicked the snot out of me.
One of the things I loved about my parents is that while they certainly would have been all for an adult hitting me to stop me from hurting another kid or from hurting myself, if any outsider (teachers and camp coumselors were certainly in loco parentis (in the place of parents) bu they definitely were not my parents. If a teacher or a counselor had the temerity to adminster force to me beyond what was necessary to protect another from me or to protect me from immediate harm. Mom would have fought like a lion in defense of her kid.
My parents had no trouble with swatting me to correct an immediate issue or even administering planned corporal punishment to adminiater a big lesson (I plated hookey from school once and I got spanked with the belt once the one correction was all that was necessary).
For the most part, I'm just happy as heck that none of you who seem to feel fimne about an outsider administering plannd or lengthy physical punishment were not my parents. I think that Mom had to lower the boom on me only once not because I was a good kid (a lot of my juvenile life without heavy interaction with the cops probably involved not getting caught) but because I knew that though she contenanced physical correction, I also knew she would go to wall for her kids and there was no question of it being OK for an outside party to adminster more than a corrective swat without my parents protecting me.
My parents would and did administer longer than a quick episode of physical punishment or interaction with me be it a teacher or sexual pedophile.
I mostly feel sorry for the kids of you parents who seem to feel fine about others having more than fleeting physical interaction with your kids.
Clap, clap!
-
I don't believe that BS story for a half-second. More likely, given that unconscionably stupid pinhead Clarke was part of the transition team, they didn't provide anything worth listening to anyway. The fact is, if Clarke had been doing HIS job in Clinton's second term, there probably wouldn't even be any need to discuss the transition.
That is pretty subjective.
-
I will... You won't like it.
No doubt, I would like to do the honors.
But, back to the point. Do work outside of soldiering, IMO, does not make you less efficient.
I do see the need for civilian support structure but, not at today's level.
I will beat you to it... Haliburton evil!
-
I knew this was coming from you Bill... I just don't see it.
I have faith we won't cross that line.
I do respect your concern and it does concern me. That is why they should just get rid of the problems on the department quick.
-
-
We should just give 'em back historical Mexico that we annexed... They are mostly "red states."
-
-
Then expect to pay the price.
In the meantime? I don't buy the reasoning. Knowing EVERY aspect keeps you sharp. People are just flat out lazy and can't keep up the pace. I believe in the opposite... You want to stay sharp, you occupy yourself with task during the "down time."
IMO.
Just do it. It needs to be done, you do it. Cross-train everyone to be self-sufficient.
-
Obstructionist party stikes again
in Politics, Polls, and Pundits
Posted
Good points.