The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

[bigblue_dl]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

Shortage of chemicals for lethal injection? Really? Put the person under, like you would in any surgery and inject ****ing liquid plumber into their veins. Pretty sure it would be lethal, and they'd be out and not feel a thing. Or how about this, one round costs like 75 cents, make it 2 to be sure, and you're at a buck fifty.

 

[Kepler]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

The Taliban give the victim's family the option of beheading. Sort of misses the point of law existing to break tribal revenge cycles, though.

Having rules about the way you execute somebody has nothing to do with the killer and everything to do with basic human dignity at the hands of the state. That's not something I want to erode. The state is powerful and humiliating enough as it is.

 

[bigblue_dl]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

The Taliban give the victim's family the option of beheading. Sort of misses the point of law existing to break tribal revenge cycles, though.

Having rules about the way you execute somebody has nothing to do with the killer and everything to do with basic human dignity at the hands of the state. That's not something I want to erode. The state is powerful and humiliating enough as it is.

If the cost difference is $50,000 between the chemicals used now and some generic household cleaner, I have no problem pi55ing on the basic human dignity of someone who raped and killed 5 teenage girls. (as one example of the kind of person I think deserves the death penalty)

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

If the cost difference is $50,000 between the chemicals used now and some generic household cleaner, I have no problem pi55ing on the basic human dignity of someone who raped and killed 5 teenage girls. (as one example of the kind of person I think deserves the death penalty)

Good luck getting past the "cruel and unusual" standard.

 

[unofan]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

Shortage of chemicals for lethal injection? Really? Put the person under, like you would in any surgery and inject ****ing liquid plumber into their veins. Pretty sure it would be lethal, and they'd be out and not feel a thing. Or how about this, one round costs like 75 cents, make it 2 to be sure, and you're at a buck fifty.

Either Utah or Idaho (or both?) still have a firing squad as a means of execution. I think one inmate even opted for that within the last decade. I think the same state has hanging still on the books, too.

 

[Rimbaud]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

What always gets lost in the shuffle of the discussion (even by me, I never bring it up) is the debt incurred to become a teacher. Since it is often a Master's Degree program (like for example in Minnesota) you can be talking about massive amounts of loans. I wont name how big my number is, but lets just say it will make anyone cry a bit. Now that is fine, any education adds debt and post graduate degrees especially except that since teachers salaries arent on par with other post grad jobs, loan payments eat up a lot of money.

So that probably offsets those benefits anyways

And I dont trust any info associated with the BS from Wisconsin...that whole situation was one big pile of crap...like Wisconsin

If you think a teacher's salary is low, I don't think you want to know what postdocs in the sciences make.

 

[Kepler]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

I have no problem pi55ing on the basic human dignity of someone who raped and killed 5 teenage girls. (as one example of the kind of person I think deserves the death penalty)

I disagree strongly. It's giving the state the power to humiliate and torment somebody that's an affront to all human dignity. That's why, for example, we don't still whip people. That's crossing the line between legitimate punishment and revenge for its own sake. You can't build a society on cruelty, even to the cruel. Dispose of them, but humanely.

 

[LynahFan]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

I disagree strongly. It's giving the state the power to humiliate and torment somebody that's an affront to all human dignity. That's why, for example, we don't still whip people. That's crossing the line between legitimate punishment and revenge for its own sake. You can't build a society on cruelty, even to the cruel. Dispose of them, but humanely.

Right, but is there any real difference between "drifting off" to an eternal sleep versus drifting off to an anesthetizized state and then being killed by some other means? I mean, to someone other than a defense lawyer? Drifting off is drifting off, and it's the last thing he'll know either way, so they both seem humane to me.

 

[Bob Gray]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

Considering I've taken more stones than probably any other poster on this board right now I seriously beg to differ. Also, you assume I care. I don't. My job is done because I've done and continue to do my duty. My duty is to remind everyone that Rome will burn. And it will. I can go on with a clear conscience.

But, you regularly berate others' skepticism, especially when it comes to Obama, so you clearly aren't just about "Rome burns", and that's all. You choose who you take shots at and they aren't spread evenly across the spectrum as they would be if you didn't care. It's actually suprisingly hard to really truly not care in the least.

I think on some level we can relate given our skepticism about what's going on in this nation and world on many levels. What you then do with that skepticism is a whole different discussion. For me, on one level I have little hope in things getting better, but to me there are other levels, and I'll leave it at that for now.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

But, you regularly berate others' skepticism, especially when it comes to Obama, so you clearly aren't just about "Rome burns", and that's all. You choose who you take shots at and they aren't spread evenly across the spectrum as they would be if you didn't care. It's actually suprisingly hard to really truly not care in the least.

I think on some level we can relate given our skepticism about what's going on in this nation and world on many levels. What you then do with that skepticism is a whole different discussion. For me, on one level I have little hope in things getting better, but to me there are other levels, and I'll leave it at that for now.

You are so hung up on times that I've chosen to back the President it's comical. You repeatedly post things like above under some grand illusion that I am in the man's back pocket or something. I don't know what planet you are on Bob that you think I'm an Obama lap dog. Heck, even Priceless knows that I'm not based on the hilarious poisoned water posting yesterday.

I'll give you a hint. The President has been wrong about just about everything. But, he's also been more right wing than President Bush. He's finally decided in the past month that maybe Warren Buffet and Eric Schmidt are right and giveaways to the top 5% don't stimulate the economy and they don't pay the bills.

As for berating skepticism. Hardly.

 

[unofan]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

You choose who you take shots at and they aren't spread evenly across the spectrum as they would be if you didn't care.

That's only true if both sides present equal opportunities for shot taking. If one side is disproportionately acting stupidly, then it only makes sense to be more skeptical of that side than the other.

If a referee calls more penalties on one team than another, that doesn't, by itself, mean the referee is biased. The one team may have actually committed more rules infractions than the other.

 

[Kepler]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

Right, but is there any real difference between "drifting off" to an eternal sleep versus drifting off to an anesthetizized state and then being killed by some other means? I mean, to someone other than a defense lawyer? Drifting off is drifting off, and it's the last thing he'll know either way, so they both seem humane to me.

That's a question of the definition of cruel and unusual, and the judges can have it.

I was only reiterating that the degree of crumminess of the criminal can't be used as a reason to erode Constitutional protections.

 

[Bob Gray]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

You are so hung up on times that I've chosen to back the President it's comical. You repeatedly post things like above under some grand illusion that I am in the man's back pocket or something. I don't know what planet you are on Bob that you think I'm an Obama lap dog. Heck, even Priceless knows that I'm not based on the hilarious poisoned water posting yesterday.

I'll give you a hint. The President has been wrong about just about everything. But, he's also been more right wing than President Bush. He's finally decided in the past month that maybe Warren Buffet and Eric Schmidt are right and giveaways to the top 5% don't stimulate the economy and they don't pay the bills.

As for berating skepticism. Hardly.

So he was wrong about the jobs bill. And you berate me when I criticize the jobs bill and intimate I should support it because you find some businessman that endorses it. You really need to get your story a bit more straight if you want to claim you're this uberskeptic or whatever.

Further right than Bush? Thank you. I needed a good chuckle this morning. It's hilarious how time after time we hear how right wing he is because he hasn't delivered the goods on a lot of stuff the lefties wanted but was never realistic that they'd get. Bush never would have pushed through the healthcare monstrosity that is Obamacare. Bush wouldn't have lifted Don't Ask, Don't Tell unilaterially. Bush wouldn't have decided to not defend the Defense of Marriage Act, the standing law of the land. Bush wouldn't have appointed anyone remotely close to Sotomayor or Kagan. It goes on and on.

 

[Bob Gray]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

That's only true if both sides present equal opportunities for shot taking. If one side is disproportionately acting stupidly, then it only makes sense to be more skeptical of that side than the other.

If a referee calls more penalties on one team than another, that doesn't, by itself, mean the referee is biased. The one team may have actually committed more rules infractions than the other.

Never heard back from you on my post listing a bunch of ways I disagree with the Republicans.


As for opportunities to act stupid, there's plenty to take shots at across the political spectrum these days, and only a hardcore partisan would say otherwise. But, that's apparently how you call it, so you define yourself thereby.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

So he was wrong about the jobs bill. And you berate me when I criticize the jobs bill and intimate I should support it because you find some businessman that endorses it. You really need to get your story a bit more straight if you want to claim you're this uberskeptic or whatever.

Further right than Bush? Thank you. I needed a good chuckle this morning. It's hilarious how time after time we hear how right wing he is because he hasn't delivered the goods on a lot of stuff the lefties wanted but was never realistic that they'd get. Bush never would have pushed through the healthcare monstrosity that is Obamacare. Bush wouldn't have lifted Don't Ask, Don't Tell unilaterially. Bush wouldn't have decided to not defend the Defense of Marriage Act, the standing law of the land. Bush wouldn't have appointed anyone remotely close to Sotomayor or Kagan. It goes on and on.

No, the jobs bill he's right about. That's the first time he's been right since he took office.

Good going on the social issues. Thanks for the reminder that social issues are really the only issues that conservatives care about. Obamacare is a conservative health care plan. Which I've already pointed out numerous times. Without a public option or universal care it doesn't even come close to being what anyone on the left wanted. Heck, it's Romney's plan and he's in second for the GOP nod. As for the rest of those social issues you are up in arms about. Obama was very pragmatic on all of them. You're just so far right you can't see it.

 

[Handyman]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

If you think a teacher's salary is low, I don't think you want to know what postdocs in the sciences make.

Oh I have heard...hence why a lot of them end up teaching as adjuncts on the side

What is the ceiling though?

 

[Bob Gray]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

No, the jobs bill he's right about. That's the first time he's been right since he took office.

Good going on the social issues. Thanks for the reminder that social issues are really the only issues that conservatives care about. Obamacare is a conservative health care plan. Which I've already pointed out numerous times. Without a public option or universal care it doesn't even come close to being what anyone on the left wanted. Heck, it's Romney's plan and he's in second for the GOP nod. As for the rest of those social issues you are up in arms about. Obama was very pragmatic on all of them. You're just so far right you can't see it.

I mention the social issues because I happen to care about the social issues. You think Obama was pragmatic because of your lefty views on those issues. At the very least you should admit that those major changes would have been far less likely with a Republican in office, whether Bush, McCain, or other. And still, I guess to fit your contorted world of things, Obama's shilling to his lefty constituencies on social issues somehow transforms into helping make him more right wing than Bush. That's some major gymnastics you're doing there.

 

[Handyman]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

No, the jobs bill he's right about. That's the first time he's been right since he took office.

Good going on the social issues. Thanks for the reminder that social issues are really the only issues that conservatives care about. Obamacare is a conservative health care plan. Which I've already pointed out numerous times. Without a public option or universal care it doesn't even come close to being what anyone on the left wanted. Heck, it's Romney's plan and he's in second for the GOP nod. As for the rest of those social issues you are up in arms about. Obama was very pragmatic on all of them. You're just so far right you can't see it.

BINGO! It took the highest ranking officials in the military telling Congress and the President that DADT Needs to End for Obama to do it. He was never going to do it that was why the GLBT Community was basically abandoning him. His action wasnt because of his desire for social justice, he basically had no choice. It will be the same for whichever President finally signs the bill to make Gay Marriage legal...most likely it will be because the public turned, not because they have some great love of the GLBT Community.

Has Obama turned over the authorities that Bush took unto himself? No? So that is a push.

Obama's Health Care plan is to the right of Bush's Medicare Part D/Prescription Drug plan.

No Child Left Behind? Yeah Obama sure is to the left of that plan...

They are equal, both middle of the road *******es who have no business being the leader of the country. One made it because his daddy was President, the other made it because the former was an idiot that almost destroyed this country. The country is lesser because of both of them.

Obviously Bob is too close to the forest to see the trees. The fact that he still thinks you love Obama despite at least 4500 protestations in the last year proves he either doesnt read what you write, or CANT read what you write.

 

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

Don't be surprised... this is the Mining Gazette of Houghton.

More to the point - Yoopers.



Sorry

 

[geezer]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

Thanks for the reminder that social issues are really the only issues that conservatives care about.

"Conservatives" don't care much about social issues; or they certainly don't agree on which side to take if they do. You're probably thinking of "Republicans"... a very common misunderstanding.
Again, the example of GW Bush - a liberal president and big spending, government control guy; but he also supported Evangelical social views.