Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
Rigel
Nov 11, 2016

Flip Yr Wig posted:

So does repealing the individual mandate pass the Byrd rule because it can be construed as a tax, rather than a penalty for breaking a statute?

They will propose to reduce the penalty to $0. The penalty still exists, its just that you owe nothing from the penalty. As long as the entire bill cuts $119 billion (which it does, somehow), then thats fine.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

farraday
Jan 10, 2007

Lower those eyebrows, young man. And the other one.

Aves Maria! posted:

That's not how it works, or how it would work.

It is in fact exactly how it works if there was a situation where congressional inability to enact a critical piece of legislation could be prevented.

Stop pretending McCain dying does anything.

Bicyclops
Aug 27, 2004

Given two minutes without a tweet storm, everything always descends onto a debate about how sorry we're supposed to feel for John McCain, and so shall it already be, long past his actual death.

Kale
May 14, 2010

Aves Maria! posted:

"Decency" in politics has been dead for years now, and Republicans killed it. Pretending to all be friends and glad-handing no longer matters when one party is essentially a cult of death.


It takes away their capacity to pass this lovely legislation for as long as it takes for someone to replace him

I haven't felt the Republican Party has given a poo poo about anything other than Rich White People since I graduated high school back in 2002 and started to become more aware of the politics of the U.S (I'm Canadian so our systems work a bit differently and it's not exactly a two party system even though there's a designation called "official opposition") and they've certainly become more and more transparent about it over time. I don't know if it's just the electoral college, but it feels like the U.S kind of loves them some Republicans as it's consistently been the default party for the 21st century to date. I believe I remember Democrats having control of the house for a very brief period at the start of Obama's presidency but then they made a couple of mistakes under Pelosi and it's like gently caress you house swings back to Republicans. It seems like the Republicans can gently caress up constantly and have scandal after scandal that would annihilate a sitting democratic rep or senator and have minimal consequences at best though. Body Slam a reporter for asking a question, get back into office. Have a runoff vote in 5 states with a deeply unpopular president, win every single one of them. Be a complete poo poo of a human being that goes against everything a leader is supposed to stand for, become president with yet another Republican and House majority etc. One party definitely seems to have it a lot easier than the other in getting elected to office for sure while the other feels like a permanent opposition party that occasionally is allowed to govern a branch of congress for a year or two.

It's why I don't think that anything is changing in the house or senate in 2018. The Republican party just seems to have a massive advantage in getting it's people elected and re-elected in red states versus Democratic ones who are more likely to be defending seats in states that aren't New England or California somehow than looking to gain them.

Kale fucked around with this message at 22:22 on Jul 25, 2017

bird cooch
Jan 19, 2007
The DCCC mines this thread for fundraising email headers.

pacmania90
May 31, 2010

Sinteres posted:

It was more controversial on this forum to celebrate bin Laden's death than it is to celebrate McCain's.

If John McCain turns out to be the deciding factor in the repeal of Obamacare, he might be responsible for more deaths than bin Laden. Even so, it is still wrong to wish for his needless suffering. He is still a person like you or me and I believe that it's wrong to be happy when when people get hurt.

axeil
Feb 14, 2006

RoboChrist 9000 posted:

An important distinction, also, between wishing death upon McCain and other Republican officials and the death penalty is this: in the death penalty, the criminal is executed after the crime. It is a purely retributive action that in no way protects or saves the innocent. If McCain dies before he can vote to strip many people of their healthcare, then the death has prevented the crime from happening and the act was not purely retributive.

It is the difference between killing in self defense and killing after the fact in vengeance.

EDIT: For clarity, I'm not taking a side in this discussion because I think it's pointless. But I do think that saying it's hypocritical to wish death upon McCain while simultaneously condemning the death penalty is not hypocrisy.

John Anderton is that you?

Danny Woodward from Justice is calling you. Lamarr said he may have found an issue with the pre-cogs.

Aves Maria!
Jul 26, 2008

Maybe I'll drown

farraday posted:

It is in fact exactly how it works if there was a situation where congressional inability to enact a critical piece of legislation could be prevented.

Stop pretending McCain dying does anything.

When is the last time you heard of anyone being appointed within minutes of a death or removal from office?

Even delaying a vote for a few days does something.

Azhais
Feb 5, 2007
Switchblade Switcharoo
^ there's a difference between "last time you've heard of" and "it doesn't work that way". There's no reason the governor couldn't do it the instant time of death was called if there was pressure to do so.

Aves Maria! posted:

That's not how it works, or how it would work.

The Governor of Arizona can just appoint a replacement that serves until the next general election. As near as I can tell, that's exactly how it does work, there's no voting, no state senate confirmation, no nothing. In Arizona the Governor can appoint anyone he wants as long as it's the same party as the replaced senator.

Waffles Inc.
Jan 20, 2005

Kale posted:

I haven't felt the Republican Party has given a poo poo about anything other than Rich White People since I graduated high school back in 2002 and started to become more aware of the politics of the U.S (I'm Canadian so our systems work a bit differently and it's not exactly a two party system even though there's a designation called "official opposition") and they've certainly become more and more transparent about it over time. I don't know if it's just the electoral college, but it feels like the U.S kind of loves them some Republicans as it's consistently been the default party for the 21st century to date. I believe I remember Democrats having control of the house for a very brief period at the start of Obama's presidency but then they made a couple of mistakes under Pelosi and it's like gently caress you house swings back to Republicans. It seems like the Republicans can gently caress up constantly though and have minimal consequences at best though. Body Slam a reporter for asking a question, get into office. Have a runoff vote in 5 states, win every single one of them. Be a complete poo poo of a human being that goes against everything a leader is supposed to stand for, become president with yet another Republican and House majority etc. One party definitely seems to have it a lot easier than the other in getting elected to office for sure.

it's because of old people who are afraid of change the the core base which literally just votes to get one over on "liberals"

there's no saving republican voters--the GOP doesn't govern, it just exists to spite

Quorum
Sep 24, 2014

REMIND ME AGAIN HOW THE LITTLE HORSE-SHAPED ONES MOVE?

Aves Maria! posted:

John McCain has arguably done more to cause people across the world to suffer than bin Laden.

Point of order, 9-11 killed more than just the people who died in the Twin Towers and the Pentagon.

Dr Kool-AIDS
Mar 26, 2004

pacmania90 posted:

If John McCain turns out to be the deciding factor in the repeal of Obamacare, he might be responsible for more deaths than bin Laden. Even so, it is still wrong to wish for his needless suffering. He is still a person like you or me and I believe that it's wrong to be happy when when people get hurt.

So was the inventor of the car. I think a 100% consequentialist ethics that decides anyone who does anything that leads to deaths, regardless of the reason or means, is an equivalent monster is absurd. Yes, the Republican healthcare bill is lovely, but removing a healthcare subsidy and mandate that didn't exist 8 years ago isn't murder or terrorism, it's politics. Obviously that does have consequences, and it should be fought vigorously, but equating politics to war is ridiculous.

Quorum posted:

Point of order, 9-11 killed more than just the people who died in the Twin Towers and the Pentagon.

This too.

Lemming
Apr 21, 2008

Kale posted:

Loving the dark turn this thread took in turning into a tribunal on whether John McCain should live or die. American Political discussion sure is a thing these days. Just divisive and antagonistic as a fault. Even if the U.S was still interested in setting the pace for democracy and global debates on the issues of the times I'm not sure I'd want it to anymore.

Who let you out of the locker, nerd

Petr
Oct 3, 2000

bird cooch posted:

The DCCC mines this thread for fundraising email headers.

I'll let you know when I get an email with the subject line "Beat cancer to the punch!"

Ague Proof
Jun 5, 2014

they told me
I was everything

Aves Maria! posted:

John McCain has arguably done more to cause people across the world to suffer than bin Laden.

At least McCain had the courage to crash the planes himself.

Casey Finnigan
Apr 30, 2009

Dumb ✔
So goddamn crazy ✔

Kale posted:

I haven't felt the Republican Party has given a poo poo about anything other than Rich White People since I graduated high school back in 2002 and started to become more aware of the politics of the U.S (I'm Canadian so our systems work a bit differently and it's not exactly a two party system even though there's a designation called "official opposition") and they've certainly become more and more transparent about it over time. I don't know if it's just the electoral college, but it feels like the U.S kind of loves them some Republicans as it's consistently been the default party for the 21st century to date. I believe I remember Democrats having control of the house for a very brief period at the start of Obama's presidency but then they made a couple of mistakes under Pelosi and it's like gently caress you house swings back to Republicans. It seems like the Republicans can gently caress up constantly though and have minimal consequences at best though. Body Slam a reporter for asking a question, get into office. Have a runoff vote in 5 states, win every single one of them. Be a complete poo poo of a human being that goes against everything a leader is supposed to stand for, become president with yet another Republican and House majority etc. One party definitely seems to have it a lot easier than the other in getting elected to office for sure.

Yeah it's cause they draw the districts so that Republicans are heavily favored and then pass state laws to prevent people (the WRONG people of course) from voting. And in any case, if you're a poor person with a lot of work like very very many Americans are, it's not so easy to be able to vote even if you aren't going to be hosed over because of your last name or the color of your skin.

As for the Republican wins that can't be explained by gerrymandering and voter suppression, well, I mean, we're real stupid down here.

bird cooch
Jan 19, 2007

Petr posted:

I'll let you know when I get an email with the subject line "Beat cancer to the punch!"

That would get a 20$ out of me.

Aurubin
Mar 17, 2011

https://twitter.com/cushbomb/status/889953327181639681

Dr Kool-AIDS
Mar 26, 2004


I don't care how he's treated, I just think the increasingly toxic death cult in this thread is bad on its own merits.

Slow News Day
Jul 4, 2007
Probation
Can't post for 6 hours!
The US should just split into two.

I say that in all seriousness: I don't see how depolarization is going to occur. Currently we are headed for Civil War 2.

Aves Maria!
Jul 26, 2008

Maybe I'll drown

Azhais posted:

^ there's a difference between "last time you've heard of" and "it doesn't work that way". There's no reason the governor couldn't do it the instant time of death was called if there was pressure to do so.


The Governor of Arizona can just appoint a replacement that serves until the next general election. As near as I can tell, that's exactly how it does work, there's no voting, no state senate confirmation, no nothing. In Arizona the Governor can appoint anyone he wants as long as it's the same party as the replaced senator.

So you're saying that the thing that literally never happens will happen because it is theoretically possible.

Quorum posted:

Point of order, 9-11 killed more than just the people who died in the Twin Towers and the Pentagon.

McCain voted for the Iraq War.

farraday
Jan 10, 2007

Lower those eyebrows, young man. And the other one.
In actual news, Russian sanctions pass house with slightly above veto proof majority.

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/889958641452843011

Kale
May 14, 2010

Casey Finnigan posted:

Yeah it's cause they draw the districts so that Republicans are heavily favored and then pass state laws to prevent people (the WRONG people of course) from voting. And in any case, if you're a poor person with a lot of work like very very many Americans are, it's not so easy to be able to vote even if you aren't going to be hosed over because of your last name or the color of your skin.

As for the Republican wins that can't be explained by gerrymandering and voter suppression, well, I mean, we're real stupid down here.

What gets me is they vote to advance debate on something that to date has been wildly unpopular according to polls but they'll all probably still have no problem getting back in. It's literally like nothing matters in that country and there's only consequences for one party and the meek. I really don't know what the people that are saying poo poo like x senator that switched their vote to yes will be gone in 2018 are getting at but they're in for a really rude awakening come mid-terms if they truly think that.

Dr Kool-AIDS
Mar 26, 2004

enraged_camel posted:

The US should just split into two.

I say that in all seriousness: I don't see how depolarization is going to occur. Currently we are headed for Civil War 2.

The red parts being in the middle of the blue parts presents an issue. Plus rural parts of the blue parts are conservative, and urban parts of the red parts are liberal. It would be a mess.

Trabisnikof
Dec 24, 2005

Sinteres posted:

I don't care how he's treated, I just think the increasingly toxic death cult in this thread is bad on its own merits.

Right, you care less about the horrible people ruining the world than you do about critiquing the morality of posters on an Internet forum.

The Glumslinger
Sep 24, 2008

Coach Nagy, you want me to throw to WHAT side of the field?


Hair Elf

farraday posted:

In actual news, Russian sanctions pass house with slightly above veto proof majority.

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/889958641452843011

I'm gonna guess Dana Rorbacher was one of the 3 against it

FizFashizzle
Mar 30, 2005







farraday posted:

In actual news, Russian sanctions pass house with slightly above veto proof majority.

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/889958641452843011

Who would vote against this and why?

i mean i know the reason but what's the stated reason?

Randbrick
Sep 28, 2002
I do not sloganeer pain. I do not traffic in suffering. I got no covenant with hell, and I do not preach to the abyss.

I do not chant death, nor for it.

I sing death, though. Death is the air I breathe, it's what McCain and his confederates bogart on down the streets I walk on past into and on through the homes of my fellows, people I love. They have filled the air with death.

I sing death. Every exhalation is the stale, tobacco taste of old, recycled death. I warm it over with some tonality, and I sing my death on back the road, point for counterpoint.

I will stand over the graves of these withered, amoral people, and I will sing.

Randbrick fucked around with this message at 22:27 on Jul 25, 2017

evilweasel
Aug 24, 2002

farraday posted:

In actual news, Russian sanctions pass house with slightly above veto proof majority.

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/889958641452843011

who were the three besides rohrbacher? massie and amash?

Aurubin
Mar 17, 2011

Sinteres posted:

I don't care how he's treated, I just think the increasingly toxic death cult in this thread is bad on its own merits.

Aves Maria!
Jul 26, 2008

Maybe I'll drown

Sinteres posted:

So was the inventor of the car. I think a 100% consequentialist ethics that decides anyone who does anything that leads to deaths, regardless of the reason or means, is an equivalent monster is absurd. Yes, the Republican healthcare bill is lovely, but removing a healthcare subsidy and mandate that didn't exist 8 years ago isn't murder or terrorism, it's politics. Obviously that does have consequences, and it should be fought vigorously, but equating politics to war is ridiculous.


This too.

lol, you really are the platonic ideal of an insufferable "politics as a game" jerk-off.

Dr Kool-AIDS
Mar 26, 2004

Trabisnikof posted:

Right, you care less about the horrible people ruining the world than you do about critiquing the morality of posters on an Internet forum.

I don't, but I'm not in the Senate so I don't get to tell them how I feel.

evilweasel
Aug 24, 2002

FizFashizzle posted:

Who would vote against this and why?

i mean i know the reason but what's the stated reason?

one is probably the guy who mccarthy said, with trump, was on putin's payroll

Aurubin
Mar 17, 2011

O, Death
O, Death
O, Death
Won't you spare me over 'til another year
Well what is this that I can't see
With ice cold hands takin' hold of me
Well I am Death, none can excel
I'll open the door to Heaven or Hell
Whoa, Death someone would pray
Could you wait to call me another day
The children prayed, the preacher preached
Time and mercy is out of your reach
I'll fix your feet til you can't walk
I'll lock your jaw til you can't talk
I'll close your eyes so you can't see
This very hour, come and go with me
I'm Death I come to take the soul
Leave the body and leave it cold
To draw up the flesh off of the frame
Dirt and worm both have a claim

O, Death
O, Death
Won't you spare me over 'til another year
My mother came to my bed
Placed a cold towel upon my head
My head is warm my feet are cold
Death is a-movin' upon my soul
Oh, Death how you're treatin' me
You've close my eyes so I can't see
Well you're hurtin' my body
You make me cold
You run my life right outta my soul

Oh Death please consider my age
Please don't take me at this stage
My wealth is all at your command
If you will move your icy hand
The old, the young, the rich or poor
All alike to me you know
No wealth, no land, no silver no gold
Nothing satisfies me but your soul

O, Death
O, Death
Won't you spare me over til another year
Won't you spare me over til another year
Won't you spare me over til another year

The Puppy Bowl
Jan 31, 2013

A dog, in the house.

*woof*

farraday posted:

In actual news, Russian sanctions pass house with slightly above veto proof majority.

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/889958641452843011

Does anyone have a summary of what these sanctions actually are? I'm happy to seize the US based assets of corrupt oligarchs but depriving starving people of food is a little hosed.

ded redd
Aug 1, 2010

by Fluffdaddy

evilweasel posted:

who were the three besides rohrbacher? massie and amash?

https://twitter.com/greggiroux/status/889958993371828229

Surprisingly enough the most obvious culprit is innocent.

FizFashizzle
Mar 30, 2005







Sinteres posted:

The red parts being in the middle of the blue parts presents an issue. Plus rural parts of the blue parts are conservative, and urban parts of the red parts are liberal. It would be a mess.

This is a dumb conversation to have, but if this split were to actually happen, you'd have ostensibly red states BEGGING to be in the blue section. Like Georgia doesn't want to be cut off, and them staying means NC tries like hell to stay in, etc

farraday
Jan 10, 2007

Lower those eyebrows, young man. And the other one.

evilweasel posted:

who were the three besides rohrbacher? massie and amash?

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2017/roll413.xml

Amash
Duncan (TN)
Massie

Rohrbacher actually voted yes

FizFashizzle
Mar 30, 2005







Office Pig posted:

https://twitter.com/greggiroux/status/889958993371828229

Surprisingly enough the most obvious culprit is innocent.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Petr
Oct 3, 2000

enraged_camel posted:

The US should just split into two.

I say that in all seriousness: I don't see how depolarization is going to occur. Currently we are headed for Civil War 2.

Along what geographical boundaries? The real division right now is urban vs rural, and every state has blue cities, no matter how red.

  • Locked thread