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
Regardless it'll likely die in the Senate. And even if it doesn't the first time it will if it's vetoed.
Former Congressman Anthony Weiner Announces His Candidacy For NYC Mayor
I dunno if the Senate will kill it, or if Obama will have the nerve to veto it should it arrive on his desk...
Share it so that people can get into this conversation, 'cause we're not the only ones who think like this.Still this will force Obama out of his neutrality.
Everything is Possible. But some things are more Probable than others. JEBAGEDDON 2016
You think he has a chance?
edited 22nd May '13 11:47:46 PM by DeviantBraeburn
Everything is Possible. But some things are more Probable than others. JEBAGEDDON 2016I say let Weiner do it. The Bloomberg dynasty needs to end, and it's not like very many people out there could make a bigger ass of themselves as the Mayor of NYC than Bloomberg.
I'm not sure that I have a problem with the Keystone pipeline or why we can't just let congress vote on it the old fashion way. Doesn't seem very veto-worthy.
edited 23rd May '13 1:29:00 AM by Barkey
Personally, I would rather us spend the money on the "nuclear option" than on any oil or coal. Some of the newest types of reactors simply can't fail like the reactors people think of. And we have been using reactors safely in the military for years without any major problems.
The newest "nuclear disaster" (in Japan) was from a 30+ year old reactor that wasn't designed for what hit it and scheduled to be shut down latter that year. It was, essentially, the worst combination of factors possible. Modern reactors are designed such that they can't fail that way.
(No strong feelings here >_> Also, I'm in a mood this morning—what with "nuclear option")
edited 23rd May '13 4:26:10 AM by Belian
Yu hav nat sein bod speeling unntil know. (cacke four undersandig tis)the cake is a lie!People see the word "nuclear" and think of Hollywood's obsession with reactors blowing up and killing millions of people. That and all the old school movies about radiation mutating lizards into Godzilla. Ignorance breeds fear, and the media have done far more to demonize nuclear power than any acts of government.
That said, there is a legitimate concern about nuclear waste disposal, as I understand it, which is not helped by NIMBY.
edited 23rd May '13 5:38:56 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"There have been exactly three major nuclear incidents since commercial nuclear reactors have been a thing.
One was Chernobyl, which only happened because the Russians were certifiably insane for doing what they did.
One was Three Mile Island, which had negligible actual radiation release outside the plant itself.
One was Fukushima, which only happened because it was a decades-old design already slated for shutdown that got hit by a double-whammy (earthquake then tsunami) which also affected response efforts.
So that's exactly two serious radiation releases in 60ish years, neither of which would have happened with modern designs. How many oil spills, natural gas leaks, and coal mining accidents have there been in that period of time?
Really from Jupiter, but not an alien.Yes, nuclear waste is a problem, but not an unmanageable one. I could see having one reactor solely powering a space launcher that takes the waste and shoots it into the sun.
Relative brought up another point: Considering how much money oil companies are making, they should not be getting anything from the government to help them build it. In fact, they should be moving their refineries inland and away from possible hurricanes—a 20 mile pipeline from the shore would be much more feasible.
...we could probably have a whole thread filled with things oil companies could do with their profits to improve the lives of their "stakeholders" and not just their "stockholders".
Yu hav nat sein bod speeling unntil know. (cacke four undersandig tis)the cake is a lie!If we talked about corporations doing the socially responsible thing instead of maximizing profits, we could be here for months. I'm reminded of last night's The Daily Show segment about Tim Cook's (Apple's CEO) visit to Congress where they practically fellatiated him about how awesome his company is and asked him his opinion on how they could fix the tax code to make it more competitive so companies like his wouldn't feel the need to offshore its profits.
edited 23rd May '13 6:22:41 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"So, the British Parliament doesn't consider itself to be sex slaves to big business? That's somewhat reassuring.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
The short answer is no. Much snark is involved when you're big and hauled up to be grilled. It's a parliamentary tradition going back quite a long way.
Brits: we only suck up to big business when we're not pissed off at it for making us having to look hard at what it's costing us.
edited 23rd May '13 9:07:48 AM by Euodiachloris
Quite. When the Chair of the Public Accounts Committeenote calls back the Northern European Head of Google for possibly lying to them in an earlier meeting and calls them:
"You are a company that says you do no evil, and I think that you do do evil in that you use smoke and mirrors to avoid paying tax," she said, adding that the company engaged in "devious, calculated and, in my view, unethical behavior".
You see, due to the English Civil War, Parliament has quite an anti-Authoritarian streak.
edited 23rd May '13 9:36:50 AM by Greenmantle
Keep Rolling On
It's true. The Commons may be an authority... yet, it detests authority at the same time, too. Particularly when it screws up so much there's not a chance in hell of sorting the mess out easily.
Um. We're some very odd ducks, as a whole, we Brits, aren't we? <_< A constitutional monarchy; a state-religion, but a democratic, secular government involving several nations, territories and other semi-independent bodies; independent and governmental watch-dogs up the wazoo, which, even if they can't always bite, really don't mind barking as loudly as possible... all formed by a fairly centralised government which dislikes authoritarianism to a large extent (so often goes all out to devolve power as much as possible, yet keep it answerable), yet relies on tradition; a constitution so big and unwieldy nobody is quite sure exactly what the heck is in it, so it can be adapted on the fly to fit the circumstances without breaking... In short: a national set-up that confuses the rest of the world, but with which most of us are comfortable, and, although often complain of, wouldn't fundamentally change if you paid us.
Oh, we grumble and tweak every year... but, that's normal.
Hmmm... Britishness: making complex contradictions work day to day for years — with sarcasm?
edited 23rd May '13 10:18:14 AM by Euodiachloris
![]()
Britain, holding itself together with duct tape, snark and tea.
Someone should really add the overseas territories to that page, just to make things ever more confusing.

It's very close to a sufficient vote to override. Not CISPA close, but distressingly so.