Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
For those who weren't aware of what happened in Virginia just recently:
The state legislature is tied between the Republicans and the Democrats. The Republicans decided to vote for a redistricting plan that favors them... after waiting for ONE of the Democrat votes to attend the president's inauguration ceremony. With the votes then 19 to 20, they were able to pass it.
It also has to go through the House of Delegates - which is GOP controlled - and the governor, who is also Republican. So there's really nothing stopping the Republicans from handing themselves more political power except their own shoulder angels. Barring massive public outcry, it seems unlikely that they'll go against their own party in a fit of wounded consciences.
It bears an interesting contrast to 2011's little Democrat version of a legislative 'dirty trick,' wherein Wisconsin's Democrats actually fled the state to avoid having to vote on something and successfully stalled the process for some time - albeit still losing in the end, IIRC.
edited 24th Jan '13 9:58:32 AM by Karkadinn
Furthermore, I think Guantanamo must be destroyed.So you need another anti-SOPA-style mass demonstration?
edited 24th Jan '13 12:38:57 PM by MarqFJA
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.Islamic nations may well have been better about that during the Crusades than they are now — they were relatively progressive during their Golden Age. Actually, the series of massacres perpetrated by the Crusaders and Mongols * are a huge part of why it started turning bad, and why the Islamic nations of today saw the fundamentalist revivals of the last century or so take such strong hold.
Maybe not so drastic, as we're far more touchy about our internets than our sacred democratic process.
However, doing the old cliche (Petitioning your friends, contacting your congresscritters) does have a slow, cumulative effect.
At the very least, you get to be all smug and "I told you so."
edited 24th Jan '13 12:56:39 PM by DrTentacles
![]()
![]()
Yeah, the Crusades were wrong from most viewpoints. It's blatantly obvious that they were politically motivated, and they obviously weren't mandated by God, considering that most of them failed miserably. And one of them sacked the second main center of Christianity.
edited 24th Jan '13 12:55:48 PM by Zendervai
And they explain why, six centuries later, the Islamic version of honor on the battlefield is strapping bombs to children and sending them to blow up schools? Yes, I get it. Perfectly understandable reaction to the Crusades. Carry on, noble suffering warriors.
edited 24th Jan '13 12:58:51 PM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Yeah, but it was Orthadox rather than Catholic, so it wasn't real Christianity.
I think what we did to the Ottoman Empire after WW 1 was the real breaking point. We kinda carved up the region, enforced artificial boundaries, pretty much everything Europe did to Africa, except it didn't last quite as long, so they just got violent rather than downtrodden and hopeless. We disolved the Ottoman Empire, Britain and France propped up their own puppets, and exploited the land for oil.
Anyway, it's much easier to blame the US and Britain for their poverty and general fucked-up-ness than it is to blame ourselves. Though we do deserve part of the blame.
edited 24th Jan '13 1:01:14 PM by DrTentacles
Long story short, a lot of factors are involved in the adoption of suicide bombing as a legitimate tactic by them, most of which were byproducts of the great powers' own meddling. We're basically dealing a case of "backed to the wall, running out of options, got nothing to lose" mentality. Not that it justifies using children as suicide bombers (though honestly speaking, I never heard of such a thing on the news, and I regularly do my best to stay up to date), but it at least makes the whole suicide bombing thing understandable.
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.A more relevant factor, and one on-topic for this thread, would be our fucking around in Iran back in the 50s.
Bobby Jindal backs down on Medicaid hospice elimination.
New Mexico bill would imprison rape victims who receive abortions for "tampering with evidence".
I can only hope. Although Obama has a tendency of liberal rhetoric with centrist reality, (how much of this is his fault is a debate best left to others), I'm tentatively optimistic. At the very least, it's a definite shift away from horrible lack of faith in government which is frankly, anathema for a functioning democracy.
New director of SEC shows Obama might not be done taking banks and wall street to task
I can only hope. We need moar regulation, FDR style regulation, the sort of regulation that will take at least 30 years to roll back.
Not exactly. Even if there's a lot of votes, like California or Texas, presidential candidates won't campaign there because the outcome is foregone unless there's a potential for a major upset. This is due to the winner-take-all system.
Swing states, where you don't know which way the state will go, are the center of attention.

well, really. The problem isn't the fifties itself. Its that the republicans want a certain fictitious 1950's where everyone was white, devoutly christian, middle class, and lived in a suburban home with a white picket fence.
the poor of the 1950's can go sod off.
edited 24th Jan '13 9:56:42 AM by Midgetsnowman