Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[Wild Hoss]

Friggin' Dr. Tom.

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

[froot loops]

I think the key is if you are leery of the oncoming uni gender menace, North Carolina is your oasis.

[Hannibal]

I disagree with your assessment on what the election will ultimately mean.

I agree that some form of compromise could be made. I'm not as fatalistic as you, Hanni. I think there's room for something less than amnesty if coupled w/ deportation. In other words, sort out the contributors from non-contributors.

I think that I may have figured out the source of our gap here -- you haven't been voting Republican long enough to get frustrated by how shitty and cowardly the Republican leadership has been. Give it a decade or so and some of the things that I am saying will make a lot more sense.

[Ghengis Jon]

Some states (like California - surprise, surprise) have enacted laws that allow photography of completed ballots to accommodate social media idiots who want to 'prove' how they voted. Laws were enacted that prohibited photography of ballots because of rampant vote buying in the 19th century.

"Hey, I'll give you $5 if you vote for Trump."
"Okay!"
"Just snap a pic with your cellphone and I'll pay you when you leave."

The laws are being challenged in court - should be an interesting outcome. Protections against vote buying vs I can photograph anything I freakin' want.

[Da Geezer]

This is the best summary of Hillary's health matters I have found.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-scrutiny.html

[hack]

The Daily Mail?

[hack]

Seriously, look at that thing. Recall the paper's reputation. You can't be serious.

[Da Geezer]

Talent said:

I agree that some form of compromise could be made. I'm not as fatalistic as you, Hanni. I think there's room for something less than amnesty if coupled w/ deportation. In other words, sort out the contributors from non-contributors.

I doubt if anyone would have a problem if we were giving some form of amnesty to contributors only. The problem is that paying the illegal immigrants (through welfare or social security) who do not contribute is simply vote-buying on a large scale. And the hope of amnesty draws people who might not otherwise come. Legal immigrants have to be "sponsored" for a period of 5 years. I don't understand why we cannot expect the same from illegals.

But, more pertinently, we dance around the problem when we talk of amnesty. The core problem is that Obama and most progressives believe, or at least defend, the Executive when it violates the oath that the laws be faithfully executed. Congress debated "comprehensive immigration reform" and rejected the idea. After that, Obama imposed his vision of immigration reform by executive order. He issued orders that the on-the-books laws about illegal immigration not be enforced. This breaks new ground in terms of an Imperial Presidency. The immigration debate is only a piece of this larger problem. With Hillary saying she will appoint Justices to the SC that resemble Kagan and Sotomayor, anyone who relies on the SC to rein in the Executive Branch is whistling past the graveyard. If the Executive can do as it pleases, all the various "scandals" or "issues" we discuss here (IRS targeting, violations of the Espionage Act, play to play, non-competitive bidding, etc) are just manifestations of the underlying problem. And only the Judicial Branch has any potential to limit the Executive.

[Da Geezer]

Seriously, look at that thing. Recall the paper's reputation. You can't be serious.

I know. Just hold your nose and read the facts. I thought the reporting of what is in the public domain was a fair summary. I suppose these incidents have been collated somewhere else, but you know my limited internet capabilities.

[Dr. Strangelove]

Middle class incomes rose over 5% in 2015. Poverty rate fell faster than any year since 1968. Growth is almost exclusively in urban/suburban areas though; rural areas completely stagnant.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/09/13/the-middle-class-and-the-poor-just-had-the-best-year-since-the-end-of-the-great-recession/

[entropy]

[iam416]

Gerrymandering has been discussed here relatively recently. One point I make wrt gerrymandering is that it's a two-party effort and the driving engine for the Ds is minority representation. Well, I can't think of a better example than this: http://dailycaller.com/2016/09/07/ne...ial-elections/

The NAACP has challenged the way Alabama elects judges. Alabama elects judges statewide which, according to the NAACP, dilutes black votes. They point to an all-white appellate court as evidence of this. Their proposed solution is that

the state be divided into separate districts with separate elections to attain an enduring minority presence in the state appeals courts and on the Alabama Supreme Court.

Yes, draw districts so that minorities are majorities and can elect minorities. Text-fucking-book gerrymandering.

A similar suit is proceeding in Texas, lest anyone think this is just Alabama being batshit crazy.

[Hannibal]

[youtube]U-zJL9JuOLQ[/youtube]

[hack]

I know. Just hold your nose and read the facts. I thought the reporting of what is in the public domain was a fair summary. I suppose these incidents have been collated somewhere else, but you know my limited internet capabilities.

You have such a rich vocabulary to describe non-independent media. Suddenly here and now it's whatever's in this one is surely factual'' when you're talking about one of the more documented rags on the planet. Come on now.

[Hannibal]

Seriously, look at that thing. Recall the paper's reputation. You can't be serious.

Is it even worse than CNN and The New York Times?