The problem isn't just that he didn't count the votes. He knew what the vote count would be. The problem is that he changed the vote's outcome.
The article dances around the question of how this trick has been used before. Saving time on a bill which everyone knows is going to pass with the required supermajority is maybe cutting-corners but well within the legislative norm. Deliberately miscounting votes (which is what essentially is happening here) is something you'd normally expect to see in banana republics.
Brian Krakow on
0
Options
VanguardBut now the dream is over. And the insect is awake.Registered User, __BANNED USERSregular
To be fair, the entire primary season has been a pissing contest about who is the most conservative. Our political discourse does treat Republicanism like it's a singular, cohesive ideology.
That it's not is besides the point, because a pretty large segment of the population is convinced otherwise.
As a previous poster said, when you start complaining that Republicans are getting away with gangster shit, that things MUST change, and then you go into the voting booth and vote Democrat because its the "lesser of two evils" - you kinda cede your ethical highground.
No you fucking don't. People choose the lesser of two evils every day, you silly goose.
Jesus when will this "Silly Goose" stupidity die? Is that like some meme or something. . .annoying.
And sorry, you kinda do. Arguing that Republicans are fools/stupid/self-defeating and or destructive/etc for following/voting-for Politician X, and then turning around and doing the exact same thing but rationalizing that Politician Y is the most palatable choice among the two options - ethical position compromised.
Jesus when will this "Silly Goose" stupidity die? Is that like some meme or something. . .annoying.
And sorry, you kinda do. Arguing that Republicans are fools/stupid/self-defeating and or destructive/etc for following/voting-for Politician X, and then turning around and doing the exact same thing but rationalizing that Politician Y is the most palatable choice among the two options - ethical position compromised.
What kind of idiotic logic is this? If I vote for Santorum over Stalin, I can criticize people for voting for Stalin and retain the moral high ground.
Edit: Noam Chomsky isn't my favorite person in the world, but I think he put this well:
The Glorious Edict
All insults other than 'silly goose' are punishable by punishment most severe. Admins and mods are exempted, so we may be allowed to practice the modly art of self-restraint.
So whenever the Admins and Mods get bored with it, I guess. Which will probably be never.
AManFromEarth on
0
Options
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
Republican position on contraception/sex ed has hardly changed in the decades I've been alive, so not sure where this "hard tack" nonsense is coming from. And Santorum, really? LMAO.
Also, whining that Southern far-right states are dictating the ENTIRE Republican Hive-Mind makes about as much sense as suggesting far-left advocates are doing the same for Democrat voters.
As a previous poster said, when you start complaining that Republicans are getting away with gangster shit, that things MUST change, and then you go into the voting booth and vote Democrat because its the "lesser of two evils" - you kinda cede your ethical highground. What is happening in Michigan is hardly new or novel; pretending political abuse is unprecedented and is the signal of "the end" is just silly.
Republican position on contraception and sex ed hasn't changed at all. The hard-liner nuts have been beating pregnant women outside of abortion clinics and killing the people that work there for decades. The only difference now is that the hard-liner view is now the national platform.
The Republican Hive-Mind thing is hyperbole. These people are just following the party standards in the post-Bush era. I wouldn't call them a hive mind for all being all second amendmenty, or for practically putting Reagan on the pulpit: Neither would I if they engage in party-wide disenfranchisement to ensure their America is as white, christian, and english-speaking as they are comfortable with. Let's not forget their views that if Christianity is protested or not fully endorsed by everyone, then war has been declared upon it... but then they engage in behavior ten times worse towards other religions.
I would always pick the lesser of two evils if the lesser of two evils means not throwing the huddled masses into and gutter and ensuring the freedom of all those who practice all religions, and especially since our Democratic presidents have done much more in terms of economy (The amount of jobs grew more under Carter than it did under both Bush's combined entire presidencies) and our financial health than any fucking Republican. The only reason Reagan even managed to create jobs is because he raised taxes, something the righties tend to forget.
0
Options
VanguardBut now the dream is over. And the insect is awake.Registered User, __BANNED USERSregular
That's just... Wow! I knew some of that was going on, but Christ! Why don't we just get rid of universal suffrage and start persecuting sinners again?
Have you been following the Republican Party lately? That's pretty much their entire publicly stated goal.
And I'm "pretty much" a woman except for a few chromosomes.
Are you arguing that the recent nonsense in Texas, Arizona, Virginia, etc, along with the hard tack to starboard the Republican Party is taking over contraception, denying blacks and hispanics voting rights in many areas, as well as having Rick Fucking Santorum straight up spouting religious dogma is not an indication that overall the Republican Party is not aiming for the U.S. to lean closer to a theocracy and suppressing others rights than it has ever been before?
Republican position on contraception/sex ed has hardly changed in the decades I've been alive, so not sure where this "hard tack" nonsense is coming from. And Santorum, really? LMAO.
Also, whining that Southern far-right states are dictating the ENTIRE Republican Hive-Mind makes about as much sense as suggesting far-left advocates are doing the same for Democrat voters.
As a previous poster said, when you start complaining that Republicans are getting away with gangster shit, that things MUST change, and then you go into the voting booth and vote Democrat because its the "lesser of two evils" - you kinda cede your ethical highground. What is happening in Michigan is hardly new or novel; pretending political abuse is unprecedented and is the signal of "the end" is just silly.
Waaa waaa waa both sides are the same something something.
Been there, heard that before. Unfortunately for you, both sides are not actually the same.
The only difference now is that the hard-liner view is now the national platform.
Are you actually suggesting this is the position of the RNC. Not Rick Santorum, not whatever nutjobs in the deep, DEEP south hold legislative power - but the national agreed upon platform of conservatives nationwide. If you believe that, no wonder The Republican Threat keeps you awake at night.
These local/state policies will never be national policies and you know that, but I suppose it makes it easier to advance the Republican Threat to pretend otherwise.
I mean really, find me one prominent Republican advocating violence against pro-choicers. Jesus.
Waaa waaa waa both sides are the same something something.
Been there, heard that before. Unfortunately for you, both sides are not actually the same.
No of course not. Ideological fantaticism/obstructionism is a phenomenom that exists only on the right.
How can I be like you ED!? How can I be secure in the knowledge the both sides are and forever will be the same? How can I dismiss the platform of the Republican Party as an irrelevant product of the party's fringe and live in an imaginary world where moderate Republicans and unicorns frolic amongst the trees?
Cantors district is in Virginia, right? That's pretty deep south depending on where its at.
Uhm, no. Virginia is not in any way shape or form "deep" in the south. It borders fucking DC. It's in the middle of the country. It's north of the Missouri Compromise Line.
This is important because I'm from NC and I will not fucking tolerate my state being lumped in with the deep south and goddammit Virginia quit being so fucking southern I want to be in the mid-atlantic region not the fucking south.
I'm not saying the RNC advocates a violent response to pro-choicers. I'm saying that if one believes abortion is murder, then the murder of abortionists is justified.
The platform of the Republican Party statement was directed toward your portrayal of the Republican party as anything other than reactionary, not at abortion specifically.
P.S. I use cmd-r, not F5.
P.P.S. I like your fancy new way of writing elipses. . .
Are you actually suggesting this is the position of the RNC. Not Rick Santorum, not whatever nutjobs in the deep, DEEP south hold legislative power - but the national agreed upon platform of conservatives nationwide. If you believe that, no wonder The Republican Threat keeps you awake at night.
Gee, Mitt Romney is about to be your Presidential nominee and wants to end funding for Planned Parenthood, supports personhood amendments, and supports the Blunt Amendment (after he was opposed to it, but you know, it's Mitt Romney). Speaking of the Blunt Amendment, all but one (specifically, the one y'all primaried last year) Republican Senator voted for it. That strikes me as a fair sampling of the national leadership of the Republican Party.
enlightenedbum on
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
Argh, you're right. It was Snowe. Murkowski was so vocally critical of the thing afterwards I assumed she was being somewhat less hypocritical than usual.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
AbsalonLands of Always WinterRegistered Userregular
If you say something is effectively murder and that the law doesn't do anything about it because the other side has won through politics, then you are basically advocating violence as is.
It's one thing to not hate the republican agenda. It's another to pretend they aren't a real, serious threat to most functions and interests of the US at large, and many groups in particular. If they were members of an organization that used meritocracy and the established business plan/elementary goals rather than democracy as a basis for membership, they would have been long gone.
They can't do anything right. They can't improve anything. They see politics as a way to wage bloodless war.
Remember when Sarah Palin had those targets of politicians on her website and then Gabriel Gifford was shot? Does it mean the Palin people wanted her dead or related? No, but it's still bullshit.
Battlenet ID: MildC#11186 - If I'm in the game, send me an invite at anytime and I'll play.
Jesus when will this "Silly Goose" stupidity die? Is that like some meme or something. . .annoying.
And sorry, you kinda do. Arguing that Republicans are fools/stupid/self-defeating and or destructive/etc for following/voting-for Politician X, and then turning around and doing the exact same thing but rationalizing that Politician Y is the most palatable choice among the two options - ethical position compromised.
The ethical thing is making the best choice for the country.
I'd say that the political party that endorses the concept that women seeking abortions should be forcibly raped with large metal objects is really not the one that gets to claim they don't support violence against pro-choicers.
As a previous poster said, when you start complaining that Republicans are getting away with gangster shit, that things MUST change, and then you go into the voting booth and vote Democrat because its the "lesser of two evils" - you kinda cede your ethical highground. What is happening in Michigan is hardly new or novel; pretending political abuse is unprecedented and is the signal of "the end" is just silly.
So we should stop Republican BS by...voting Republican? Do you listen to yourself?
Bill Ayers is a terrorist but an abortion clinic bomber isn't, the former was focusing on fighting against the government and the latter is focused on terrorizing the citizenry
As a previous poster said, when you start complaining that Republicans are getting away with gangster shit, that things MUST change, and then you go into the voting booth and vote Democrat because its the "lesser of two evils" - you kinda cede your ethical highground. What is happening in Michigan is hardly new or novel; pretending political abuse is unprecedented and is the signal of "the end" is just silly.
So we should stop Republican BS by...voting Republican? Do you listen to yourself?
I do. Obviously though you heard something completely different and not at all reflected in my comment.
I will accept this. NC is commonly viewed as either the "upper south" or the "mid atlantic" region, and we're honestly at least a little bit more liberal than either SC or VA. At least lately. Even though Obama was the first Dem to win NC's electoral votes since Carter (and Johnson before that), we tend to end up with Dem's running the state.
As a previous poster said, when you start complaining that Republicans are getting away with gangster shit, that things MUST change, and then you go into the voting booth and vote Democrat because its the "lesser of two evils" - you kinda cede your ethical highground. What is happening in Michigan is hardly new or novel; pretending political abuse is unprecedented and is the signal of "the end" is just silly.
So we should stop Republican BS by...voting Republican? Do you listen to yourself?
I do. Obviously though you heard something completely different and not at all reflected in my comment.
So if voting Democratic isn't the way to stop Republican goosery, what is?
Posts
The article dances around the question of how this trick has been used before. Saving time on a bill which everyone knows is going to pass with the required supermajority is maybe cutting-corners but well within the legislative norm. Deliberately miscounting votes (which is what essentially is happening here) is something you'd normally expect to see in banana republics.
That it's not is besides the point, because a pretty large segment of the population is convinced otherwise.
And sorry, you kinda do. Arguing that Republicans are fools/stupid/self-defeating and or destructive/etc for following/voting-for Politician X, and then turning around and doing the exact same thing but rationalizing that Politician Y is the most palatable choice among the two options - ethical position compromised.
This man is ignorant of yon Glorious Edict.
What kind of idiotic logic is this? If I vote for Santorum over Stalin, I can criticize people for voting for Stalin and retain the moral high ground.
Edit: Noam Chomsky isn't my favorite person in the world, but I think he put this well:
FYI:
http://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/145693/the-rules#Item_1
So whenever the Admins and Mods get bored with it, I guess. Which will probably be never.
Republican position on contraception and sex ed hasn't changed at all. The hard-liner nuts have been beating pregnant women outside of abortion clinics and killing the people that work there for decades. The only difference now is that the hard-liner view is now the national platform.
The Republican Hive-Mind thing is hyperbole. These people are just following the party standards in the post-Bush era. I wouldn't call them a hive mind for all being all second amendmenty, or for practically putting Reagan on the pulpit: Neither would I if they engage in party-wide disenfranchisement to ensure their America is as white, christian, and english-speaking as they are comfortable with. Let's not forget their views that if Christianity is protested or not fully endorsed by everyone, then war has been declared upon it... but then they engage in behavior ten times worse towards other religions.
I would always pick the lesser of two evils if the lesser of two evils means not throwing the huddled masses into and gutter and ensuring the freedom of all those who practice all religions, and especially since our Democratic presidents have done much more in terms of economy (The amount of jobs grew more under Carter than it did under both Bush's combined entire presidencies) and our financial health than any fucking Republican. The only reason Reagan even managed to create jobs is because he raised taxes, something the righties tend to forget.
When you stop being a silly goose?
Waaa waaa waa both sides are the same something something.
Been there, heard that before. Unfortunately for you, both sides are not actually the same.
Are you actually suggesting this is the position of the RNC. Not Rick Santorum, not whatever nutjobs in the deep, DEEP south hold legislative power - but the national agreed upon platform of conservatives nationwide. If you believe that, no wonder The Republican Threat keeps you awake at night.
These local/state policies will never be national policies and you know that, but I suppose it makes it easier to advance the Republican Threat to pretend otherwise.
I mean really, find me one prominent Republican advocating violence against pro-choicers. Jesus.
No of course not. Ideological fantaticism/obstructionism is a phenomenom that exists only on the right.
If you believe that abortion is murder, as most pro-lifers do, then murder of abortionists is implicitly justified.
How can I be like you ED!? How can I be secure in the knowledge the both sides are and forever will be the same? How can I dismiss the platform of the Republican Party as an irrelevant product of the party's fringe and live in an imaginary world where moderate Republicans and unicorns frolic amongst the trees?
Teach me, ED!. Teach me the ways of the BoBo.
Where in the Deep South do nutjobs not hold legislative power?
Oh I thought he was saying on a national scale. I was asking what nutjobs from the deep-south have any power on the national level.
Who knows - I don't have a southern legislature score-card. I'm fairly sure they exist and are keeping more than a few folk awake at night.
Show me on the RNC website, hell the website of any prominent conservative in Congress advocating a violent response to pro-choicers.
Or you can sit here clicking F5 waiting to get cutesy again. Both are excercises in futility of equal measure so. . .have at it.
Uhm, no. Virginia is not in any way shape or form "deep" in the south. It borders fucking DC. It's in the middle of the country. It's north of the Missouri Compromise Line.
This is important because I'm from NC and I will not fucking tolerate my state being lumped in with the deep south and goddammit Virginia quit being so fucking southern I want to be in the mid-atlantic region not the fucking south.
Okay I'm done now.
The platform of the Republican Party statement was directed toward your portrayal of the Republican party as anything other than reactionary, not at abortion specifically.
P.S. I use cmd-r, not F5.
P.P.S. I like your fancy new way of writing elipses. . .
Gee, Mitt Romney is about to be your Presidential nominee and wants to end funding for Planned Parenthood, supports personhood amendments, and supports the Blunt Amendment (after he was opposed to it, but you know, it's Mitt Romney). Speaking of the Blunt Amendment, all but one (specifically, the one y'all primaried last year) Republican Senator voted for it. That strikes me as a fair sampling of the national leadership of the Republican Party.
Argh, you're right. It was Snowe. Murkowski was so vocally critical of the thing afterwards I assumed she was being somewhat less hypocritical than usual.
It's one thing to not hate the republican agenda. It's another to pretend they aren't a real, serious threat to most functions and interests of the US at large, and many groups in particular. If they were members of an organization that used meritocracy and the established business plan/elementary goals rather than democracy as a basis for membership, they would have been long gone.
They can't do anything right. They can't improve anything. They see politics as a way to wage bloodless war.
Battlenet ID: MildC#11186 - If I'm in the game, send me an invite at anytime and I'll play.
The ethical thing is making the best choice for the country.
So we should stop Republican BS by...voting Republican? Do you listen to yourself?
Steam: pazython
Bill Ayers is a terrorist but an abortion clinic bomber isn't, the former was focusing on fighting against the government and the latter is focused on terrorizing the citizenry
I don't even know
I do. Obviously though you heard something completely different and not at all reflected in my comment.
More of those deep-south nutjobs.
The South is not a geographical location; it's a state of mind.
Truer words were never spoken. Take it from someone who lives in Tennessee
So if voting Democratic isn't the way to stop Republican goosery, what is?
Steam: pazython