StrangeSox

BTW you can admit that the modern GOP is insane and dysfunctional without rejecting conservative ideology in toto.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ May 4, 2012 -> 05:44 PM) It's insane to target oil subsidies because the same people will foot the bill...whether it's through those tax subsidies or at the pump. It comes down to the same outcome, just in two different ways...and as I said, accomplishes nothing. So why not just completely subsidize them then? For this to be true, you'd have to have 100% tax incidence. Either way, bad policy is not necessarily insane policy. You have a point that literally nothing will get done. This is now a quibble over effective political strategy, not really whether something is "insane" or not. However, one aspect of the GOP insanity is their unprecedented obstructionism. Both parties have ratched it up over the past decade+, but it shot up exponentially in 2009. The night of Obama's inauguration, GOP leaders got together and worked out a strategy on how to oppose anything and everything Obama and the Democrats proposed. As much as the Democrats disliked Bush, he never faced complete opposition to every proposal, even if those proposals were previously-Democratic ideas. The reaction to Obama has been unique. I'm asking you to point out anything comparably insane. So far, you've got that they want to eliminate oil subsidies for companies making record profits. This is supposedly insane because the subsidy amount will be completely passed through to the customer (if they can charge a higher price equivalent to the subsidy difference, why aren't they doing that right now?) and because the whole tax system needs to be overhauled. The Republicans on the committee even voted against Simpson-Bowles, which was a very right-friendly proposal. You can argue that it's ineffective to focus on these small items like the Buffet tax or the oil subsidies or even that they're bad policy, but they're not insane policies in the same way that garbage like anti-gay hatred and the Norquist pledge are. Those are categorically non-sane, unreasonable absolutionist policy positions.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ May 4, 2012 -> 05:13 PM) Well right, but that's the easy scenario. The questions is more about what happens at the 10 week, 15 week, 20 week mark. And then you have people like SS that think it's a crime against humanity that women are asked to wait 24 hours before making a decision (the horror!) or how terrible it is that we make women (and men) responsible for their actions by making THEM pay for the procedure out of their own pocket (again, the horror!) I think it's pretty s***ty to throw up ever-more barriers to a woman's choice on her own reproductive health, yes. This can really impact women in more rural states where abortion services are limited, as they now how to drive a long distance to the clinic and then stay over night. In increases the financial burden and will affect poor women the most. It's also pretty damn insulting to assume that a woman who has chosen to have an abortion hasn't thought about it already. This is also true of the various mandatory sonogram laws and forced rape-wand laws except that those add an extra-special shame and humiliation factor via completely unnecessary procedures. 'We Have No Choice': One Woman's Ordeal with Texas' New Sonogram LawThe painful decision to terminate a pregnancy is now—thanks to Texas' harsh new law—just the beginning of the torment. edit: thanks for the reminder, made my annual donation to PP!

QUOTE (Y2HH @ May 4, 2012 -> 04:39 PM) It's merely your opinion that the "entire" GOP is insane, but you're trying to state it as a fact. I'd argue that there are just as many crazy liberals running around out there, but because you believe what they believe, you don't see it as "insane". I think it's totally "insane" to spend like liberals want to spend...openly and freely, debt on top of debt. Most (if not "all") liberals feel Obama isn't spending enough. That, to me...is what's insane. So, as shown, depending on your point of view, the opposing party can easily be seen as "insane". Now...if anyone really bothered to think about it...I'd probably have to say it's not the GOP or the DNC that's insane...it's the voters. It's the sheep followers that keep voting these people into office, only to receive more of the same in return. Not all points of view are equally valid, of course. How about that article I've linked co-written by someone from AEI, a pro-corporate conservative think tank? How is this "insane" to want to stop oil subsidies, which would be a relatively easy fix? You can advocate for starting somewhere as a starting point for tax reform. Promoting one thing does not mean that you are ignoring everything else. Is this comparably "insane" to the anti-gay bigotry from the GOP? Or the absolutely-no-tax-revenues-increase-EVER pledge that most of them sign? Eliminating oil subsidies is a part of fixing the tax code. Do you think it'd be more pragmatic to address what may possibly stand a chance of passing Congress instead of only proposing huge reform packages that have no hope of passing? Is there anything comparably insane to the GOP candidates saying they'd turn down a budget deal that was 10-1 spending cuts vs. revenue increase? Is there anything comparably insane to the opposition to the Grand Bargain proposals that Boehner and Obama tried to work out over the summer but were stridently opposed by House members? Comparable to being one of if not the only major political party in the developed world the rejects the entire field of climate science outright?

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.