The Atlas Deluge of Absurdity, Ignorance, and Bad Posts

[they don't love you like i love you]

I suppose J. J. posting directly into here is like when Naso posts directly into the Goldmine, it's against standard protocol but appropriate in this case.

[they don't love you like i love you]

from the same post:

I consider races to be things like Asian, White (European Descent, Black (African descent), Asia, and Hispanic (this is an odd category).

Wait, wait, wait. In the same post, the guy accuses a poster of being racist and describes what he considers to be "races" ?

It is hilarious, especially considering the target of his accusation.

Then again, coming from the King of Self-Righteous Land it shouldn't be surprising.

That, and he considers both "Asian" and "Asia" to be races.

I'm embarassed I didn't even catch that.

[they don't love you like i love you]

Also, I make no claims about Ocean County. I've never really looked at it and don't know it, and the growth seems to be senior citizens, which is going to make it more conservative.

Orthodox Jews were a big part of their growth

no one cares ~

if there's a discussion about why Ocean County is more conservative the answer is very relevant and if you all of a sudden stop caring when you find out why, then you go on to prove that left wingers are the most intolerant and closed minded people in America.

[they don't love you like i love you]

King of the Hill.  Beavis and Butt-head was an idiotic show, not even remotely funny.

[they don't love you like i love you]

This belongs in more of a self-parody goldmine or whatever but I guess this is closest:

Christmas Carols, because it's that time of year again!

[they don't love you like i love you]

ag is the rather obvious choice - he's a professor in economics.

Beyond that, I think me, Beet and Phnkrocket have about as much education on the subject?

People like Carl and Jmf also has some knowledge. Opebo, of course, is completely clueless. In fact, not realizing this is an indication of someone not knowing much about economics.

[they don't love you like i love you]

But in its order, the Supreme Court called into question whether the governor has the power to veto the redistricting maps, setting up the possibility that the maps drawn by the Democrats could become law.

The order tells the Secretary of State to address the issue.

The constitution provides that the legislature apportion the state by passing a law.  The veto power is part of the Article 4.  Legislative department.  And says that any bill shall be presented to the governor who before it becomes a law must sign it (or let it become law without signature).

The legislature presented a "bill" to the governor.  They did not pass a law, which they are incompetent to do, without either the assent or acquiescence of the governor (or perhaps the connivance of the judiciary).

The text says the apportionment shall be "by passing a law," not presenting a bill to the Governor that becomes law. I don't get it. "Passing" is a rather powerful verb here.

It is actually pretty weird.  If you go to the Nevada Supreme Court web page

http://www.nevadajudiciary.us/index.php/supremecourt

And click on high profile cases you will find the emergency petition and then the Supreme Court's order.

Miller v. Dist. Ct. (Guy) (Docket No. 59322)

Miller is the Nevada Secretary of State

After the legislature's plans were vetoed, some citizens filed in a Nevada district court to have maps drawn.  The district court said that they would decide various legal issues, in particular which Hispanics should be considered (CVAP, VAP, etc.), before turning the case over to the special masters.

Instead, the district court turned it over to the special masters.

Miller is asking the Supreme Court to order the district court to rule on the legal issues before turning it over to the special masters.  He didn't raise the issue directly whether the district court could draw a map, but rather about how they went about it.

It is the Supreme Court asking for briefing on whether there is even a need to draw a map (ie since the legislature passed a bill, did they provide an apportionment?  The section that was quoted in the Supreme Court order dealt with legislative apportionment, there is nothing in the constitution about congressional districting.)   The other questions were whether the district court had the authority to draw a map - or whether they should have sought other remedies such as ordering a special election, or ordering at large elections.

The two California cases were after Ronald Reagan had vetoed the redistricting bills in California.  For congressional districts, the California Supreme Court ordered the map drawn by the legislature to be used, since it had enough congressional districts; and for the legislature, the old map was used, since that was deemed better than trying to draw one from scratch.

Carson City is not a very big town, so maybe the Supreme Court was getting fidgety about the uppity district court judge, or maybe they had met the Secretary of State at the barber shop or cafe, and urged him to file suit, and they could expand on it.

Since the State Supreme Court is seated in Carson City, why would the Supremes have anything against Carson City?

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/InsaneTrollLogic

[they don't love you like i love you]

I'm not going to even bother quoting it, but just refer to BigSkyBob's proposal in the Ohio redistricting thread and his straight-faced defense of it. I mean that makes pbrower's airhub theory, "age wave" and "approval plus six" stuff look like top notch quality political analysis.

[they don't love you like i love you]

I'm not going to even bother quoting it, but just refer to BigSkyBob's proposal in the Ohio redistricting thread and his straight-faced defense of it. I mean that makes pbrower's airhub theory, "age wave" and "approval plus six" stuff look like top notch quality political analysis.

Any chance of a synopsis? Because if it's crazy enough I must just read it...

He proposed that if the current hideous gerrymander gets challenged in a referendum the GOP should try to pass a new map that consists of a majority black district around Cleveland/Akron and the rest of the state being a huge 15-member multi-seat district and then continued to argue with a straight face that this is no different from multi-member State House districts in states like New Hampshire and West Virginia and that it would not violate federal law.

[they don't love you like i love you]

Only in America...

[they don't love you like i love you]

Yeah:  Many Christians understand Islam is the enemy of individual freedom and that the US is the champion of individual freedom.

It's more the second part of that statement (after the "and") that makes it so ridiculous.

[they don't love you like i love you]

Teacher productivity? I'm lost for words.

The standard is quite obvious. The productivity of a teacher can reasonably be measured by the number of students one teachers. For some reason that number keeps declining.

[they don't love you like i love you]

He's like a combination of CARLHAYDEN and Libertas.

[they don't love you like i love you]

Every post CARLHAYDEN has made in this thread from about this page on: https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=139461.90

[they don't love you like i love you]

And there was also this:

Christmas will never be banned in the USA because the economic importance of Christmas shopping is too important to the American economy.  I would think Jewish Economists would recognize the importance of Christmas.  Christmas is significant in that not only is it a religious holiday, but it is also based on the Winter solstice, which is the darkest day of the calendar year.  As a holiday in the darkest and coldest week of the year, Christmas is an important cultural celebration for families and societies. 

The Jewish religion has an important emphasis on power and influence, and the global spread of Christianity and cultural Christianity directly antagonizes Jewish culture.  Instead of wanting gentiles to celebrate their faith or celebrate their Christianity openly, it seems that many Jewish leaders hate gentiles and would rather encourage Jewish elitism in American society and global culture. 

[they don't love you like i love you]

It's not even the most important Jewish holiday.

Beyond that; it's one of the least important.

It seems kind of odd for one of the least important Jewish holidays to coincide with one of Christianity's most important holidays (second only to Easter).  I guess that's on purpose so as to not overshadow or short-circuit the importance of Christmas.

[they don't love you like i love you]

Europe as free or more free then the USA? Not before we had to bail your asses out of fascism a while back, turds

Again: Relevant to this topic how? It's to avoid adressing the claims, sure. Whatever you and your precious military did 70 years ago doesn't have much to do with the current situation.

"Your precious military"?

Our military ought to be precious to everyone for what it has done thruout its history, especially an American like yourself

I also think it is ironic that the author takes a crap on American nationalism for thiinking every other nation is worse, as part of an article on why America is worse

[they don't love you like i love you]

Everything posted by J. J. in this thread from this page on:

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=145685.30

[they don't love you like i love you]

Obama's socialism is just as real as Wonkish1's intelligence.

Thank you for you admiration or Workish1's intelligence, and admitting to Obama's socialism.

Convenient this was posted directly into the Deluge.

[they don't love you like i love you]

Most disgusting post ever? Most disgusting post ever.

It's vile, but there have been a couple worse.

It reminds me of some of the things AuH2ORepublican from 2004-2005 often said, which of course are the ones that can compete with it.

[they don't love you like i love you]

Context:

At this point in 2008, wasn't everyone saying the same things about Romney and Clinton?

Weren't they?

No.

[they don't love you like i love you]

This might be old, but it was somehow overlooked:

You are largely right, Snowguy, and that's unfortunate.  We have become too 'comfortable' in our relatively persecution-free American lifestyle.  This comfort gives us the tendency to relax and let our guard down and relax our morals.  I heard a sermon about a year ago from my cousin that America's blessings have become our cursings.  We are so blessed in this nation to be able to worship the way you choose without the government cracking down on raiding your homes or places of worship that we have relaxed our morals and are rejecting large parts of the Word of God and allowing heresy and immorality to infiltrate the church.  The church should change the world, but we in America have allowed the world to change the church.  It is utterly shameful.  We, as American Christians, need to realize that there could very easily come a point that we will no longer be allowed to worship as freely as we once were.  In fact, it's already started by some groups saying that if you preach against homosexuality from the pulpit, they want you charged with a hate crime.  It is sad, really, really sad.

So, just so I understand you correctly: Freedom of religion is causing the nation to lose freedom of religion, so we should have less freedom of religion so that we can have more? George Orwell, meet Oklahoma.

That's not what I'm saying at all.  What I'm saying is that we've allowed society to influence the church, when we, as the church, should be influencing society.  We've watered down the Gospel so much that it has little or none effect.  We preach what people want to hear, not what they need to hear.  We have let our blessings as a nation make us complacent and comfortable.  Freedom of religion is a great thing, don't get me wrong, and that's not what I'm talking about.  I'm talking about all of our other blessings this country enjoys, mainly the lack of real persecution.  Other countries like China where they are still trying to stamp out Christianity brag about how they were beaten for their faith.  We water everything down here in the Bible Belt.  We choose where we worship based on the style of music or the style of preaching or the ethnicity and social makeup of the congregation, whether the church lets out on time for lunch or not.  We take complete chunks out of the Bible to make it fit what we want to believe, not forcing our beliefs to fit the Bible.  It's not that way in all of America.  For example, 8 years ago I went on a mission trip to Vermont and the churches up there, of course are few and far between, but they are strong, committed, genuine and authentic Christians.  They're not watered down like the Bible Belt is.  Down here, we have a church pretty much on every corner.  Up there, they don't.  Wicca is a huge part of the culture in Vermont and Massachusetts.  Christians are really a minority in New England, as well as in the Pacific Northwest.  At the time, I believe only 10% of Vermont residents even claimed Christianity.  In Oklahoma, it's probably 10% of our residents don't claim Christianity.  The difference is Christianity is much more authentic and genuine in Vermont than it is in Oklahoma or Texas.  As much as it pains me to put my state second in a race.

[they don't love you like i love you]

Romney will be accepting the nomination with Mount Rushmore as the backdrop, as he, of course, is the heir to the Presidents portrayed on that historic edifice.

[they don't love you like i love you]

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=147286.0

Note: I have yet to read anything beyond the OP.

[they don't love you like i love you]

I actually think it may be Unconstitutional for the government to regulate marriage if it is not about forcing a man to financially support his biological children. 

Basically, the government has no right regulating what gay couples can and cannot do. 
People need to be free, and gay people need to be free from government oversight and enforcement.
If the government regulates gay marriage, then it would have to enforce gay monogamy.  In some cases, the government may choose to make gay adultery illegal.  The government may imprison gay people for gay marriage fraud. 

Getting marriage benefits is not a right.  No person has a right to be subsidized by the government.  Every government agreement is a quid pro quo.  Biological marriage enforces a man to financially support his wife and child.  Biological marriage is anti-bigamy.  That is why it is regulated by the government, because the government (and married women) do not want men running around impregnating every woman in sight and have millions of bastard children. 

There is no Constitutional reason that says that gay people need to be married to gay people in order to have sexual relations or impregnate each other (which they can't). 
The government should not and cannot play a role in regulating the private lives and financial lives of gay people. 
America is about freedom, and each person should advocate less government programs and regulations and not more.