StrangeSox

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ May 4, 2012 -> 03:59 PM) Yeah, i'd say there's a pretty huge subset of the democratic party that hates pretty much anyone with money. See: occupy members. Maybe there aren't 6 candidates spouting ridiculous things about it like we just had with the GOP, but there wasn't a primary to fight over. Occupy members are not a subset of the Democratic party and do not hate anyone with money.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 4, 2012 -> 05:13 PM) Conservatism can never fail. It can only be failed. lol

QUOTE (Y2HH @ May 4, 2012 -> 12:57 PM) Ehhh, no. I absolutely disagree. Never accept counter offers...ever. Never ever. What a counter offer of this sort truly is, when you break it down, is that you've always been worth Y, but they were fine paying you X so long as you had no where else to go. In my opinion, this is a b**** move. You should pay your employees what they are worth, and if they start at less than that, you should move them up too it at your first opportunity to do so. What this really means is that they were underpaying you and didn't care UNTIL you had a better offer elsewhere. If you were worth Y to them the entire time, they should have been paying you Y...not wait until someone else offers you Y, and then jump in and say, "oh...we don't want to lose you, you're too valuable!" They should have thought about that before...and mostly likely did, but didn't care. The other company, meanwhile, was happy to give you what you were worth from the get go. Counter offers also come with other implications: * They will remember this, and so should you...at a future date it may lead them to say you have "no loyalty to anything other than money" and if bad times approach, you will find yourself high on the list of possible layoffs. I never recommend anyone accept counter offers, unless they are "blow away" offers and/or offers that come with downside guarantees. I.E., they want to keep you so badly, they'll guarantee your salary even if you were to get laid off for a specified period of time. My friend recently started working where I work. When she resigned from her previous company, they offered her a raise and a promise to create a new position for her there within 6 months. She declined. Today she found out her old work is being sold soon and 30-45 people will be laid off in about a month.

That's exactly the lame false-equivalency crap I'm talking about! "Any corporate white male with money," really? How many trillions have the banks been given under Obama's watch? How have their profits been lately? Can you actually name anything comparable to the numerous anti-gay bills and actions from the GOP? Aside from Bernie Sanders, can you actually name anyone in the US Congress who is actually a socialist? Did you bother to read that editorial? Or the letter from a life-long GOP staffer last year that said pretty much the same thing? Or anything from Frum or Barlett or any of the other apostates who have been cast out of the party by the radicals currently controlling it? I'd LOVE it if the Democrats had been a bunch of leftist radicals at any point in my life, but they haven't come anywhere close.

QUOTE (illinilaw08 @ May 4, 2012 -> 01:32 PM) High spaces are huge for the cats' sanity. Our more social cat has been fine with the dog since day 1. She likes to be chased by the dog and tease the dog and lets him know if he's too aggressive. Our other cat who is very little and shy stays away from him when he's awake (in fact, we rarely saw her the first week the puppy was home), but she has adjusted pretty well and now likes to cuddle with him while he sleeps. The dog is sweet and loves them both but absolutely plays too rough sometimes. If your cats are ok in the car, see if you can bring them to meet the dogs. Our cats don't leave the house except for the vet, they'd be melting down the whole time.

They're not all equally insane, and the false equivalency/appeal-to-centrism is as much a part of the problem. There is not an equivalent in the Democratic Party to the anti-gay bigotry, complete opposition to taxation or the denial of entire fields of science. The GOP is not a 'conservative' party right now as much as it is a reactionary party. I'll link to this editorial in the WaPo again, and I'll note that one of the authors works for AEI, not exactly a pro-Democrat think tank.

QUOTE (mr_genius @ May 4, 2012 -> 12:28 PM) study finds babies are racist. http://news.yahoo.com/9-month-olds-show-ra...-135132410.html literally lol'd at this post

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ May 3, 2012 -> 11:06 AM) When I said "completely insane," I was not saying "every single self-identifying Republican is insane." Completely was a modifier on insane, indicating that they've "gone off the deep end." I disagree with plenty of people I do not find insane. However, many of the GOP's policies are not sane, rational policies. Case-in-point, the general GOP hatred of gays. QUOTE (Y2HH @ May 4, 2012 -> 11:28 AM) Yea, you can say that again. Just...dumb. And I'm not talking about the segment...which was funny. as I was saying....

You ruined the joke.

At least you are still wearing pants.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ May 3, 2012 -> 07:53 PM) lol, ok God of All Thought. We were discussing the impact of supreme court appointments and laws that may be overturned. Talking about how much the public cares isn't relevant to that.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ May 3, 2012 -> 07:27 PM) I meant from the standpoint of how people view the issue wouldn't change. You'd have a small minority that would be put into action (or inaction) and everyone else would say "i don't care, this doesn't involve me." But that is irrelevant.

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ May 3, 2012 -> 06:35 PM) WHy should something that is elective be taxpayer funded? if medically needed to save the mother, that is one thing. If just because they don't think the time is right, well then, why can't they pay for it themselves? I for one don't care what you do to yourself, just stop trying to get me, in the form of taxes, to pay for it. Many of these new regulations and rules have nothing to do with public funding.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ May 3, 2012 -> 06:35 PM) Except in cases of incest, rape or health to the mother, I see no issue with this. Why is it so difficult to be responsible if you don't want a kid? I have no desire to argue about abortion with you. My contention was against your claim that "nothing will change" when it pretty demonstrably will change and you openly support this change.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ May 3, 2012 -> 10:16 AM) He's talking about the New Years weekend Blizzard in 99. The Groundhogs Day blizzard was in 2011. That was awesome, got almost an extra week of christmas break that year.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 2, 2012 -> 12:23 PM) If only someone had told me this before I got into broadcasting. This is, unfortunately, what most sports radio and in-game commentary seems to break down to.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ May 3, 2012 -> 01:27 PM) No way. It'll be the same as it is now, just reversed. 80% of the country doesn't give a s***, 10% really wants it to be legal, 10% doesn't (people that would actually talk about it publicly versus just their wish in a perfect world). That 10% is doing a great job passing every possible bill they can to defund reproductive health clinics, throw up barriers for abortions and shame those who may seek them.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ May 3, 2012 -> 10:02 AM) She has a newer one out in a bikini playing in my head constantly

When I said "completely insane," I was not saying "every single self-identifying Republican is insane." Completely was a modifier on insane, indicating that they've "gone off the deep end." I disagree with plenty of people I do not find insane. However, many of the GOP's policies are not sane, rational policies. Case-in-point, the general GOP hatred of gays.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ May 3, 2012 -> 11:00 AM) And that's why none of them won the primary. Romney proposed plenty of terrible, retrograde ideas. His immigration policies were arguably the harshest. As far as that issue goes, though, the GOP isn't really any worse than a lot of European right-wing parties. Hell, the National Front candidate in France got 20% of the vote.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ May 3, 2012 -> 10:54 AM) When people make completely generalized statements like this, it tends to tell me they need to be ignored. The "entire GOP" isn't "insane". Is there a fringe section of it that is? Sure. But the same can be said of the Democratic party, too. However, saying all of them are "insane" is the only thing that's "insane". Oh, and I realize that in your opinion the entire Democratic party is "sane" and they're "right about everything", too...which is also insane. Nah I openly criticize the Democrats at the national level and won't be voting for Obama. But the modern GOP is insane. The "fringe section" is a majority--just look at all the nutty ideas that candidates proposed during the primaries. Or, look at all of the anti-abortion bills state GOP legislatures are passing. Or look at an adviser being shoved out or a soldier being booed simply for being gay.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ May 3, 2012 -> 10:41 AM) If he was such a hardcore Republican due to his old man, why in 92 was he an Independent who voted for Tsongas? It wasnt until he ran against Kennedy that he found his "Republicanism". And what does wealthy have to do with it? The super rich are more likely to be Democrats. I don't think he's a hard-core Republican, but I'll admit that this is just guessing at his "true" feelings.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ May 3, 2012 -> 10:39 AM) 1) I don't see the GOP gaining control of both houses anyway, so unless they did, not to mention the required vast majorities, it wouldn't matter anyway...and the odds of that happening are next to zero. I think that if there's enough Republican support for Romney to win, that means they'll be doing well down-ticket and take the Senate. Young is relative for SC justices. Barring some unforeseen illness, Roberts, Alito and Thomas will be there another 20 years. Kagan and Sotomayor will be there for decades, but Ginsburg and Breyer are both getting up there in age along with Scalia and Kennedy. They'll try to time their retirements strategically, but even being able to replace Kennedy with a young conservative justice can tip the balance down the road. SC appointments can be the longest-lasting legacy for a President.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ May 3, 2012 -> 10:41 AM) I'm not denying this...but I am saying we got the exact government we asked for...which is a 2 party no choice government. Other countries have two-party systems where one party isn't completely insane like the GOP.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ May 3, 2012 -> 10:34 AM) Nothing...that's exactly how the rich wanted it, so it's exactly what we have. They're all connected, rich, and that's regardless of their "fake party affiliation". There's plenty of legitimate gay-hate in this country. This isn't political theater but their honest convictions.