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
Dude you are not helping your case about not liking guys. Your express desire for me to engage in some sexual intercourse that you are aware of only fuels speculation of you having poor taste, but still pretty gay taste
In a different subject though, srsly, on the Antonin Scalia thing. What is more likely, that he will get replaced before the next election or after
edited 15th Feb '16 10:52:38 AM by Aszur
It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothesRespectfully, I don't see why they should have banned Nihlus. If it was for the "personally slaughtered 300 Al Qaeda operatives, than I'm pretty sure he was being sarcastic, or mocking people who have done that previously. If anything between the two of you would be objectionable, which I don't think it actually was, it would be Fighter saying he might punch Nilus in the face.
Edit:
edited 15th Feb '16 10:50:27 AM by JackOLantern1337
I Bring Doom,and a bit of gloom, but mostly gloom.Here's an idea: Why doesn't the government have me be the new Supreme Court Justice? I'm ''totally'' qualified for this position and entirely bi-partisan!.
Leviticus 19:34I was offering a possible interpretation of Nihlus' post to elicit a response, to which he responded as I expected given his prior history. Sometimes a troll has to be counter-baited into revealing themselves.
Anyway, let's talk about SCOTUS.
edited 15th Feb '16 10:52:36 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Plus, he had oil in his account, and it needed to be liberated.
Can anyone block his attempts to use this window? Or is he just free to do it at any time with no one able to do shit about it?
edited 15th Feb '16 10:55:08 AM by Aszur
It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothesI do have a question about recess appointments. I thought those could only work if the President submitted the appointment prior to Congress going on recess, and they left it on the table. I don't think that the President has carte blanche to nominate anyone he wants while the Senate is on recess as a fait accompli.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Anyway. I predict that the Senate is going to hold firm on the "let's wait for a new Prez before we pick a Justice" made-up rule. I also think that if the Senate stays red, they'll hold firm even after we get a new President.
![]()
He does, but the appointment only lasts until the end of the next Senate session unless confirmed.
The reason Obama's not doing so is because he'd rather give the Republicans more rope with which to hang themselves.
edited 15th Feb '16 10:56:53 AM by Ramidel
Well, he was certainly "resolute," and kept hammering the same points on every issue and sticking to them no matter what (and not really adding very much else).
Some of it rubbed me the wrong way, though I stayed out it, such as his argument about police shootings a while back that seemed to boil down to "remember, black people are criminals." I could see the point trying to be made about police procedure, but it wasn't communicated very well. I don't quite see it as trolling, but it's not a very large leap.
EDIT: About SCOTUS, not much to talk about since there is likely going to be deliberately nothing going on for the next year.
edited 15th Feb '16 11:01:48 AM by Eschaton
They can't do this forever. Can they?
Edit: Fucking
's
I don't remember that. As it stands, it seems to me he was banned for expressing ideas that most of us here disagree with. As Archemied said, for breaking the Circle Jerk.
edited 15th Feb '16 10:57:18 AM by JackOLantern1337
I Bring Doom,and a bit of gloom, but mostly gloom.I think that he can make temporary appointments, but they'd be subject to confirmation as soon as the Senate returned, and I don't see how that could work in SCOTUS' case because lack of confirmation would retroactively invalidate any decisions they had rendered.
Little secret: He was my radical conservative alter ego that I invented to troll myself. Convincing, eh?
edited 15th Feb '16 10:58:24 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"If there is someone whoever Obama nominates, it would be the other Supreme Judges (wild guess here), but given its current composition they would be unlikely to disagree with him.
Who else can put a hamper on Obama's 7 day window?
![]()
What's my style, I wonder? I bet On a Scale from One to Ten, i enchant all the judges except for the grumpy german one who always gives everyone a 5.0
edited 15th Feb '16 11:02:46 AM by Aszur
It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothes

@Shinra: Essentially, Fighteer was saying that he'd like to punch Nihlus in the face, and Nihlus responded by snarking back at him for being an Internet Tough Guy. So Fighteer banned him.
edited 15th Feb '16 10:47:37 AM by Ramidel