What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Obama XXII: Occupy the White House

  • Thread starter Thread starter Priceless
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Obama XXII: Occupy the White House

Kepler said:
Fair point.

It is, indeed, Kollection.

I'm not up on Kardashian Lore. Which of these three is the one with the (known) sex tape? They are all vaguely reptilian.

kk_bg_girls.v2.jpg


For comparison:

komodo-dragon-hd-3-300x230.jpg
Click to expand...

Middle one. Although I'd bet my *ahem* bottom dollar on all three being in their own feature film.
 
Re: Obama XXII: Occupy the White House

Saw a really interesting article over at Slate about a possible solution to the college tuition crisis.

tl;dr: After the one year mark, offer students a partial rebate to leave college. The student would know more about whether college is really for them, their chances of graduating, their chances of getting a job in their field, etc. by that point, and the colleges would have some skin in the game and be less likely to admit students who would be wasting their time.

Granted, the colleges will never see it happen, but it's a heck of an idea. Myself, I'd extend the rebate to two years, because a lot of the first year is full of weeder courses and gen ed courses that might not really represent what the major is about.
 
Re: Obama XXII: Occupy the White House

Kepler said:
I assume the Twinkies are going to be Raptured -- it would hardly be heaven without them.
Click to expand...

But probably just Mauer, Cuddyer, and Morneau... maybe Revere. The others are screwed.
 
Re: Obama XXII: Occupy the White House

Craig P. said:
People tend to be wrong about things that challenge their belief system:
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2011/12/i-was-wrong-and-so-are-you/8713/
Click to expand...

Great retraction by him, though. The problem with these things is: original article with snappy title has 10 million email forwards; the retraction will reach less than 1% of those people and of them, 90% will dismiss the retraction in part because the original (false) premise reassured them of their ideological supremacy.

A great site devoted to the many ways we don't actually think about the things we think we think about.
 
Re: Obama XXII: Occupy the White House

Kepler said:
Lobbyists are just parasites naturally produced by a system of legalized bribery. Get big money out of politics and the lobbyists will jump to the next host. They'll go back to corporate law or the media or somewhere else where lack of scruples is rewarded.

It is impossible to kill them off, they are indestructible. It's only possible to limit their damage. Having corporations be able to contribute to election funds is as corrupt and absurd as allowing the defense and the prosecution to "contribute" money to judges sitting for their case. The only reason it's not illegal is the lawmakers personally benefit from the crime.
Click to expand...

So from a practicle standpoint, what has to happen to our governmental system that will tranfer the power from the lobbyists/corporations to the people?
 
Re: Obama XXII: Occupy the White House

Timothy A said:
So from a practicle standpoint, what has to happen to our governmental system that will tranfer the power from the lobbyists/corporations to the people?
Click to expand...

I would tax lobbying. Really, who would be able to vote against that? Lobbyists have to registar and disclose how much they're spending, right? Well, slap a top level tax on that activity and the cost of buying politicians just got a lot more expensive. Specify that the proceeds go towards paying down whatever the most expensive outstanding US debt is.
 
Re: Obama XXII: Occupy the White House

Rover said:
I would tax lobbying. Really, who would be able to vote against that? Lobbyists have to registar and disclose how much they're spending, right? Well, slap a top level tax on that activity and the cost of buying politicians just got a lot more expensive. Specify that the proceeds go towards paying down whatever the most expensive outstanding US debt is.
Click to expand...
Cost of doing business, pass it on to the consumer.
 
Re: Obama XXII: Occupy the White House

Timothy A said:
So from a practicle standpoint, what has to happen to our governmental system that will transfer the power from the lobbyists/corporations to the people?
Click to expand...
On the supply side (the lobbyists) I think we need something analogous to the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. It should be illegal for a company or industry group or union or church or foreign government or any other entity that's not an individual human being to contribute money in any way to an office-seeker or any other entity that gives money or provides some other partisan service (advertising, polling, etc) to an office-seeker (like a political party, a 527 group, etc). Make it a criminal offense for both the executives of the contributing entity and the office-seeker and make it automatically DQ the office-seeker from holding the office.

The problem is not our democratic system of government, it's the crowding out of the one-man-one-vote principle by the undemocratic one-dollar-one-vote principle.
 
Last edited:
Re: Obama XXII: Occupy the White House

Kepler said:
On the supply side (the lobbyists) I think we need something analogous to the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. It should be illegal for a company or industry group or union or church or foreign government or any other entity that's not an individual human being to contribute money in any way to an office-seeker or any other entity that gives money or provides some other partisan service (advertising, polling, etc) to an office-seeker (like a political party, a 527 group, etc). Make it a criminal offense for both the executives of the contributing entity and the office-seeker and make it automatically DQ the office-seeker from holding the office.

The problem is not our democratic system of government, it's the crowding out of the one-man-one-vote principle by the undemocratic one-dollar-one-vote principle.
Click to expand...

I'd like to see what the political process would look like if your plan were implemented. Of course, we both realize there is less than zero chance for that to happen. Especially the part about DQing office-seekers. I'd expect the Supremes might have a problem with it. High marks for including "gifts in kind," the mothers milk of union "donations."
 
Re: Obama XXII: Occupy the White House

geezer said:
Here's something we can all agree needs to be vetoed. I've already written to Obama. I don't understand how it got passed in the first place.
Click to expand...

Not sure of the details. But it seems odd that in an election year something that would be both overwhelmingly against public opinion and the tenents of the country would be voted through with such a majority. Somebody's rider.

I think you veto this...but there's risk that the GOP candidate spins this as being against US security.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top