Hubris252

I'm by no means a fan of the idea that corporations are people, but when we fret that they can now spend as much money during campaigns as they want aren't we really saying that people are stupid? Would campaign finance matter at all unless the average person could be convinced of anything with enough advertising.

Two examples:

In the 2000 Republican primary Bush ran an ad against McCain that implied he was for breast cancer because he voted against an omnibus bill with some funding for breast cancer research.

The (in)famous "I voted for it before I voted against it" ad against Kerry. Anyone who actually knows how the legislative process works knows that that is a frequent occurrence. Legislators vote for something in committee and then vote against it after all the mark ups, the amendments, and the riders make it a completely different bill.

I really believe in democracy but when I look at California, a state heavily influenced by direct democracy through ballot initiatives, I start to doubt if people in modern society have the time to make informed decisions.

Listening to Gov. McDonnell's "response" to the State of the Union address it was clear that it was really nothing more than a counter-speech rather than an actual response to what was actually said by the president in his address. Should there be a rule that the opposition response has to actually respond to the address?

Very few people seem to remember what a real filibuster consists of. Senators who oppose a bill prevent a vote by holding the floor and speaking until they're blue in the face; no food, no water, and no sitting allowed. Given the heat Democrats are taking for not producing legislation would the Democrats be right to make Republicans actually produce a filibuster? As it is all that it takes to stop legislation is for Mitch McConnell or Jon Kyl to threaten a filibuster of any meaningful legislation and then the legislation basically dies. 50 years ago Strom Thurmond held the senate floor for over 24 hours to prevent a vote on the Civil Rights Act of 1957, sometimes actually speaking about the bill and at one point reading his grandmother's biscuit recipe.

Why don't Democrats actually force the Republicans to mount a genuine filibuster?

How would Republicans like being broadcast on C-Span 24/7 rambling about biscuit recipes and reading the phone book from their home states?

I will be graduating from college at the end of this semester and plan to go directly to graduate school. I can complete a dual MBA/MS by spring 2012 if I take 5 courses per semester. This was an easy course load for undergraduate work but is it a realistic work load for graduate studies?

The winner-take-all two-party system has clearly been failing us for quite some time. Would a multi-party parliamentary system be better? Social conservatives can have a party, social liberals can have a party, and the vast majority of centrists can govern.

Why do Republicans continue to point out that it was the southern Democrats who opposed civil rights legislation as if the south weren't as solidly Republican today as it was Democratic in the 1950s?

Retiring Democrats:

Christopher Dodd of CT - retiring because he would lose

Ted Kaufman of DE - Biden's senate seat filler, was a senator for a few months

Roland Burris of IL - Obama's senate seat filler, overall worthless douchebag

Paul Kirk of MA - Kennedy senate seat filler, never had desire to hold public office

Byron Dorgan of ND - actually retiring

Dennis Moore of KS - actually retiring

Bart Gordon of TN - actually retiring

John S. Tanner of TN - actually retiring

Brian Baird of WA - actually retiring

More incumbents are retiring from their current positions to seek other elected offices

Retiring Republicans:

George LeMieux of FL - Martinez's seat filler

Jim Bunning of KY - retiring because he would lose

Kit Bond of MO - actually retiring

Judd Gregg of NH - Announced he would seek reelection, then announced otherwise

George Voinovich of OH - actually retiring

George Radanovich of CA - actually retiring

Henry E. Brown, Jr. of SC - actually retiring

More incumbents are retiring to seek other elected offices

So looking at Republican and Democrat elected officials who are actually retiring to retire or enter the private sector they are essentially even. The list of Democrats is longer because the seat fillers appointed for Obama's, Biden's, and Kennedy's seats aren't seeking full terms.

Any thoughts?

Examine the proposition at the point of sale. Who do want between your kid and a bag of weed, a store clerk with his job to lose or a criminal?

Why can't we base our drug policy on knowledge of how rational people behave in regulatory environment? Why do we keep voting for idiots who promise that if we vote for them we will have fewer responsibilities as parents? Why do we buy this garbage: We don't have to teach our kids about why it's bad to do drugs, we can just say they're illegal and that's that?

can we just come together and agree that we should something about this

http://science.howstuffworks.com/great-pacific-gar...

http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/science/08/04/pacific...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Pacific_Garbage...

Has anybody else noticed that Michelle Bachmann's problems with the census seem to have gone away once she realized that her seat would be eliminated if too few people filled out their census forms?

Is this another example of a principled politician?

$h!t Happens Airlines? With all the bull$h!t, feel good security measures being talked about in the wake of the Underwear Bomber I think it's time we all followed Bill Maher's advice and started an airline where you can show up an hour before your flight, pay cash, limited security screening and none of the other measures that don't really keep us any safer.

So tell me what you think Y!A community, would you fly on an airline where the guy sitting next to you probably had a bomb if you could have a gun?

Considering the fact that money cannot be earmarked unless it has already been appropriated it seems to me that earmarks are good. Earmarks are how elected legislators ensure that federal spending meets the needs of their states.

So I guess the real question is why do people harp on earmarks when it's appropriations that are out of control?

about the Underwear Bomber if George Bush were president and a Democrat senator were filibustering his nominee to head the TSA?

It seems to often that our representatives are forced to vote in favor of something they don't like because there's enough of what they do like in the same bill. They end up getting attacked for supporting a position they don't even hold because one bill had some clause they didn't like but didn't oppose enough to vote no on the parts they support.

Why was President Bush's response to the Shoe Bomber so praiseworthy but President Obama's response to the Underwear Bomber isn't? The situations are practically identical: incompetent terrorist makes it onto an airplane, fails to detonate his device, is subdued by the passengers, and is handled by the federal justice system.

Is this really just partisanship at its worst?

“I think every good Christian ought to kick Falwell right in the ***.”

“You don't have to be straight to be in the military; you just have to be able to shoot straight.”

“If everybody in this town connected with politics had to leave town because of chasing women and drinking, you would have no government.”

“I think any man in business would be foolish to fool around with his secretary. If it's somebody else's secretary, fine.”

“It's wonderful that we have so many religious people in our party, ... They need to leave their theologies in their churches.”

A few years ago I got a ticket for possession of marijuana for having some stems in my ashtray. The ticket was classified as a "civil offense" and was issued in a small town in a state I have never lived in. Since I have never even lived in the state, let alone the tiny *** town, where the citation was issued can I get away with not telling the recruiter about it?