Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
August 16, 2017, 04:53:38 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Cast your Ballot in the 2016 Mock Election

  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 679 680 681 682 683 [684] 685 686 687 688 689 ... 961
17076  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: 2010 California proposition would ban divorce on: September 11, 2009, 12:07:48 pm
If Prop 8 was about protecting marriage, Calif. man reasons, a ballot initiative outlawing divorce should win in a landslide.
link
Quote
Rob Cockerham: John Marcotte. You've filed a petition with the Secretary of State, in an effort to get a voter's initative on the California 2010 ballot.

John Marcotte: Yes. Filed the paperwork on September 1. It's the "2010 California Marriage Protection Act." I am trying to ban divorce in the state of California.

RC: Ok. So your act, if it became law, would make marriage undissolvable.

John: Exactly. The only exception would be if the marriage was "voidable" -- if you married an 8-year-old, you don't get to keep her. She goes back on the shelf. You can't marry the mentally incapacitated, etc.

RC: Ah, ok, so most normal marriages would be irreversable.

John: 99.99% of all marriages would be set in stone. It's a return to traditional values.

RC: Wow, that is amazing. Could it really happen? What steps remain to make this initiative into a valid, enforced law?

John: I am trying to extend the good work done with Proposition 8 last year. It could really happen. The United States has not always had divorce as an institution the way we do now. As a ballot initiative it bypasses the legislature and the governor. It's the will of the people made law.

RC: How long has divorce been around?

John: As a concept, pretty much forever, but in the past, divorces were at the very least difficult to get and frowned upon by society. Now they pass them out like Tic-Tacs.

RC: Who is providing the bulk of funding for this initiative?

John: It began as a self-funded initiative, but we've been collecting donations and already recouped a fair percentage of the filing fees. We hope to collect more donations and maybe start selling t-shirts, etc. to raise more funds.

RC: Are you going to hit the streets collecting signatures for the initiative?

John: We're going to set up a table in front of Wal*Mart and ask people to sign a petition to protect traditional marriage. We're going to interview them about why they thing traditional marriage is important, and then we'll tell them that we are trying to ban divorce.

People who supported Prop 8 weren't trying to take rights away from gays, they just wanted to protect traditional marriage. That's why I'm confident that they will support this initiative, even though this time it will be their rights that are diminished. To not support it would be hypocritical.
good stuff
17077  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: What, if any, 9/11 alternate theories do you believe in? on: September 11, 2009, 12:02:08 pm
I'm with fezzy on this.  I don't buy it and it bothers me that so many do (not greatly).
17078  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Calif. GOP lawmaker caught bragging about affairs on: September 11, 2009, 06:12:55 am
If Prop 8 was about protecting marriage, Calif. man reasons, a ballot initiative outlawing divorce should win in a landslide.
link
Quote
Rob Cockerham: John Marcotte. You've filed a petition with the Secretary of State, in an effort to get a voter's initative on the California 2010 ballot.

John Marcotte: Yes. Filed the paperwork on September 1. It's the "2010 California Marriage Protection Act." I am trying to ban divorce in the state of California.

RC: Ok. So your act, if it became law, would make marriage undissolvable.

John: Exactly. The only exception would be if the marriage was "voidable" -- if you married an 8-year-old, you don't get to keep her. She goes back on the shelf. You can't marry the mentally incapacitated, etc.

RC: Ah, ok, so most normal marriages would be irreversable.

John: 99.99% of all marriages would be set in stone. It's a return to traditional values.

RC: Wow, that is amazing. Could it really happen? What steps remain to make this initiative into a valid, enforced law?

John: I am trying to extend the good work done with Proposition 8 last year. It could really happen. The United States has not always had divorce as an institution the way we do now. As a ballot initiative it bypasses the legislature and the governor. It's the will of the people made law.

RC: How long has divorce been around?

John: As a concept, pretty much forever, but in the past, divorces were at the very least difficult to get and frowned upon by society. Now they pass them out like Tic-Tacs.

RC: Who is providing the bulk of funding for this initiative?

John: It began as a self-funded initiative, but we've been collecting donations and already recouped a fair percentage of the filing fees. We hope to collect more donations and maybe start selling t-shirts, etc. to raise more funds.

RC: Are you going to hit the streets collecting signatures for the initiative?

John: We're going to set up a table in front of Wal*Mart and ask people to sign a petition to protect traditional marriage. We're going to interview them about why they thing traditional marriage is important, and then we'll tell them that we are trying to ban divorce.

People who supported Prop 8 weren't trying to take rights away from gays, they just wanted to protect traditional marriage. That's why I'm confident that they will support this initiative, even though this time it will be their rights that are diminished. To not support it would be hypocritical.
17079  General Politics / International General Discussion / Re: Plans for Scotland's first 'New Town' in decades on: September 11, 2009, 06:03:15 am
Very cool.  Good luck to them.
17080  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Pelosi admits Medicare/caid has a lot of waste, corruption and redundancy on: September 11, 2009, 05:27:04 am
link
Quote
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said today that Congress will pay for half of the $1 trillion health care reform  bill that President Obama wants enacted by “squeezing” Medicare and Medicaid to wring out what she called “waste, fraud, abuse, redundancy, obsolescence and whatever it is.”
 
Pelosi was asked at her weekly press briefing if she agreed with President Obama that much of the health care reform plan can be paid for by cutting Medicare and Medicaid.
 
“Half the bill will be paid for by squeezing excesses out of the [Medicare and Medicaid] system, and there is $500 billion dollars to do that and we’re looking for more,” Pelosi said. “That can be achieved--waste, fraud, abuse, redundancy, obsolescence, whatever it is. Squeeze it out of the system; and that means out of the providers and the rest as well.”
This works out to $50billion a year out of the programs.  Why wasn't she working to cut this waste the last few years she's been in charge?  Why does she think the next govt run medical program will be less wasteful?  And if the new program doesn't go through, will she still work to cut the garbage out of medicare/caid?
17081  General Politics / Political Debate / Which flavor of military is it better for a nation to have? on: September 11, 2009, 04:01:24 am
go
17082  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Calif. GOP lawmaker caught bragging about affairs on: September 11, 2009, 03:33:10 am
Adultery is clearly just a fact of life and something Republican family members just have to accept of their fathers and husbands.  Same-sex marriage is obviously more damaging to the "sanctity" of marriage....somehow.
17083  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: Favorite posters on: September 10, 2009, 12:58:06 pm
dead0men
So our multipersonality disorder shows heh?
17084  General Politics / Political Debate / Re: One-party autocracy certainly has its drawbacks.... on: September 10, 2009, 07:50:37 am
Yeah but if they cared about such things they could FORCE it upon you...that's what this guy wants.  He wants a group of "smarts" telling the rest of us what to do about the things the "smarts" find important.  I believe this method of govt has been tried before with amazingly disturbing results.
17085  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Calif. GOP lawmaker caught bragging about affairs on: September 10, 2009, 05:15:53 am
Rule #2 for all Republicans: IF YOU ARE MARRIED STOP FUCKING PEOPLE OTHER THAN YOUR SPOUSE!  God danged hypocritical scumbags.
17086  General Politics / Political Debate / One-party autocracy certainly has its drawbacks.... on: September 10, 2009, 03:14:43 am
...But when it is led by a reasonably enlightened group of people, as China is today, it can also have great advantages.  WTF link
Quote
Watching both the health care and climate/energy debates in Congress, it is hard not to draw the following conclusion: There is only one thing worse than one-party autocracy, and that is one-party democracy, which is what we have in America today.

One-party autocracy certainly has its drawbacks. But when it is led by a reasonably enlightened group of people, as China is today, it can also have great advantages. That one party can just impose the politically difficult but critically important policies needed to move a society forward in the 21st century. It is not an accident that China is committed to overtaking us in electric cars, solar power, energy efficiency, batteries, nuclear power and wind power. China’s leaders understand that in a world of exploding populations and rising emerging-market middle classes, demand for clean power and energy efficiency is going to soar. Beijing wants to make sure that it owns that industry and is ordering the policies to do that, including boosting gasoline prices, from the top down.
<snip>
They also understand you need to jail and/or kill anybody that disagrees with you.  They also understand that curbing pollution isn't a necessity. 

Now lets see who comes in to defend this asshat or the PRC.
17087  General Politics / International General Discussion / It would cost less than $600M to save the lives of 4 million people in Kenya on: September 10, 2009, 02:52:07 am
link
Quote
<snip>

The World Food Program says there are four million Kenyans in need of assistance. That’ll cost $576 million but less than half the required amount has been raised. This is the sort of thing that makes it hard for me to take seriously the neoconnish mindset that’s extremely interested in international humanitarian issues if and only if humanitarian problems can allegedly be ameliorated by bombing someone or deploying American troops somewhere. The total bill for saving millions of people from starvation would be tiny compared to any military adventure. And yet the folks eager to wave the banner of “idealism” on behalf of launching wars are going to be nowhere to be found on this issue.
I'd rather we send money over seas and down a hole that will potentially save 4 million lives than I would see us spend the same money to keep failed American businesses afloat.
17088  General Politics / International General Discussion / Re: First the Aussies take the fat ass crown from us, now they pollute more also on: September 10, 2009, 02:18:06 am
wait wait....it says the US is second with 19.78 per person and Canada is third with 19.81?  Maybe we shouldn't trust the English with math.
17089  General Politics / International General Discussion / First the Aussies take the fat ass crown from us, now they pollute more also on: September 10, 2009, 02:16:25 am
link
Quote
Australia has overtaken the U.S. as the biggest emitter per person of carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas blamed for global warming, according to a British risk analysis firm.

The average Australian contributes 20.58 tons of CO2 to the atmosphere each year to cool homes, drive cars and generate electricity with coal, the U.K.-based risk assessment company Maplecroft said today. The U.S. fell to second at 19.78 tons per inhabitant a year while Canada was third at 19.81 tons.

<snip>
What's next, gun crime?  Spoiled 16 year old girls?  People in jail?
17090  General Politics / Political Debate / Re: Who scares you more? on: September 10, 2009, 01:31:36 am
I'd like to point out to dead0man and Mechman, and numerous others, that libertarianism and the Liibertarian Party will never grow if it continues to be defined as real libertarianism and "moralfaggotry." It is the equivalent of RINO and DINO purging (aka political suicide).
I don't expect the Libertarian Party to ever grow.  I expect (hope?) the Dems or the Pubs will turn more towards libertarianism to win people like me over or a new party springs up after the death of one of the big boys with a strong streak of liberty and small govt.
17091  General Politics / Political Debate / Re: Who scares you more? on: September 10, 2009, 01:28:40 am
There is a difference between interventionism of the trade and interventionism of the gun.
I'm confused, are you anti free trade?  If so that is much more non-libertarian than being pro-Isreal....at least to me.


(also, your sig is WAY to tall)

He said it's okay to use trade as leverage against nations that committ violations of human rights -a form of interventionism, I believe.
Ahh, I agree with Mechman then.  We shouldn't trade with states that are horrible to their people and that includes the PRC and the Fundies on the Arabian peninsula even it means a drop in the quality of life of Americans and others in the West.
I will admit I'm hesitant for freely signing away on free trade agreements if the nations in question have a poor record on human rights.
Agreed.
17092  General Politics / Political Debate / Re: Who scares you more? on: September 10, 2009, 01:21:41 am
There is a difference between interventionism of the trade and interventionism of the gun.
I'm confused, are you anti free trade?  If so that is much more non-libertarian than being pro-Isreal....at least to me.


(also, your sig is WAY to tall)
17093  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: This is the kind of school indoctrination that Republicans support on: September 10, 2009, 01:19:30 am
Wow...that's as wrong as telling them that god is as real as me or you.  god shouldn't be brought up outside of a class on religion, history or culture and even then there shouldn't be any pro or anti god opinion coming from the teacher or the text books.

It's too bad we don't live in a perfect world....probably be boring though.
17094  General Politics / Political Debate / Re: Who scares you more? on: September 10, 2009, 01:03:10 am
Well we all have our idiots (I keep mine in my back pocket) the far right just has more people willing to admit to being far right.

I still don't really understand why it's funny to be libertarian and pro-Isreal, but I suppose that should be left for another thread.  This thread is about making fun of people on the extreme ends of a made up metric and denying the existence of half of them.
17095  General Politics / Political Debate / Re: Who scares you more? on: September 10, 2009, 12:49:05 am
Well yeah, but we're HUGE parts of both organizations and they ain't going if we aren't willing to go.  Well, we HAVE to go if a fellow NATO state is attacked.

So lets say Israel is on the brink and some of our buddies in Europe decide they don't want to see another holocaust and attempt to assist the Israelis, would you be up for assisting them?  What if they just wanted to use our transportation infrastructure?  Would you be cool with using C5s to ship German Leopards to Tel Aviv?
17096  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: This is the kind of school indoctrination that Republicans support on: September 10, 2009, 12:37:58 am
Yeah, I'd move (or not move into that district in the first place) if I had kids.
17097  General Politics / Political Debate / Re: Who scares you more? on: September 10, 2009, 12:35:19 am
Even it meant the death of all of them that couldn't flee in time?  What if the same situation happened in say, Portugal?
17098  General Politics / Political Debate / Re: Who scares you more? on: September 10, 2009, 12:28:10 am
Yeah, that's where I'm at too. 

Would you offer to help if they were attacked and were likely to lose?
17099  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: This is the kind of school indoctrination that Republicans support on: September 10, 2009, 12:23:27 am
There are good public school systems out there though.  Not all of them suffer from the major problems often associated with public schools...but they all suffer from the minor problems that public schools can't avoid.  (like dumb kids, bad kids and "special" kids)
17100  General Politics / Political Debate / Re: Who scares you more? on: September 10, 2009, 12:18:22 am
I don't consider myself a zionist though...is everybody that supports Israels right to exist a zionist?
Pages: 1 ... 679 680 681 682 683 [684] 685 686 687 688 689 ... 961


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines