|
radical meme posted:Listening to Mark Levin on the way home and he and some law professor from California were having masturbatory fantasies about a ballot initiative to break California into 6 separate states. Given that its California and that the ballot initiative is being sponsored and funded by a venture capital billionaire, Tim Draper, I don't doubt that they will get the signatures they need to get it on the ballot. At that point, the law professor was saying that it would be a done deal if the initiative passed and that even if Congress doesn't approve it, the proposed legislation is written in such a way that California will still have to function as 6 separate states until the bill is passed or the time for passage lapses. The initiative is written in such a way that it would be win if they win and even a win if they loose situation. So how scared should we be that California will put at least 10 new Republican Senators into Congress? States can't unilaterally decide to split into more states. That has to be approved by congress. Congress can't do it without the state's permission, but they are the only ones who can do it. There's no way in hell that poo poo would make it through unless Republicans controlled everything and even then it would probably be tough.
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2014 02:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 19:55 |
|
|
radical meme posted:Listening to Mark Levin on the way home and he and some law professor from California were having masturbatory fantasies about a ballot initiative to break California into 6 separate states. Given that its California and that the ballot initiative is being sponsored and funded by a venture capital billionaire, Tim Draper, I don't doubt that they will get the signatures they need to get it on the ballot. At that point, the law professor was saying that it would be a done deal if the initiative passed and that even if Congress doesn't approve it, the proposed legislation is written in such a way that California will still have to function as 6 separate states until the bill is passed or the time for passage lapses. The initiative is written in such a way that it would be win if they win and even a win if they loose situation. So how scared should we be that California will put at least 10 new Republican Senators into Congress?
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2014 02:15
|
|
|
Modern Day Hercules posted:States can't unilaterally decide to split into more states. That has to be approved by congress. Congress can't do it without the state's permission, but they are the only ones who can do it. There's no way in hell that poo poo would make it through unless Republicans controlled everything and even then it would probably be tough. The final split has to be approved, but they've written the drat thing so that they don't even care if Congress passes it cause they get to gently caress over all the blue parts of California as long as the initiative passes. Like I said, win win.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2014 02:18
|
|
|
radical meme posted:The final split has to be approved, but they've written the drat thing so that they don't even care if Congress passes it cause they get to gently caress over all the blue parts of California as long as the initiative passes. Like I said, win win. That's highly unlikely. Even if it did end up on the ballot, and did end up passing, it would immediately be challenged in court which would prevent it from being implemented and there's no way that sort of bill makes it through a constitutional challenge. No serious court would allow that sort of weirdo poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2014 02:24
|
|
|
How exactly is it a win/win is what I'm wondering. They're not going to be able to send extra senators to Washington without federal ratification, and representatives are apportioned based mostly on population. Unless they've chosen some really wonky way of choosing the two senators they'd still get, I don't see how they'd benefit. e: I poked around a bit, but I don't see many details on this thing
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2014 02:30
|
|
|
There's no way something like that passes. No one living in California wants to suddenly find out they live in Fresnofornia. It would be like that Seinfeld episode with the area codes.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2014 03:02
|
|
|
Just regurgitating what Levin and his guest were discussing but according to the guest law professor, the initiative would be binding on California during the interim, waiting for congressional approval. That way, California, as a State would have to function as 6 separate states, with 6 separate taxing and legislative authorities. From a Federal standpoint, it might not matter, but, from a legislative/taxing standpoint, they would get to direct taxing and regulation in their own little fiefdoms. Again, this is coming from Levin's guest. Anyway you look at it, it could create a constitutional nightmare which is the intent of the billionaire behind it. Why not buy your own state if you can afford it? Plus, this is a great way to push people who would love to see it happen to the polls in November. Here's the entire initiative if you want to read it. radical meme fucked around with this message at 03:20 on Feb 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2014 03:02
|
|
|
pd187 posted:EDIT: I dunno if you think the Lincoln Heights Literary Society is better than an MST3k fansite, but there's also this:
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2014 03:10
|
|
|
Well, of course a person who is not religious will figure out that one can be moral without a religion.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2014 03:29
|
|
|
Beowulfs_Ghost posted:And, is it just me, or does it seem like those that complain about personal taxes the most are either just bad at business or otherwise peaked in terms of income?
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2014 03:40
|
|
|
radical meme posted:The final split has to be approved, but they've written the drat thing so that they don't even care if Congress passes it cause they get to gently caress over all the blue parts of California as long as the initiative passes. Like I said, win win. No, they don't 'get' to do that. Like if I write a ballot measure that says I'm king of America, and buy enough votes for that, I don't actually become king of America because the federal government will go 'what, are you retarded? No.' because that's their jurisdiction.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2014 03:48
|
|
|
Don't shoot the messenger man. I'm just repeating what the guy said and if you read the initiative, then its clear that you have a billionaire that has put more than a little thought into it, that he's trying to create chaos in California and he has the money to do it. I don't know if the thing will pass but I do know that Draper and other monied interest will likely pour some bucks into trying to make it happen. I hope someone steps up and puts a stop to it before it even has a chance to make the ballot but that may not happen. I question whether a court would have the power to stop a ballot initiative before it goes to a vote. It's California and anything is possible. radical meme fucked around with this message at 04:28 on Feb 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2014 04:25
|
|
|
Tatum Girlparts posted:Like if I write a ballot measure that says I'm king of America, and buy enough votes for that, I don't actually become king of America because the federal government will go 'what, are you retarded? No.' because that's their jurisdiction. The hell you don't.  I just wanted an excuse to post that because it's the greatest story
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2014 04:40
|
|
|
radical meme posted:Don't shoot the messenger man. I'm just repeating what the guy said and if you read the initiative, then its clear that you have a billionaire that has put more than a little thought into it, that he's trying to create chaos in California and he has the money to do it. Billionaires are routinely idiots. I don't know why you brought that up as if it changes things. I also don't know which monied interests would be interested in pouring cash into this initiative. Why would they gently caress with the status quo that got them rich? This is the fools errand of a few idiots. You're getting really concerned over something that might as well be a ballot initiative to reintroduce the wild unicorn into the redwood forests.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2014 04:50
|
|
|
WoodrowSkillson posted:Given Mike Nelson's lack of history of saying or supporting terrible things, I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. Dude seems to be an older style conservative who I would not agree with but could live with. Mike Nelson is a hardcore conservative. He's also a professional and knows to spread his targets. I'm as big a socalist as it gets, and to be perfectly fair the side I've seen attacked the most in his recent work are libertarians. Pretty much every time someone is shown being brainwashed or having something weird done to their head, there is a "You're now a Ron Paul supporter!" quip. There's even a short about freedom of expression with a bona-fide nazi in which they say he'd fit right in at a Ron Paul rally. And my personal favorite, in Star Wars Episode II, when Anakin is talking to Palpatine at the weird bubble opera thing. Palpatine: You see, some people do not have much appreciation for democracy. Kevin: Libertarians? Much as I wish he'd see things differently, he's not an agitator and does decent work consistently. And some of his digs at liberals are obviously prompted by movies/scenes that make them inescapable if they really want to reach a wide audience and go for every joke. Like the one in The Dark Knight, when the Joker blows up a hospital and they quip "Single-payer healthcare, day one."
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2014 05:18
|
|
|
Yeah, I'll accept that he's pretty hardcore conservative, and that does inform his comedy to some extent, but he's not a conservative comic. He doesn't put his ideology ahead of his humor, and he doesn't use the latter to heavily promote the former. And there's nothing inherently wrong with ripping on liberals. Like all people, we can be ridiculous and silly, and if we can't handle some jokes we deserve the ridicule that brings.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2014 06:03
|
|
|
Conservative comedy: http://homeofthegnome.net/mc/Greatest%20Salesman.mp3 from: 
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2014 06:34
|
|
|
There's another problem with being a conservative comic. Being conservative also means holding back. So if you're conservative with your comedy, it's likely going to be very mediocre and have nothing noteworthy to say or any edge or bite to it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2014 06:35
|
|
|
radical meme posted:Listening to Mark Levin on the way home and he and some law professor from California were having masturbatory fantasies about a ballot initiative to break California into 6 separate states. What I found most hilarious about this whole thing was how much Levin seemed to dig the idea, even though he often criticizes Democrats for trying to Balkanize America. This plan to break up California right along party fault lines is like textbook Balkanization. But that is okay because it would easily produce half a dozen new Republican senators.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2014 07:11
|
|
|
PeterWeller posted:Yeah, I'll accept that he's pretty hardcore conservative, and that does inform his comedy to some extent, but he's not a conservative comic. He doesn't put his ideology ahead of his humor, and he doesn't use the latter to heavily promote the former. I agree, with the caveat that the humor (whether aimed at libs or cons) must be based in truth to be funny. For example, joking about liberals wanting "happy holidays" to replace "merry christmas" is stupid and unfunny, because it's based on right wing persecution fantasy, and stuff like mocking diversity or equality, which is just spiteful ranting.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2014 07:15
|
|
|
Beowulfs_Ghost posted:What I found most hilarious about this whole thing was how much Levin seemed to dig the idea, even though he often criticizes Democrats for trying to Balkanize America. This plan to break up California right along party fault lines is like textbook Balkanization. But that is okay because it would easily produce half a dozen new Republican senators. It's okay if the Republicans break the rules because they play it up like it's for the good of the country or state or whatever. Doesn't matter if it's as low as bellyaching about things and stalling for time or as awful as genocide. But if the other team does it oh hell no.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2014 07:15
|
|
|
ReindeerF posted:Let's think about that list. Carolla, Rob Schneider, Dee Schneider, Jon Lovitz, Victoria Jackson, Kelsey Grammer, Ted Nugent, Vince Vaughn, Dave Musta- okay, yeah, I think we've got enough anecdotal research to fund this study. Bill Maher bitches about taxes all the goddamn time and he's still doing fairly well. beatlegs posted:I agree, with the caveat that the humor (whether aimed at libs or cons) must be based in truth to be funny. For example, joking about liberals wanting "happy holidays" to replace "merry christmas" is stupid and unfunny, because it's based on right wing persecution fantasy, and stuff like mocking diversity or equality, which is just spiteful ranting. So all conservative humor, then? Most of the funny digs at liberals are self-deprecating humor.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2014 07:52
|
|
|
beatlegs posted:I agree, with the caveat that the humor (whether aimed at libs or cons) must be based in truth to be funny. For example, joking about liberals wanting "happy holidays" to replace "merry christmas" is stupid and unfunny, because it's based on right wing persecution fantasy, and stuff like mocking diversity or equality, which is just spiteful ranting. I agree, but there is truth to naive liberals making awkward attempts at multiculturalism, which is where I find humor in the gag in question.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2014 07:59
|
|
|
mr. mephistopheles posted:Bill Maher bitches about taxes all the goddamn time and he's still doing fairly well. Basically, he's a typical New York (Jersey, whatever) refugee who has moved to a sunny area with all his money and grows increasingly conservative while holding on to the political labels and some of the progressive beliefs that don't cross any of his soft spots.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2014 09:28
|
|
|
ReindeerF posted:Yeah, I don't think you're going to find any case where it's 100% of anyone. Maher's also had progressive get-off-my-lawn disease for a decade or so. Last podcast that hit my feed had he and the incredibly un-funny PJ O'Rourke doing a non-ironic "when we were kids!" back and forth for like 2-3 minutes. That's all combined with that batshit entertainment industry nutbarism where you make fun of people for not believing in evolution and then openly protest vaccines. Then there's his constant, "Well, look, Israel has a right to..." crap. And Maher is also an example of some one who has peaked and can't admit it to himself. When it comes to blending comedy and politics for a TV audience, he is solidly behind The Daily Show and Colbert. He's not going to squeeze any more money out of his HBO show because it will never compete with the audiences and buzz that those other 2 (better) shows can get with the more accessible Comedy Central. He admits to being changed by 9/11, which basically means he is suffering from mild PTSD. Combine his other nutty beliefs with his smug attitude, and the Bill Maher brand is circling the drain. So yah, the only way Maher is going to take home a bigger paycheck is by paying less taxes, because doing his third rate show behind a pay wall and flailing all over the political spectrum isn't going to make him any wealthier. edit; Actually, reading up on what else he has been up to lately, and it sounds like he is going into producing and doing some other stuff with his money. So if he is smart, he'll find other ways to grow his revenue, because selling "Bill Maher" as a comedian/personality isn't going to do it. Beowulfs_Ghost fucked around with this message at 11:02 on Feb 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2014 10:41
|
|
|
I will give Bill a thing: he has panels. He even gets conservatives as guests. Real, hard-core, not-half-hearted, Global Warming is a hoax and every other stupid talking point on his show. He tries to keep the audience and the libs on the panel from getting too insulting and I admit I kinda respect that about him. What I don't like is, well, mostly his comedy. His bits are 85% bad, his monologues are 95% bad, he laughs every time he sets up a bit; and his version of Dennis Miller's "I don't wanna get off on a rant here" at the end of every show is hit-or-miss. Sometimes I really think he hits the nail on the head, other times I hold my face in my hands and shake my head, "No, Bill, don't." As I've said before, at least he's mostly stopped chiding his audience for not laughing much at his lame political jokes in the monologue. I make a point to catch every show, but it's really only good when they have at least one solid conservative/loving nutjob on the panel to argue with. e: And by that I mean, it doesn't usually sink all the way to the old Crossfire levels of everybody screaming at once.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2014 11:37
|
|
|
Yeah, his material is really the worst part of the show - especially the bit they do about a quarter of the way through where they have the mocked up posters or book covers or whatever. God those are all like hand-over-your-eyes-groaning unfunny. I tune in for the guests mostly, though I never know whether he's going to drag the interview or panel in some crazy direction. In positive news, Bugler John Oliver's new HBO show Last Week Tonight is set to debut in April. I find him pretty loving hilarious when he's on about current events and politics and such, so I hope it works out. We could use some of that more understated, biting British humor in our American politinfotainment landscape. EDIT: Off on the right foot: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/john-oliver-talks-new-hbo-669779 quote:...Oliver said, adding that he will continue to seek Stewart’s advice as he’s done for the past seven and a half years. (Oliver suggested he hadn’t done the same of fellow HBO comedian Bill Maher, but said he intends to do via email, and joked that the gesture likely would entail a fruit basket.)
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2014 13:48
|
|
|
beatlegs posted:I agree, with the caveat that the humor (whether aimed at libs or cons) must be based in truth to be funny. For example, joking about liberals wanting "happy holidays" to replace "merry christmas" is stupid and unfunny, because it's based on right wing persecution fantasy, and stuff like mocking diversity or equality, which is just spiteful ranting. You know, this is often bandied about as the reason Conservative Comedians aren't funny and can't be funny because if they could actually see the truth, they wouldn't be conservatives. "Single-payer Day one" doesn't have a grain of factual basis to it. Never-the-less, it is funny. Stewart Lee has lots of facts in his stuff, but he's not particularly funny. Dennis Miller, when he was a liberal, was not particularly funny. (To say nothing of now) Bob Hope, on the other hand, was conservative as the day is long and has decades of funny material. Truth is a subjective concept, and not really at all essential to being funny. You're missing a really key element to something being funny: the absurdity of the premise and the spirit it's offered in. mr. mephistopheles posted:Bill Maher bitches about taxes all the goddamn time and he's still doing fairly well. He's also peaked. Like everyone else on that list. My Q-Face fucked around with this message at 15:07 on Feb 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2014 15:04
|
|
|
Dr. Faustus posted:I will give Bill a thing: he has panels. He even gets conservatives as guests. Real, hard-core, not-half-hearted, Global Warming is a hoax and every other stupid talking point on his show. He tries to keep the audience and the libs on the panel from getting too insulting and I admit I kinda respect that about him.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2014 15:15
|
|
|
OH NO WHITE GUILT http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Hollywood/2014/02/20/slave-plays-guilt-card-oscar-push  quote:The studio behind the harrowing drama 12 Years a Slave thinks "it's time" the film win an Oscar or two. Maybe more. Mr Ice Cream Glove fucked around with this message at 15:56 on Feb 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2014 15:48
|
|
|
Being white is pretty cool, whenever a black guy does a thing we still get to smugly lean back and go 'nope, didn't count' if they get any attention for it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2014 16:01
|
|
|
I really don't get all the Maher hate, never get it. There's tons of lame crap on his how (his monologues and mid show bits are usually pretty atrocious) but the actual show part is pretty much the only show on American television where bullshit American sacred cows can be lambasted and questioned. He calls conservatives out on their bullshit, people can express real opinions outside the "Overton window", Jeremy Scahil and Matt Taibbi get a voice. For all its flaws, its pretty much the only honest political conversation on American television.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2014 16:01
|
|
|
My biggest problem with Maher is that he really seems to go off on Muslims a lot. He's one of those athiests who hates most religions, but heaps the most scorn on Islam. I agree though that at least he lets people like Greenwald, Scahill, Taibbi, Amy Goodman, etc. have a voice.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2014 16:11
|
|
|
Gozinbulx posted:I really don't get all the Maher hate, never get it. Anti-vaxxer.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2014 16:13
|
|
|
WoodrowSkillson posted:Anti-vaxxer. I'm pretty sure this charge is completely over blown to the point of being bullshit. I know theres some quote floating around from like 5 years ago but I think that's hardly indicative of a firmly set belief. If he is truly anti-vax then yes he's stupid, doesn't change the content of his show. Also yes, his unusual fascination with Islam is troublesome. Again, he and his show are flawed, but it doesn't mean it still isn't the most honest debate show on tv.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2014 16:28
|
|
|
He's like a 3 on a 1-10 scale of anti-vaxxer, he is overly pro-Israel, he says THOSE middle-eastern countries are backwards in a lot of ways (I basically agree with this even though it's an unsavory issue to be passionate about), and he's probably overcompensating with the women he couldn't get in high school in a semi-creepy way. This concludes my report on what I find lacking in Bill Maher. Still like him.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2014 16:46
|
|
|
Gozinbulx posted:I really don't get all the Maher hate, never get it. He hates Muslims super hard, like, he goes beyond 'this specific law the Muslim nation is doing is backwards' and into "THE FUCKIN SAVAGES ARE AT IT AGAIN", he's a pretty creepy misogynist about a lot of things, he only really goes after right wing 'sacred cows' but lets stupid rear end neo-liberals spout whatever trash they want because they're on his team, and Religious sucked super hard and was a bunch of smug internet atheist level trash that he thinks is really meaningful and strong. He's also a huge zionist, which is hilarious because he makes fun of right wingers for being too pro-Israel but it's ok when he does it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2014 16:49
|
|
|
Gozinbulx posted:I'm pretty sure this charge is completely over blown to the point of being bullshit. This is Maher summing up his anti-vax stance, such as it is.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2014 16:57
|
|
|
eviltastic posted:This is Maher summing up his anti-vax stance, such as it is.  He's just asking questions!
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2014 17:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 19:55 |
|
|
eviltastic posted:This is Maher summing up his anti-vax stance, such as it is. It's not "vaccines cause autism" level crazy, no. I'd give him a 3/10 really. He had adequate caveats to his positions, and kept his analysis rooted in debatable positions rather than hyperbolic vitriol. I personally don't get a flu shot, because I found the drawbacks to getting it (invariably: the flu for 2-3 weeks) when I was forced to in the Navy outweighed the risk avoidance. I've been flu-free ever since I stopped taking the shot. So I don't take a huge umbrage with his position of each person considering whether or not they're a reasonable candidate for a flu shot every year. If he poo poo on MMR vaccines or HPV? Then yeah he's retarded. But he didn't. Bill's relatively centrist in today's America outside of his near-libertarianism when it comes to social issues (gender/sexual equality, drug policy, military industrial drawdown). His show's good considering it's nearest analogue would be the shitfire that is Crossfire. I don't think he fits into this thread's "Right Wing Media" focus too well.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2014 17:16
|
|
