Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Tuesday, June 26, 2012

OT-P: President Obama Booed After Thanking Boston For Kevin Youkilis « CBS Boston

Political loyalties aren’t as strong as team loyalties.


NOTE: As I discussed in the Off-Topics, Politics, and the Redesign thread, in the redesign I’m making non-baseball content opt-in. Until the redesign is done (about two months), I’m designating one thread each month (similar to the basketball and soccer threads) as Off-Topic Politics (OT-P) and will restrict off-topic political conversations to that thread. Off-topic political comments which appear in other threads will be deleted. Since this thread has been highjacked, I’m designating this thread as the June OT-P thread.

Jim Furtado Posted: June 26, 2012 at 06:52 AM | 1396 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: red sox

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 7 of 14 pages ‹ First  < 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 >  Last ›
   601. Srul Itza Posted: June 28, 2012 at 02:13 PM (#4168724)
If someone borrows billions and can't pay it back, that's a problem for the lender.


Free Enterprise 101 -- If you loan money to somebody who can't pay you back, and you don't get collateral enough to cover the loan -- you lose.
   602. Yeaarrgghhhh Posted: June 28, 2012 at 02:14 PM (#4168726)
Not in all contexts. David was objecting to the claim that overturning the ACA would have caused a significant backlash. The contemporary popularity of Obamacare is directly germane in that context.

I'm just not sure those polls really tell us much about how people, especially those in the mushy middle, would react to the Court overturning ACA. I think the polls tells us that ACA isn't especially popular or unpopular right now, but that's about it.

For the same reason, I think it's very difficult to predict how this will impact the election. Does it fire up the left? the Right? Does it box Romney in? There's no clear answer.
   603. Johnny Sycophant-Laden Fora Posted: June 28, 2012 at 02:14 PM (#4168727)
If so, I expect Wisconsin leg. to introduce a 18/19 drinking age bill in the not so distant future.


When I was 17 the drinking age in my state was 18.
Just before I turned 18 the age was changed to 19.
Halfway through age 19 it was changed to 21.

Even though it had very little impact on my drinking behavior (from the POV of under 21s, it operated like an extra tax, now we had to pay some shiftless older dudes to buy stuff for us- which in fact was what you did when you were under 18 anyway)
I and all my friends were royally pissed off- most of us didn't even have cars...
   604. Fernigal McGunnigle has become a merry hat Posted: June 28, 2012 at 02:15 PM (#4168728)
TownHall is particularly fun since some lefties have started showing up to taunt the righties, maturity all around!


Take notes! A libertarian-leaning lawyers' blog I sometimes read is having a contest, setting its readers in search of "the most egregious example of hysterical, shrieking outrage, or smug, gloating condescension, produced on the World Wide Web today." This can be over the Supreme Court Case and/or the Eric Holder contempt vote. The winner gets a DVD of Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan!

I was holding out some hope that this thread goes nuclear and that I can scrape something from it before it gets erased, but so far you people are sorely disappointing.
   605. ?Donde esta Dagoberto Campaneris? Posted: June 28, 2012 at 02:15 PM (#4168729)
For those who get a chance to read the majority opinion, in III-C, are you reading the tax v. penalty analysis starting in the last paragraph of page 35 as locking in the terms under which the "not-insured payment" will be viewed by the Court as a tax as opposed to a penalty?

That is to say, if any of those three conditions were to change- say the IRS were allowed to proceed with punitive sanctions or the payment amount was increased substantially- would the payment cease to be a permissible tax, and become an impermissible penalty at that point? Would the entire act be unconstitutional at that point, or would only the legislation that changed the payment/collection terms be unconstitutional?

If the terms under which the payment is a permissible tax- and not an impermissible penalty- are locked in, that would be a very interesting result going forward.

   606. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: June 28, 2012 at 02:15 PM (#4168730)
They should have been investigated. Then indicted, arrested, and prosecuted. Obama could easily have directed the DoJ to undertake a massive investigation, but he didn't.


Aha! If only they'd have been further investigated, everyone could have seen that they needed to be arrested, indicted, and prosecuted!

Wait, are we talking about financial crooks or suspicious looking Latinos?
   607. The Good Face Posted: June 28, 2012 at 02:16 PM (#4168731)
That's some real good trollery, GF. I didn't even quite see that you were trolling at first - I figured you took it as obvious that if you make a broad statement about a group with which people identify, they'd take that statement as being about themselves. We are all defined partly by our allegiances.


Whether you believe it or not, my point about bubbles/cocoons was not trollery. Getting a kick out of the reactions was just a langiappe. Even to the extent we are defined by our allegiances, there are less.... self-indicting ways to address statements such as my earlier comment.

But in fact you were just trolling, waiting for people to make the obvious conclusion, and then playing your little mockery game. I should have learned a long time ago not to engage with you on these meta games you like to play.


How about a nice game of meta-chess?

... he says, defending himself because he realizes the truth of those charges as they apply to him.


See this? You missed it.
   608. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: June 28, 2012 at 02:18 PM (#4168734)
For many people (in my life, my in-laws) the worst part about ObamaCare is the Obama part of it. Had the exact same bill been NewtCare, they'd have been all over it.

This is almost certainly true to some extent, and it's why I'm baffled whenever I see liberals actually refer to it as "Obamacare".
I used to say "ACA" or "the Affordable Care Act", now I mostly say "Obamacare". I switched for a couple reasons:

1) The right won the branding battle. Not only does everyone call it Obamacare, but I found that people didn't even necessarily know what I meant when I wrote "ACA". I don't think this is winnable.
2) I am not a public figure. It doesn't matter what I say, except in the very most marginal of senses, so I'm going with the one everyone recognizes.
3) There's a long game in play, at least for liberals who unlike me are public figures. If Obamacare survives, it's likely to be quite popular. I think there's some marginal value in having a massive and popular state program named after a president who's affiliated with the left - don't take away my Roosevelt Retirement Fund or my JohnsonCare... um, we would have needed rebranding on the latter. But you see the point.
   609. zonk Posted: June 28, 2012 at 02:18 PM (#4168735)
Huh, so this is the left's ultimate "solution" to the problem; they're going to say "f*ck you, we're not paying you back". Boy, I can't wait to see what the repercussions of that are going to be.


Hey - it wasn't my side of the aisle here in the US that took that seemed to be saying that during the debt ceiling debate.

But globally, yes -- lenders to sovereign states have to assume risk, too. I'm not saying "we're not paying you back" -- the US can easily afford to satisfy its debts. So can most European countries... A few cannot - Greece, Spain*, maybe Italy and out in the Pacific Rim at some point soon, probably Japan. It's madness to expect a sovereign nation to putting servicing debt to lenders as paramount to serving its citizens. There will be trade-offs. Some of those trade-offs will involve lenders taking a haircut. That's not free, of course, but plenty of nations have defaulted on debts and none of them no longer have a sovereign credit card.
   610. Yeaarrgghhhh Posted: June 28, 2012 at 02:21 PM (#4168737)
The admin. started embracing the term "Obamacare" a while ago, and I think that was a good move. Political jujitsu.

I would, however, pay good money for some "JohnsonCare."
   611. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: June 28, 2012 at 02:21 PM (#4168738)
How about a nice game of meta-chess?
The only way to win Global Trollonuclear War is not to play.
   612. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: June 28, 2012 at 02:22 PM (#4168739)
However: Others of the goals of liberals with the ACA included power grabbing, redistribution of wealth, issues of "fairness" (fairness in the minds of liberals), etc. That point should be conceded as well.


No, it shouldn't. The fact that you think there's a conspiracy to take over blah blah blah blah blah doesn't indicate that rational people should concede your conspiracy. It indicates that you're paranoid.

The reason liberals wanted to pass public health insurance options is because they wanted to provide affordable healthcare options to people who currently don't/didn't have it.
   613. A big pile of nonsense (gef the talking mongoose) Posted: June 28, 2012 at 02:24 PM (#4168741)
Take notes! A libertarian-leaning lawyers' blog I sometimes read is having a contest, setting its readers in search of "the most egregious example of hysterical, shrieking outrage,


My nominee would be the tweet I saw reproduced on Facebook about an hour ago --

"This is the greatest destruction of individual liberty since Dred Scott. This is the end of America as we know it. No exaggeration." It came from something called Ben Shapiro, who I gather from Wikipedia occupies the same padded cell as some of our more right-wing nutjobs here.

Since I'm cocooned on an Air Force base right now, I'm wondering if I'll find myself driving through flaming rubble when I drive home after work in about 4 hours. No doubt the riots have already started.
   614. Tripon Posted: June 28, 2012 at 02:25 PM (#4168742)
Again, arguing about Political Cocoons is dumb. Now how about those Dodgers doing their duty to the American Capitalistic society!
   615. Langer Monk Posted: June 28, 2012 at 02:25 PM (#4168743)
Ooh, is the Medicare part of this ruling really that broad? I know I need to read this all, but the media quips I've read/heard suggest that South Dakota v Dole.(Feds can hold highway $$ hostage to compel states to raise drinking age to 21) may be out of favor? If so, I expect Wisconsin leg. to introduce a 18/19 drinking age bill in the not so distant future.


The opinion specifically cites and discusses Dole, and distinguishes it for a number of reasons. I don't think anything changes in that vein.
   616. DA Baracus Posted: June 28, 2012 at 02:27 PM (#4168745)
People Who Say They Are Moving To Canada Because Of Obamacare


Oh they're going to love gas prices there.
   617. Langer Monk Posted: June 28, 2012 at 02:29 PM (#4168748)

That is to say, if any of those three conditions were to change- say the IRS were allowed to proceed with punitive sanctions or the payment amount was increased substantially- would the payment cease to be a permissible tax, and become an impermissible penalty at that point? Would the entire act be unconstitutional at that point, or would only the legislation that changed the payment/collection terms be unconstitutional?


My guess is any change to one of those three might tip the scales would invalid the new legislation making that change only. Pretty sure at this point, there's no unringing this bell. As to how much of a change would trigger 'unconstitutional'.... wild-ass guessing: amount would have to be higher than insurance and criminal sanctions added to a violation.
   618. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: June 28, 2012 at 02:34 PM (#4168750)
Wait, are we talking about financial crooks or suspicious looking Latinos?


You are aware that "being quite reasonably suspected of committing massive fraud" is not the same category of crime as "looking Mexican," yes?
   619. Lassus Posted: June 28, 2012 at 02:36 PM (#4168751)
I would, however, pay good money for some "JohnsonCare."

You used to be able to get this at various intersections along the West Side Highway. Not so much any more.
   620. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: June 28, 2012 at 02:37 PM (#4168752)
My guess is any change to one of those three might tip the scales would invalid the new legislation making that change only. Pretty sure at this point, there's no unringing this bell. As to how much of a change would trigger 'unconstitutional'.... wild-ass guessing: amount would have to be higher than insurance and criminal sanctions added to a violation.

You're going to have organized non-payment of the penalty in hopes of litigating the zeal with which the IRS pursues the non-payers.
   621. spike Posted: June 28, 2012 at 02:37 PM (#4168753)
"the most egregious example of hysterical, shrieking outrage,


Neal Boortz on Twitter - I would SERIOUSLY consider moving to Texas if it would secede from the union and re-form as The Republic of Texas. It has that power.
   622. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: June 28, 2012 at 02:38 PM (#4168754)
I have never seen conservatives try and fight any of California's stricter environmental laws federally and there was never a constitutional fight when Massachusetts passed their health care bill.


OTOH, proposing a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, superseding California's legalization of marijuana, some conservatives back a federal ban on abortion, and the other SCOTUS decision last week that got less play where Montana's corporate campaign contribution rules were struck down even in state and local elections.

This is almost certainly true to some extent, and it's why I'm baffled whenever I see liberals actually refer to it as "Obamacare".


I thought this was interesting. I guess when you win, you want to own the name.

I expect Wisconsin leg. to introduce a 18/19 drinking age bill in the not so distant future.


They did, and a number of states have, although it was ONLY for military vets. I don't believe any have passed.
   623. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: June 28, 2012 at 02:39 PM (#4168756)
Neal Boortz on Twitter - I would SERIOUSLY consider moving to Texas if it would secede from the union and re-form as The Republic of Texas. It has that power.


OH PLEASE OH PLEASE OH PLEASE OH PLEASE!
   624. Tripon Posted: June 28, 2012 at 02:39 PM (#4168757)
Here's one:

Kevin Goldstein ?@Kevin_Goldstein
Gee, hyperbole much? RT @JakeSherman: SCOOP: in closed GOP mtg, rep mike pence likens #SCOTUS decision to 9/11. http://politi.co/MYSPjF


I can't wait for somebody refer it to our nation's holocaust next.
   625. Langer Monk Posted: June 28, 2012 at 02:41 PM (#4168759)
You're going to have organized non-payment of the penalty in hopes of litigating the zeal with which the IRS pursues the non-payers.


Yup. But what if the IRS just audits some of the returns, adds in the penalty, and sends a bill? Seems like the IRS can withhold money, adjust refunds, etc.
   626. A big pile of nonsense (gef the talking mongoose) Posted: June 28, 2012 at 02:42 PM (#4168760)
I can't wait for somebody refer it to our nation's holocaust next.


JoeyB, you're on!
   627. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: June 28, 2012 at 02:42 PM (#4168761)
in closed GOP mtg, rep mike pence likens #SCOTUS decision to 9/11


So we're invading Canada?
   628. Eraser-X is emphatically dominating teh site!!! Posted: June 28, 2012 at 02:42 PM (#4168764)
I'm leaning toward the "Great Big American Hat Solution" where were put all 300,000,000+ names in a hat and pick out all of our elected officials and then outlaw lobbying. (I say as a former lobbyist)
   629. Dan Szymborski Posted: June 28, 2012 at 02:43 PM (#4168765)

No, it shouldn't. The fact that you think there's a conspiracy to take over blah blah blah blah blah doesn't indicate that rational people should concede your conspiracy. It indicates that you're paranoid.

The reason liberals wanted to pass public health insurance options is because they wanted to provide affordable healthcare options to people who currently don't/didn't have it.


Liberals didn't need to pass public health insurance options to provide affordable healthcare options to people who currently don't/didn't have it. Liberals were always free to reach into their pockets and give anybody any of their money. Liberals needed the law in order for those that are healthy and/or with means to subsidize those that are sick and/or without means.

Whether or not the law was justified is a separate issue, but liberals as a group aren't providing anything here - the liberals and conservatives and moderates and anyone else who is on the losing end of the money scale that will be subsidizing healthcare options are ultimately the ones who are providing the additional healthcare options.

   630. The District Attorney Posted: June 28, 2012 at 02:43 PM (#4168766)
I would SERIOUSLY consider moving to Texas if it would secede from the union and re-form as The Republic of Texas. It has that power.
Wikipedia disagrees:
The annexation resolution has been the topic of some historical myths: One that remains is that the resolution granted Texas the explicit right to secede from the union. This is a right argued by some to be implicitly held by all states, although the Supreme Court of the United States of America ruled in Texas v. White in 1869 that no state has the right to unilaterally secede. The resolution did include two unique provisions: First, it said up to four additional states could be created from Texas' territory with the consent of the State of Texas (and that new states north of the Missouri Compromise Line would be free states). The resolution did not include any special exceptions to the provisions of the US Constitution regarding statehood. The right to create these possible new states was not "reserved" for Texas, as is sometimes stated. Second, Texas did not have to surrender its public lands to the federal government. While Texas did cede all territory outside of its current area to the federal government in 1850, it did not cede any public lands within its current boundaries. Consequently, the lands in Texas owned by the federal government are those which were subsequently purchased by it.
Considering that Texas as a separate country would have a hard time making it for any number of reasons, it would surely be the better play to divide it into five states. This would give it 10 Senators, five times as much clout in the Constitutional amendment process, etc.
   631. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: June 28, 2012 at 02:47 PM (#4168771)
Whether or not the law was justified is a separate issue, but liberals as a group aren't providing anything here - the liberals and conservatives that will be subsidizing healthcare options are ultimately the ones who are providing the additional healthcare options.

It's OK ... the vast majority of them can afford it and are already privileged by the system anyway.

At some point, the ability to turn money into privileges that shouldn't be for sale needs to end (*) and the healthcare reform is a perfectly decent place to start.

(*) The things that money can buy are, of course, the real problem with the rising inequality in the country, more so than the actual differences in income and wealth.
   632. Lassus Posted: June 28, 2012 at 02:48 PM (#4168772)
Considering that Texas as a separate country would have a hard time making it for any number of reasons, it'd surely be the better play to divide it into five states, giving it 10 Senators.

I HEREBY DECLARE MY CANDIDACY FOR PREFECT OF BROWNSVILLE.
   633. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: June 28, 2012 at 02:49 PM (#4168773)
Liberals didn't need to pass public health insurance options to provide affordable healthcare options to people who currently don't/didn't have it. Liberals were always free to reach into their pockets and give anybody any of their money. Liberals needed the law in order for those that are healthy and/or with means to subsidize those that are sick and/or without means.

Whether or not the law was justified is a separate issue, but liberals as a group aren't providing anything here - the liberals and conservatives that will be subsidizing healthcare options are ultimately the ones who are providing the additional healthcare options.


And the Amish partially fund wars too. Ray's position is that the ACA, and pretty much ever "liberal" action, is not to be taken at face value for what it does and what it is said to accomplish by it's proponents. Rather, we should assume that the arguments in favor of those actions are lies and cover stories, to hide the true goal of all "liberal" action, which is the takeover of everything by "the state" and the creation of baby eating zombie lizards in secret government labs. It's conspiracy theory 101, some straight-outta-Elders-of-Zion Illuminati level crazy.

Disagree with the policy. Disagree with the theory. But for god's sake, don't reduce your opponent* to a silly cartoon of evil conspirators just because you're that lazy.

*except David. All rules disapply with David.
   634. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: June 28, 2012 at 02:49 PM (#4168774)
I would SERIOUSLY consider moving to Texas if it would secede from the union and re-form as The Republic of Texas. It has that power.


Gotta love true patriots that love America.
   635. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: June 28, 2012 at 02:51 PM (#4168777)
(*) The things that money can buy are, of course, the real problem with the rising inequality in the country, more so than the actual differences in income and wealth.


Out of curiosity, what can money buy today that it couldn't buy in previous generations?
   636. Tripon Posted: June 28, 2012 at 02:51 PM (#4168778)
I would SERIOUSLY consider moving to Texas if it would secede from the union and re-form as The Republic of Texas. It has that power.


Gotta love true patriots that love America.


Before Rick Perry declared his intention to seek the Republican Nomination, he declared that Texas still had the right to succeed when he wanted to. If he ever made it to the general election, how the heck would that have played out without him being beat over the head with it.
   637. Dan Szymborski Posted: June 28, 2012 at 02:52 PM (#4168780)
It's OK ... the vast majority of them can afford it and are already privileged by the system anyway.

I'm not arguing whether the bill is good or whether the bill is bad. But if one's going to play the "compassion card" then whose skin is in the game should be properly assigned. Passing a bill that provides something is a large step from being the one actually tasked to personally provide that something. If I shovel Frank's driveway, I get credit for the work. But if I pass a law making Joe shovel Frank's driveway, even if I set into motion the conditions that got Frank's driveway shoveled, Joe's the one that actually provided the labor, even if he was against the bill.
   638. Tripon Posted: June 28, 2012 at 02:53 PM (#4168781)

Out of curiosity, what can money buy today that it couldn't buy in previous generations?


Tricorders/Phasers. Smartphones are that thing that people on Star Trek used to do whatever they need to do.
   639. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: June 28, 2012 at 02:55 PM (#4168783)
Tricorders/Phasers. Smartphones are that thing that people on Star Trek used to do whatever they need to do.


Let's just call this "luxury tech" as a holding pen. Rich people could afford more luxury tech in 1587 than poor people, just like now.
   640. Johnny Sycophant-Laden Fora Posted: June 28, 2012 at 02:55 PM (#4168784)
Considering that Texas as a separate country would have a hard time making it for any number of reasons, it'd surely be the better play to divide it into five states. This would give it 10 Senators, five times as much clout in the Constitutional amendment process, etc.


Texas is a large State- it is also surprisingly diverse-SOME of those states would almost certainly be one where non-hispanic whites were a clear minority...
Right now Texas has 2 reliably conservative senators, split Texas 5 ways and the most likely outcome would be 56 conservative, 4 liberal- essentially little or no impact on the Senate's ideological balance.

Now- PR or DC??? That would push things a bit.
   641. formerly dp Posted: June 28, 2012 at 02:56 PM (#4168786)
OH PLEASE OH PLEASE OH PLEASE OH PLEASE!

When the NLRB was going forward with their their plan to block Boeing from opening its plant in North Charleston, state radio was filled with calls for South Carolina to secede. If it came to a state referendum, I would take one for good ol' Team USA and vote with the secessionists.
   642. Johnny Sycophant-Laden Fora Posted: June 28, 2012 at 02:58 PM (#4168788)
Ray's position is that the ACA, and pretty much ever "liberal" action, is not to be taken at face value for what it does and what it is said to accomplish by it's proponents. Rather, we should assume that the arguments in favor of those actions are lies and cover stories, to hide the true goal of all "liberal" action,


It's called projection, Conservatives are always advancing X as a backdoor way of reaching Y so they assume that's what everyone else does as well.

Not that liberals do not in fact sometimes do that- but Obamacare does not appear to be one of those times
   643. Tripon Posted: June 28, 2012 at 02:58 PM (#4168789)
If we're breaking up states, California, Florida, heck, even mid-western states like Ohio and Illinois could stand a restructure or two.
   644. formerly dp Posted: June 28, 2012 at 02:59 PM (#4168791)
Out of curiosity, what can money buy today that it couldn't buy in previous generations?

Someone doesn't know Google Goggles were invented.

Rich people could afford more luxury tech in 1587 than poor people, just like now.

But our luxury tech is way cooler.
   645. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: June 28, 2012 at 03:01 PM (#4168793)
Texas is a large State- it is also surprisingly diverse-SOME of those states would almost certainly be one where non-hispanic whites were a clear minority...

Right now Texas has 2 reliably conservative senators, split Texas 5 ways and the most likely outcome would be 56 conservative, 4 liberal- essentially little or no impact on the Senate's ideological balance.

Now- PR or DC??? That would push things a bit.


One blue, three reds, one toss-up.

El Norte would vote D.
Plainland, Trinity, and Gulfland would vote R.
New Texas would be a toss-up state, with Austin pulling D and the outer counties pulling R.

DC and PR both add D reps and Senators.

NoCal goes D, SoCal is a toss-up.
   646. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: June 28, 2012 at 03:03 PM (#4168796)
Granted, you could probably squeeze 3-6 reasonably sized states out of California as well.
   647. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: June 28, 2012 at 03:04 PM (#4168797)

If we're breaking up states, California, Florida, heck, even mid-western states like Ohio and Illinois could stand a restructure or two.


And lets merge some of the small New England states and the large rectangle Western states. I mean two Dakotas???? Who needs em?
   648. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: June 28, 2012 at 03:04 PM (#4168798)
Out of curiosity, what can money buy today that it couldn't buy in previous generations?

Spots in elite universities and their feeder schools, political influence, health, your children's health, surrogate mothers, the ability to name stadiums, the ability to prosecute war on behalf of states, the ability to not serve in the military, and a bunch more.

The best way to attack income and wealth inequality isn't leveling the incomes; it's negating the privileges that money can buy.
   649. Tripon Posted: June 28, 2012 at 03:04 PM (#4168799)
I would actually break California into Norcal, Socal, and Middle Cal, basically from Bakersfield to say, Fresno.
   650. jack the seal clubber (on the sidelines of life) Posted: June 28, 2012 at 03:04 PM (#4168800)
Over/under on posts for this thread: 1,382
   651. zonk Posted: June 28, 2012 at 03:05 PM (#4168801)

Liberals didn't need to pass public health insurance options to provide affordable healthcare options to people who currently don't/didn't have it. Liberals were always free to reach into their pockets and give anybody any of their money. Liberals needed the law in order for those that are healthy and/or with means to subsidize those that are sick and/or without means.

Whether or not the law was justified is a separate issue, but liberals as a group aren't providing anything here - the liberals and conservatives and moderates and anyone else who is on the losing end of the money scale that will be subsidizing healthcare options are ultimately the ones who are providing the additional healthcare options.


How does the same thing not apply to say, the postal service? Personally, I have zero use for the mail anymore -- I'm entirely digital in all forms of commerce and communication. In addition, I live in a major metropolitan area which is certainly going to continue to be profitable for mail delivery. If the USPS went away - people would be free to individually subsidize communication/mail/whatever in isolated rural areas... Or -- let's say electric service... or whatever.

It boils down to what you believe belongs in that 'social' bucket and what doesn't. We've simply added healthcare (or rather, insurance, since I would make the case we long ago added healthcare -- we just didn't pay for it) to that bucket.
   652. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: June 28, 2012 at 03:06 PM (#4168803)
If we're breaking up states, California, Florida, heck, even mid-western states like Ohio and Illinois could stand a restructure or two.


But if you're going that route, you might as well just break the entire model and start over.
   653. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: June 28, 2012 at 03:06 PM (#4168805)
the ability to not serve in the military


I thought that was pretty rampant in the Civil War.


But if you're going that route, you might as well just break the entire model and start over.


The 38 States
   654. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: June 28, 2012 at 03:06 PM (#4168806)
But if one's going to play the "compassion card" then whose skin is in the game should be properly assigned.

I certainly haven't played the "compassion card." The card I've played is that the market and market values shouldn't have much to do with health outcomes.
   655. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: June 28, 2012 at 03:08 PM (#4168810)
I would actually break California into Norcal, Socal, and Middle Cal, basically from Bakersfield to say, Fresno.


Three state California breakup.
   656. Famous Original Joe C Posted: June 28, 2012 at 03:09 PM (#4168811)
I can't wait for somebody refer it to our nation's holocaust next.


Free Republic can get you close:


It looks like the “Great American Experiment” is over with.

I WILL NOT SUCCUMB TO THEIR SLAVERY ANYMORE!

OBAMACARE = SLAVERY

Heh, so it turns out Roberts is the same kind of Democrat faggot as Souter.

With The Supreme Court upholding Obamacare, The Death Panels are not far behind. If you are a Democrat and need a kidney, you get it. If you are a member of the Tea Party and need a kidney, sorry you are out of luck. Very soon, Death Panels will decide who lives and who dies. How will these Death Panels make life and death decisions? I think I know the answer.

Just took my flag down with tears in my eyes. My country is gone.

It’s reparations. 0bama said that he didn’t favor a reparations payment, but instead preferred implementing perpetual social programs that achieved more wealth transfer in perpetuity, all the while keeping the race-grievance industry alive.

When my wonderful man, Arpaio, and his Cold Case Posse come forth, this should send everything into a huge spin. How can any of these things with BO/BS’s signature be legal? He is an illegal president; therefore, everything he signed and continues to sign is illegal and worthless. I can’t wait for the Cold Case Posse to come forth.


Good times!
   657. The Clarence Thomas of BBTF (scott) Posted: June 28, 2012 at 03:09 PM (#4168812)
The opinion specifically cites and discusses Dole, and distinguishes it for a number of reasons. I don't think anything changes in that vein.


That was one thing I was specifically wondering about. Do you have a page cite for that?

While we're at it, can we finally expand the house of reps again? We quit growing it in the early 20th century, and there's no reason why it couldn't be a couple hundred members larger without compromising how it works at this present time.
   658. zonk Posted: June 28, 2012 at 03:09 PM (#4168813)
If we're breaking up states, California, Florida, heck, even mid-western states like Ohio and Illinois could stand a restructure or two.


There was a downstate Illinois rep (a Democrat, actually, I think) who had proposed breaking up Illinois into "Chicagoland" and "Illinois"... as a liberal who has no real problem with subsidizing services and infrastructure at a government level in places where such subsidization is necessary, I opposed this. As a Chicagoan playing 'Monkey's Paw Wishes' -- I'd have liked to see it happen.
   659. spike Posted: June 28, 2012 at 03:11 PM (#4168817)
Pamela Geller@pamelageller
Obama yappin' again-why aren't there any American flags in the frame? Typical The flag to Obama is like the siver cross to Dracula

I am loving the internet right now
   660. DA Baracus Posted: June 28, 2012 at 03:12 PM (#4168818)
I would SERIOUSLY consider moving to Texas if it would secede from the union and re-form as The Republic of Texas. It has that power.


Neal Boortz is retiring soon anyway, but good luck with that.
   661. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: June 28, 2012 at 03:12 PM (#4168819)
The 38 States


I've seen that, but I think if we go that route we should target maybe 12-16 states all told, with distinct districts (counties, municipalities) and reduce the federal apparatus by half.
   662. The District Attorney Posted: June 28, 2012 at 03:14 PM (#4168821)
Before Rick Perry declared his intention to seek the Republican Nomination, he declared that Texas still had the right to succeed when he wanted to. If he ever made it to the general election, how the heck would that have played out without him being beat over the head with it.
Agreed. Considering that he already had to combat an image of being uninformed and gaffe-prone, confusing "succeed" with "secede" would have been a disaster!
   663. zonk Posted: June 28, 2012 at 03:15 PM (#4168823)

While we're at it, can we finally expand the house of reps again? We quit growing it in the early 20th century, and there's no reason why it couldn't be a couple hundred members larger without compromising how it works at this present time.


Repeal the Reapportionment Act of 1929 -- but I can guarantee you that the ideological descendants of the same folks who put a hard stop on growth 100 years ago would put a stop to it now.

I wholeheartedly agree with the idea, but no possible way it ever goes anywhere.
   664. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: June 28, 2012 at 03:15 PM (#4168824)
Just took my flag down with tears in my eyes.


1. This statement wins the internet today.
2. I'm terrified, but incapable of not Googling up what the hell "Cold Case Posse" means. Early money is on some apocalyptic militia ####.
   665. The Clarence Thomas of BBTF (scott) Posted: June 28, 2012 at 03:15 PM (#4168825)
So we're invading Canada?


We actually began a couple weeks back. War of 2012! They don't have Laura Secord to save them this time!

Roberts is going to take so much #### for this decision even though his dictum on the commerce clause there's 5 votes for significantly restricting it in the future and the restriction on sticks to get states to do stuff is potentially a big deal. And that's ignoring that this case simply wasn't that difficult on the law, depending upon your philosophy it either worked because it was in line with past valid exercises of the tax and cc and np powers, or it wasn't because you thought those earlier decisions were mistakes.
   666. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: June 28, 2012 at 03:16 PM (#4168826)
People Who Say They Are Moving To Canada Because Of Obamacare


Oh they're going to love gas prices there.

Especially when they discover that $2.00 only buys them a litre.

------------------------------------------------------------

Aha! If only they'd have been further investigated, everyone could have seen that they needed to be arrested, indicted, and prosecuted!


Wait, are we talking about financial crooks or suspicious looking Latinos?

You are aware that "being quite reasonably suspected of committing massive fraud" is not the same category of crime as "looking Mexican," yes?


Tell that to Sheriff Arpaio and you'll be dressed in a pink jumpsuit before you know it.
   667. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: June 28, 2012 at 03:17 PM (#4168827)
Before Rick Perry declared his intention to seek the Republican Nomination, he declared that Texas still had the right to succeed when he wanted to. If he ever made it to the general election, how the heck would that have played out without him being beat over the head with it.


He had a three-pronged plan of attack for dealing with the spin, but he forgot it.
   668. spike Posted: June 28, 2012 at 03:19 PM (#4168830)
The cold case posse is Sherrif Joe's "team" of birther investigators.

oh and one more....

benshapiro@benshapiro
This is the greatest destruction of individual liberty since Dred Scott. This is the end of America as we know it. No exaggeration.
   669. The Clarence Thomas of BBTF (scott) Posted: June 28, 2012 at 03:19 PM (#4168831)
650: I want the over. I'll even give you odds on it.

Spots in elite universities and their feeder schools, political influence, health, your children's health, surrogate mothers, the ability to name stadiums, the ability to prosecute war on behalf of states, the ability to not serve in the military, and a bunch more.


Spots in universities and feeder schools were around at least a century ago, as was the ability to not serve in the military going back to the civil war. Health is dodgier, but a modern median earner is going to live a lot longer than his century or two ago counterpart as well. And as for warring on behalf of states, if you go back far enough and squint you've got the whole feudal system before strong central governments.
   670. jack the seal clubber (on the sidelines of life) Posted: June 28, 2012 at 03:20 PM (#4168833)
So we're invading Canada?


We actually began a couple weeks back. War of 2012! They don't have Laura Secord to save them this time!


About time. When we shoot them we'll see how their socialized medical care works. "Sorry, Gaston, but rocket launcher wounds are not covered by your government program".
   671. jack the seal clubber (on the sidelines of life) Posted: June 28, 2012 at 03:21 PM (#4168834)
650: I want the over. I'll even give you odds on it.


Deal, Clarence ..it'll peter out after 1,000 or so. I win if the moderator cuts it off when death threats are exchanged.
   672. DA Baracus Posted: June 28, 2012 at 03:22 PM (#4168837)
I'll take the under since this is the June thread and the month ends this weekend.
   673. The District Attorney Posted: June 28, 2012 at 03:23 PM (#4168838)
It's fun to think about (which is why I brought it up!), but unfortunately, it doesn't look to me like the annexation resolution is actually saying that Texas could unilaterally decide to split itself up.
New States of convenient size not exceeding four in number, in addition to said State of Texas and having sufficient population, may, hereafter by the consent of said State, be formed out of the territory thereof, which shall be entitled to admission under the provisions of the Federal Constitution; and such states as may be formed out of the territory lying south of thirty-six degrees thirty minutes north latitude, commonly known as the Missouri Compromise Line, shall be admitted into the Union, with or without slavery, as the people of each State, asking admission shall desire; and in such State or States as shall be formed out of said territory, north of said Missouri Compromise Line, slavery, or involuntary servitude (except for crime) shall be prohibited.
So it sounds like it's the Northerners trying to tell the Southerners that this large territory is going to be one state and can't be divided into a whole bunch of smaller slave states. The subdivided states, as I'm reading it, still have to go through the same admissions process as a new state would. You could probably even read it as effectively saying Texas' territory can ONLY be divided into five states, while there are no stated limits on how many states any other territory can be divided into.

It's certainly true that Texas does have some liberal regions, and that its demographics are changing. For this to achieve Boortz's goal, he would of course want to figure out a way to gerrymander it so that it is in fact five regions that are all majority conservative. I don't know how possible that is. It surely wouldn't hold up forever, in any event.
   674. zonk Posted: June 28, 2012 at 03:24 PM (#4168844)
Just took my flag down with tears in my eyes.



1. This statement wins the internet today.
2. I'm terrified, but incapable of not Googling up what the hell "Cold Case Posse" means. Early money is on some apocalyptic militia ####.


No way that post wins the internet... freeper is entertaining, but they're pikers next to Jonah Goldberg's mommy's site (lucianne.com):

This is a horrible day for America. Expect the elections to be cancelled in November. Barky will have us in a war with Iran by then. King Barack is in control now.


How does it feel to be murders of your fellow Americans SC? Now we will have the death panels. You are fascists scum pigs. May you when you pass live in the hottest part of you know where for eternity.

Will any state have the courage to seceed? I will immediately move to the first state to delcare independence from the tyrannical USA. Let it be Texas.

The best medical care system in the whole world has just been shot to hell. I will be 61 this year so I assume I will never be able to see a doctor or have a medical procedure again. We are no longer in control of our own destiny. I assume that within a year we will be forced to purchase an electric car.

We are now all serfs to the government of the US. We can be taxed to death and taxed in death. We fought the revolutionary war over a 3% tea tax and taxes with out representation. This goes beyond pale and YES Roberts is no constitutional scholar just another black robed dictator.

Just got out my flag.... "Don't Tread on ME"


I'm so upset, almost weepy. We just don't deserve this especially coming from the anti-American, immoral Obama and democrats.

Heartsick and very worried.

For people in better shape than I'm in right now, is repeal possible?


I spit on you, 'justice' Roberts. Traitor to the Constitution, traitor to the nation. You have handed this country's future to the brownshirts. I expected no better from the other four. I thought, though, that you had great regard for the Constitution and its basic foundation of limited government. My confidence in you was obviously misplaced. You have sold us into slavery to the government. We are no longer a free people. We are subjects. You should be held in great contempt by all freedom-loving Americans. We now have no freedom to love! Only such 'privileges' as may be granted by 'the government'. I have defended Pres. Bush for a long time. This time, it truly IS his fault.

This is my favorite, though -- lots of irrational weeping today --

I am weeping tears right now, out of fear.
I am one of the ones who will soon be subjected to an appearance before a "Death Panel".
My guess is that at my end, I will not even be allowed to compassionate care at Hospice. When my spouse died, he did so with compassionate people all around him.
I will have government workers who don't give a DAMN.
IF we can elect Romney, I suggest revisiting the Supreme Court. America simply cannot afford to have 9 people accountable to no one, serving for life.
They ruled that you do NOT have the right to your own property (Kelo), and now you do not have the right to your OWN body.
They bent into pretzels, seeing that clearly the Individual Mandate is UNconstitutional, so they called it a tax.
The full force of Government will now be used against any citizen who refuses to submit to Obamacare.
Roberts also needs to be looked at more closely..something really smells with his actions.
We the People deserve an explanation as to why the Supreme Court has reinstituted SLAVERY again in America.
   675. The Clarence Thomas of BBTF (scott) Posted: June 28, 2012 at 03:27 PM (#4168847)
On the actual effects of the decision, how many states are likely to turn their noses up at the Medicaid expansion out of pique? IIRC Arizona didn't have a medicaid program until 1982. What happens if those states refuse to sign on? I'd assume the people who'd be covered fall into the individual mandate market and either get subsidized coverage or a hardship waiver. Still, 7 years funding and then a 90/10 split would probably save some states money compared to the current setup right now.
   676. jack the seal clubber (on the sidelines of life) Posted: June 28, 2012 at 03:27 PM (#4168848)
fascists scum pig


My new handle. I just have to put it up.
   677. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: June 28, 2012 at 03:30 PM (#4168852)
Spots in universities and feeder schools were around at least a century ago, as was the ability to not serve in the military going back to the civil war. Health is dodgier, but a modern median earner is going to live a lot longer than his century or two ago counterpart as well. And as for warring on behalf of states, if you go back far enough and squint you've got the whole feudal system before strong central governments.

I'm speaking of the changed circumstances in America since about 1980.
   678. Lassus Posted: June 28, 2012 at 03:31 PM (#4168853)
Just took my flag down with tears in my eyes. My country is gone.

WELCOME, COMRADE!
   679. The Clarence Thomas of BBTF (scott) Posted: June 28, 2012 at 03:33 PM (#4168857)
Barky will have us in a war with Iran by then.


Wait, I thought Barack was a secret Muslim?

I would make more fun, but I more worry for their mental health if they're at all serious. For balance, I feel the way when I read some very liberal sites too. And I'd be spitting nails right now if the whole law had been struck down, because that would simply be a complete reversal of severability doctrine.

eta:
I'm speaking of the changed circumstances in America since about 1980.


Whoops! Even so, I think the school part of what I said stands and there was the whole National Guard for the connected during Vietnam.
   680. Johnny Sycophant-Laden Fora Posted: June 28, 2012 at 03:33 PM (#4168858)
I will be 61 this year so I assume I will never be able to see a doctor or have a medical procedure again.


You know, there are some people who believe stuff like this.

What are these people going to do when
A; The jackbooted thugs don't show up
B; they can still see a doctor;
C; there are no death panels?

I know true believers never change their opinions, but the level of unhinged delusion is scary
   681. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: June 28, 2012 at 03:34 PM (#4168860)
Spots in elite universities and their feeder schools, political influence, health, your children's health, surrogate mothers, the ability to name stadiums, the ability to prosecute war on behalf of states, the ability to not serve in the military, and a bunch more


Wait, is this a list of things you can buy now that you couldn't buy before? Because people have been buying all of that #### since the Roman Republic at the very least.
   682. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: June 28, 2012 at 03:38 PM (#4168865)
Because people have been buying all of that #### since the Roman Republic at the very least.

People bought MRIs and cancer operations in ancient Rome?
   683. booond Posted: June 28, 2012 at 03:39 PM (#4168866)
Before Rick Perry declared his intention to seek the Republican Nomination, he declared that Texas still had the right to succeed


Texans would succeed only if Perry seceded.
   684. Booey Posted: June 28, 2012 at 03:42 PM (#4168870)
#674 - Those are pretty bad, but in all fairness they're not really any worse than the stuff I heard from the other side when W won re-election in 2004. Comparisons to nazi's and Hitler and all that. I remember one girl I knew telling me that she fully expected Bush to abolish the two term maximum and declare himself king.

People overreact when they're pi$$ed. It's nothing new.
   685. A big pile of nonsense (gef the talking mongoose) Posted: June 28, 2012 at 03:43 PM (#4168871)
This is a horrible day for America. Expect the elections to be cancelled in November. Barky will have us in a war with Iran by then. King Barack is in control now.

How does it feel to be murders of your fellow Americans SC? Now we will have the death panels. You are fascists scum pigs. May you when you pass live in the hottest part of you know where for eternity.

Will any state have the courage to seceed? I will immediately move to the first state to delcare independence from the tyrannical USA. Let it be Texas.

The best medical care system in the whole world has just been shot to hell. I will be 61 this year so I assume I will never be able to see a doctor or have a medical procedure again. We are no longer in control of our own destiny. I assume that within a year we will be forced to purchase an electric car.

We are now all serfs to the government of the US. We can be taxed to death and taxed in death. We fought the revolutionary war over a 3% tea tax and taxes with out representation. This goes beyond pale and YES Roberts is no constitutional scholar just another black robed dictator.

Just got out my flag.... "Don't Tread on ME"

I'm so upset, almost weepy. We just don't deserve this especially coming from the anti-American, immoral Obama and democrats.

Heartsick and very worried.

For people in better shape than I'm in right now, is repeal possible?

I spit on you, 'justice' Roberts. Traitor to the Constitution, traitor to the nation. You have handed this country's future to the brownshirts. I expected no better from the other four. I thought, though, that you had great regard for the Constitution and its basic foundation of limited government. My confidence in you was obviously misplaced. You have sold us into slavery to the government. We are no longer a free people. We are subjects. You should be held in great contempt by all freedom-loving Americans. We now have no freedom to love! Only such 'privileges' as may be granted by 'the government'. I have defended Pres. Bush for a long time. This time, it truly IS his fault.

I am weeping tears right now, out of fear.
I am one of the ones who will soon be subjected to an appearance before a "Death Panel".
My guess is that at my end, I will not even be allowed to compassionate care at Hospice. When my spouse died, he did so with compassionate people all around him.
I will have government workers who don't give a DAMN.
IF we can elect Romney, I suggest revisiting the Supreme Court. America simply cannot afford to have 9 people accountable to no one, serving for life.
They ruled that you do NOT have the right to your own property (Kelo), and now you do not have the right to your OWN body.
They bent into pretzels, seeing that clearly the Individual Mandate is UNconstitutional, so they called it a tax.
The full force of Government will now be used against any citizen who refuses to submit to Obamacare.
Roberts also needs to be looked at more closely..something really smells with his actions.
We the People deserve an explanation as to why the Supreme Court has reinstituted SLAVERY again in America.


You forgot BTF's own

It is a terrible day for freedom


Lunatics of a feather flock together, I suppose.
   686. Langer Monk Posted: June 28, 2012 at 03:44 PM (#4168872)
That was one thing I was specifically wondering about. Do you have a page cite for that?


Roberts starts that discussion on page 50 of his opinion.

In consequence, "we conclude[d] that [the] encouragement to state action [was] a valid use of the spending power." Dole, 483 U. S., at 212. Whether to accept the drinking age change "remain[ed] the prerogative of the States not merely in theory but in fact." Id., at 211-212.

In this case, the financial "inducement" Congress has chosen is much more than "relatively mild encouragement"—it is a gun to the head.

That's on page 51
   687. The Clarence Thomas of BBTF (scott) Posted: June 28, 2012 at 03:47 PM (#4168875)
People overreact when they're pi$$ed. It's nothing new.


Yep. Heck, my dad's reaction to blown calls in baseball lead to epic rants about the lack of integrity in baseball.

686: Thanks. That could end up in a lot of different places depending on how it's applied.
   688. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: June 28, 2012 at 03:48 PM (#4168876)
People bought MRIs and cancer operations in ancient Rome?


Yes. They were more advanced than ours. They came in small packages called "leeches."
   689. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: June 28, 2012 at 03:50 PM (#4168878)
Yep. Heck, my dad's reaction to blown calls in baseball lead to epic rants about the lack of integrity in baseball.


There is no such thing as an overreaction to blown calls against your baseball team.
   690. Fernigal McGunnigle has become a merry hat Posted: June 28, 2012 at 03:50 PM (#4168879)
If we're breaking up states, California, Florida, heck, even mid-western states like Ohio and Illinois could stand a restructure or two.


I'm so all over this. Everything is too damn big and unwieldy in this country. I'm not talking about the Federal government, I'm talking about the country itself. We can't make the whole country smaller, but we can break in half any state that reaches 8 million. So the new states:

California becomes 9 states.
Texas becomes 6 states.
New York and Florida become 4 states.
Illinois and Pennsylvania become 3 states.
Ohio, Michigan, Georgia, North Carolina, New Jersey, and Virginia become 2 states.

That brings us 79 states. It breaks up the power of the megastates of California and Texas and lessens the relative Senatorial power of the South Dakotas and Vermonts of the world. The biggest states are now Washington, Massachusetts, Indiana, Arizona, and Tennessee. Also, in another 20 years or so we'll roll Delaware and DC into Maryland, then break the resultant state in two. Because I feel like it.

I'd vote for any party that ran on this platform. I'd vote for the Peoples Revolutionary Fascist-Maoists if this was a part of their platform.
   691. The Clarence Thomas of BBTF (scott) Posted: June 28, 2012 at 03:52 PM (#4168881)
There is no such thing as an overreaction to blown calls against your baseball team.


Of course. He does it about any blown call, though. He's cruising towards his crotchety years with a full head of steam.
   692. Fernigal McGunnigle has become a merry hat Posted: June 28, 2012 at 03:54 PM (#4168883)
Barky will have us in a war with Iran by then.

Wait, I thought Barack was a secret Muslim?


He's a secret *Sunni* Muslim!
   693. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: June 28, 2012 at 03:57 PM (#4168886)
I'd vote for any party that ran on this platform. I'd vote for the Peoples Revolutionary Fascist-Maoists if this was a part of their platform.


I'm trying to think of a good reason to ever not vote for the PRFMP.
   694. DA Baracus Posted: June 28, 2012 at 03:57 PM (#4168887)
I assume that within a year we will be forced to purchase an electric car.


This guy needs to keep his conspiracy theories straight. Agenda 21 says we will all be forced to take public transportation.
   695. zonk Posted: June 28, 2012 at 03:58 PM (#4168889)
I'd vote for the Peoples Revolutionary Fascist-Maoists if this was a part of their platform.


Yes, but would you donate to their PAC?
   696. Fernigal McGunnigle has become a merry hat Posted: June 28, 2012 at 03:58 PM (#4168890)
I'd vote for any party that ran on this platform. I'd vote for the Peoples Revolutionary Fascist-Maoists if this was a part of their platform.

I'm trying to think of a good reason to ever not vote for the PRFMP.


If they're running against the Popular Peoples Revolutionary Fascist-Maoists, of course.
   697. zonk Posted: June 28, 2012 at 03:59 PM (#4168891)
This guy needs to keep his conspiracy theories straight. Agenda 21 says we will all be forced to take public transportation.


You must have missed the last meeting - that hasn't yet been decided. We are still awaiting bids from the UAW union masters and the AFSCME conductors and engineers....
   698. The Clarence Thomas of BBTF (scott) Posted: June 28, 2012 at 03:59 PM (#4168892)
Agenda 21 says we will all be forced to take public transportation.


Wait, what about bikes? Bike shares?
   699. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: June 28, 2012 at 04:00 PM (#4168894)
You see, the humor stems from when people rush to defend themselves against charges that have not actually been levelled against them, typically because they realize the truth of those charges as they apply to them. Please don't hesitate to let me know if you need this broken down further.
Come on. This is disingenuous; the only way to make it more obnoxious is when one pretend to be a faux southern populist (like neckstabber) and uses the expression about throwing stones at a pack of dogs and the one yelping is the one who got hit.
   700. DA Baracus Posted: June 28, 2012 at 04:01 PM (#4168896)
You must have missed the last meeting - that hasn't yet been decided.


I've been at the meetings.

Page 7 of 14 pages ‹ First  < 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 >  Last ›

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
The Piehole of David Wells
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogAdam Dunn, 34, calls it a career
(77 - 6:25am, Oct 02)
Last: The Id of SugarBear Blanks

NewsblogBaseball Will Test Out Six New Rules To Speed Up The Game
(48 - 5:12am, Oct 02)
Last: Dr. Vaux

NewsblogOT: Monthly NBA Thread - October 2014
(27 - 3:04am, Oct 02)
Last: RollingWave

NewsblogDog eats baseball playoff tickets
(8 - 2:59am, Oct 02)
Last: RollingWave

NewsblogThe Baseball Show with Rany Jazayerli and Joe Sheehan - 9/29/14
(9 - 2:02am, Oct 02)
Last: Dr. Vaux

NewsblogA’s wild swing of a season ends in wild-card loss to Royals
(37 - 2:00am, Oct 02)
Last: PreservedFish

NewsblogFangraphs (Sullivan): How Jarrod Dyson Stole The Biggest Base Of His Life
(15 - 1:36am, Oct 02)
Last: Golfing Great Mitch Cumstein

NewsblogWSJ: Playoff Hateability Index
(36 - 1:18am, Oct 02)
Last: DFA

NewsblogBP: 2014 Internet Baseball Awards
(3 - 12:58am, Oct 02)
Last: Yoenis Cespedes, Baseball Savant

NewsblogPosnanski: The Beauty of Belief [Royals win Wild Card, headed to ALDS]
(8 - 12:29am, Oct 02)
Last: Walt Davis

NewsblogUNR study: Temperature affects baseball scores
(9 - 12:24am, Oct 02)
Last: BochysFingers

NewsblogSpector: Stats incredible! Numbers from the 2014 MLB season will amaze you
(69 - 12:22am, Oct 02)
Last: Jarrod HypnerotomachiaPoliphili(Teddy F. Ballgame)

NewsblogOT: The Soccer Thread, September 2014
(492 - 12:06am, Oct 02)
Last: CWS Keith plans to boo your show at the Apollo

NewsblogDayton Moore's vision for Kansas Royals validated - ESPN
(49 - 12:04am, Oct 02)
Last: zack

NewsblogNL WILD CARD 2014 OMNICHATTER
(283 - 12:03am, Oct 02)
Last: tshipman

Page rendered in 0.9843 seconds
52 querie(s) executed