Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

First 100 Days: Day 19 - Legal Conference. Without blackjack nor hookers.

monikermoniker Registered User regular
edited February 2009 in Debate and/or Discourse
And so it begins. What will be the first items accomplished? How good will they be or how much will they suck? Will bipartisanship actually occur or will logjams get broken by sheer force of will? When will Harry Reid buckle under and capitulate? And who will he capitulate to? What's going to happen in the Middle East? How many times will the talking heads talk about the historic nature of the first black President signing a bill into law, and the first black President vetoing a bill, and the first black President using a pocket veto, and the first black President having a ceremony on the south lawn, and the first black President to host a state dinner, and the first black President to raid the white house ice cream stash....

29whitehouse_600.jpg
Let's do this thing.


Politifact: List of campaign promises and their status.
Wikipedia Article on the time line of the administration.

Accomplishments thus far:
Executive Orders-
  • Requiring the closure of Guantanamo Detention Center within 1 year. [citation]
  • Establishing the Army Field Manual as the standard for interrogation techniques for everyone. [citation]
  • Closing the 'black sites' and putting a halt to extraordinary rendition, and ordinary rendition, of prisoners or detainees. [citation]
  • Freezing the pay for all White House Staff earning a salary of over $100k. [citation]
  • Banning gifts from lobbyists and preventing administration officials from working as lobbyists for two years after leaving the White House or until the Administration is ended. [citation]
  • Ending the 'global gag rule' and permitting government funding to clinics that provide abortions. [citation]
  • Favouring Union Labour in any large scale Federal construction work. [citation]

Legislation Signed into Law-
Legislation Vetoed-
  • None.

Regulations:
  • States allowed to set emission standards for vehicles. [citation]
  • Compensation restrictions on TARP recipients: [citation]
    No top executives will be paid more than $500,000 a year.
    Any additional compensation must be paid in restricted stock options that do not vest "until taxpayers have been paid back.''
    Restrictions on golden parachutes.
    "Say on pay" shareholder policies "to give a voice to average investors about salary structures for top executives.''
    Tougher "transparency rules,'' including on expenses such as aviation services, office renovations, entertainment and holiday parties, conferences and events.

moniker on
tea-1.jpg
«13456747

Posts

  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    tsmvengy wrote: »
    Well I don't think it will encourage more lawsuits since precedence was exactly what this bill says until the Supreme Court decided to throw precedence completely out the window in 2007.

    Well it's not like people who found out that they were discriminated against in pay weren't going to sue in the first place because they've been working there for years. The only thing that will really lead to more lawsuits (after/if the wave that might come as a result of this bill) would be more discriminatory pay that people can sue over.

    tea-1.jpg
  • ElJeffeElJeffe Super Moderator, Moderator, ClubPA mod
    edited January 2009
    moniker wrote: »
    moniker wrote: »
    Mei Hikari wrote: »
    The White House website, now with high-res photos:
    http://www.whitehouse.gov/assets/images/winter_storm_signature.jpg

    Dear god, you can see the outline of the greek key in the Resolute desk.

    Greek Key?

    0198606788.greek-key.1.jpg

    It's an ancient motif that symbolizes infinity. Most ornamented old buildings and furniture has it on it somewhere. The Resolute desk has it around the writing surface, and you get close enough in that resolution to see the indents.

    Architecture nerd. ^^^^^^

    Maddie: "I named my feet. The left one is flip and the right one is flop. Oh, and also I named my flip-flops."

    I make tweet.
  • OptimusZedOptimusZed Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    VeritasVR wrote: »
    I think the law will act more as a deterrant to companies to stop the unfair pay, not actually encourage more lawsuits like the opponents are saying.
    Either of those are awesome outcomes. One way, people aren't getting screwed. The other way, the people who screwed other people are paying for it.

    Win/win.

    We're reading Rifts. You should too. You know you want to. On Hiatus!

    Any gamers in the Danville, PA area? PM me if you're interested in some tabletop gaming.
  • VeritasVRVeritasVR Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    OptimusZed wrote: »
    VeritasVR wrote: »
    I think the law will act more as a deterrant to companies to stop the unfair pay, not actually encourage more lawsuits like the opponents are saying.
    Either of those are awesome outcomes. One way, people aren't getting screwed. The other way, the people who screwed other people are paying for it.

    Win/win.

    Exactly. Which is why the opponents (read: GOP) fail at simple logic.

    CoH_infantry.jpg
    Let 'em eat fucking pineapples!
  • ForarForar #432 Already prepping for Toronto Fan Expo!Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    Please excuse my ignorance as a filthy Canadian... but is that a painting of Lincoln in the OP pic?

    Because if it is, it strikes me as a wonderfully powerful shot; having him overlooking a meeting involving the first black president.

    sigone.png
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    Forar wrote: »
    Please excuse my ignorance as a filthy Canadian... but is that a painting of Lincoln in the OP pic?

    Because if it is, it strikes me as a wonderfully powerful shot; having him overlooking a meeting involving the first black president.

    It is. There's a painting of Washington over the fireplace. Which is basically true for all Presidencies, though the particular painting of each may change.

    tea-1.jpg
  • OptimusZedOptimusZed Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    Forar wrote: »
    Please excuse my ignorance as a filthy Canadian... but is that a painting of Lincoln in the OP pic?

    Because if it is, it strikes me as a wonderfully powerful shot; having him overlooking a meeting involving the first black president.
    That's a portrait of Lincoln, yes.

    I'm not familiar with the process of selecting that sort of thing, or if there are specific portraits that always hang in specific places.

    We're reading Rifts. You should too. You know you want to. On Hiatus!

    Any gamers in the Danville, PA area? PM me if you're interested in some tabletop gaming.
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    OptimusZed wrote: »
    Forar wrote: »
    Please excuse my ignorance as a filthy Canadian... but is that a painting of Lincoln in the OP pic?

    Because if it is, it strikes me as a wonderfully powerful shot; having him overlooking a meeting involving the first black president.
    That's a portrait of Lincoln, yes.

    I'm not familiar with the process of selecting that sort of thing, or if there are specific portraits that always hang in specific places.

    In the Oval Office it's up to the individual President, though Obama hasn't chosen new ones yet and Bush picked Washington and Lincoln. Presumably Lincoln would be staying put anyway. Otherwise some are (I think) permanently in certain rooms. Like the Roosevelt Room I think always had both Roosevelts and TR's Nobel Peace Prize.

    Lose: to suffer defeat, to misplace (Ex: "I hope I don't lose the match." "Did you lose your phone again?")
    Loose: about to slip, to release (Ex: "That knot is loose." "Loose arrows.")
  • HakkekageHakkekage Space Whore Academy summa cum laudeRegistered User regular
    edited January 2009
    Is the stimulus bill being debated in the Senate today, and if not, then when?

    3DS: 2165 - 6538 - 3417
  • TomantaTomanta Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    So stimulus package is being worked on in the senate, Ledbetter is signed (yay!), there are still a few outstanding appointments...

    Anyone know what else is being worked on right now?

    Edit for Hakkekage: I think it is going to be debated next week.

    camo_sig2.png
  • urahonkyurahonky Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    I thought it was approved..? With 100% republican rejection? Maybe I was just reading highlights or something.

    Games completed recently: Dragon's Crown, Knights of Pen and Paper, Castlevania: Symphony of the Night (20th time), Defender's Quest, The Witcher
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    SCHIP is also in the Senate currently. House is in recess til the 2nd. Holder confirmation I think scheduled for Monday.

    Lose: to suffer defeat, to misplace (Ex: "I hope I don't lose the match." "Did you lose your phone again?")
    Loose: about to slip, to release (Ex: "That knot is loose." "Loose arrows.")
  • TofystedethTofystedeth veni, veneri, vamoosi Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    Day 9 - Take Off Your Tie and Jacket
    but you can leave your hat on.

    steam_sig.png
  • Professor PhobosProfessor Phobos Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    urahonky wrote: »
    I thought it was approved..? With 100% republican rejection? Maybe I was just reading highlights or something.

    House passed it. Now it's going to the Senate, where changes will no doubt be made, kicked back to the House, etc. It'll be a few weks at the earliest before the package will actually be passed.

    We'll have to see if Senate Republicans are as loyal as House Republicans because it's 59 to 41...

  • OptimusZedOptimusZed Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    urahonky wrote: »
    I thought it was approved..? With 100% republican rejection? Maybe I was just reading highlights or something.
    It passed the House. Now it's in the Senate where it's going to get cut up and put back together a dozen different ways before being voted on and theoretically sent back to the House for them to ratify the alterations.

    We're reading Rifts. You should too. You know you want to. On Hiatus!

    Any gamers in the Danville, PA area? PM me if you're interested in some tabletop gaming.
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    urahonky wrote: »
    I thought it was approved..? With 100% republican rejection? Maybe I was just reading highlights or something.

    House passed it. Now it's going to the Senate, where changes will no doubt be made, kicked back to the House, etc. It'll be a few weks at the earliest before the package will actually be passed.

    We'll have to see if Senate Republicans are as loyal as House Republicans because it's 59 to 41...

    They're not.

    Lose: to suffer defeat, to misplace (Ex: "I hope I don't lose the match." "Did you lose your phone again?")
    Loose: about to slip, to release (Ex: "That knot is loose." "Loose arrows.")
  • PantsBPantsB Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    Henroid wrote: »
    OptimusZed wrote: »
    Olivaw wrote: »
    urahonky wrote: »
    Wow the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pair Act sounds great. Glad he signed it!

    Now I am no law expert

    But don't we already have like a billion of these laws already?

    Is this really gonna do anything for women getting paid less than men or is it another one of those symbolic gesture things?
    The Supreme Court ruled that the statute of limitations for noticing you're getting screwed and acting on it was based on the date of your first paycheck.

    It basically made any sort of institutionalized pay discrimination impossible to litigate against.

    C... can you put that into simpler terms?

    Like two years ago in Ledbetter v Goodyear, the SCOTUS ruled that even though the pay discrimination was ongoing, the plantiff (Ledbetter, thus the bill's name) could not sue because the statute of limitations said 180 days and the conservative majority chose to interpret that as from the first pay check instead of the clear meaning.

    11793-1.png
    Spoiler:
  • OptimusZedOptimusZed Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    On the "we need more former SNL cast members in Congress" front, we got this gem today;
    Friedberg: In point of fact, even though I did something I wasn't supposed to do with the application, my ballot should still count because my signature is genuine.

    Deputy Secretary of State Jim Gelbmann: Not according to the procedures we use to determine whether the signature is genuine.

    Friedberg: I don't care about your procedures.

    (Franken lawyer calls an objection, is sustained.)

    Friedberg: Okay, I do care...
    Coleman's lawyers are just coming out and saying it now; they don't really care about the law at this point.

    We're reading Rifts. You should too. You know you want to. On Hiatus!

    Any gamers in the Danville, PA area? PM me if you're interested in some tabletop gaming.
  • nexuscrawlernexuscrawler Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    The House is far more friendly to partisan hacks than the Senate.

    This bill has a lot of backing of the public. Any Senator of either party is going to have to justify not voting for it.

  • GoslingGosling Looking Up Soccer In Mongolia Right Now, Probably Watertown, WIRegistered User regular
    edited January 2009
    OptimusZed wrote: »
    urahonky wrote: »
    I thought it was approved..? With 100% republican rejection? Maybe I was just reading highlights or something.
    It passed the House. Now it's in the Senate where it's going to get cut up and put back together a dozen different ways before being voted on and theoretically sent back to the House for them to ratify the alterations.
    Problem is, that's not the vote everyone's going to remember. Even if someone does defect at the ratification stage, "UNANIMOUS OPPOSITION" is all anyone's going to notice come election time. Sticks in the mind real easy.

    I have a blog. Read it. Blog-reading makes you pretty and popular.
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    The House is far more friendly to partisan hacks than the Senate.

    This bill has a lot of backing of the public. Any Senator of either party is going to have to justify not voting for it.

    Especially the Senators in states Obama won that are running for re-election in 2010. Arlen Specter, come on down!

    Lose: to suffer defeat, to misplace (Ex: "I hope I don't lose the match." "Did you lose your phone again?")
    Loose: about to slip, to release (Ex: "That knot is loose." "Loose arrows.")
  • ShurakaiShurakai Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    From Politico 44:

    POTUS ON BONUSES: “That is the height of irresponsibility. It is shameful. And part of what we’re going to need is for folks on Wall Street who are asking for help to show some restraint, and show some discipline and show some sense of responsibility.”

    “There will be time for them to get bonuses. Now’s not that time,” he said.


    ...pwnt

  • ForarForar #432 Already prepping for Toronto Fan Expo!Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    They dealt with the head of Merril Lynch yesterday on the Daily Show, over his 1.x million dollar office improvement.

    I really hope Stewart goes to town on Citigroup for the plane fiasco, especially since it might be a little late in the day to get this in.

    sigone.png
  • AegisAegis Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    I was beginning to read a post linked to by Sullivan arguing that "it's good for democracy and government in general for the Republicans to be opposing Obama rather than just going along" (Sullivan seems to be taking a far more "there's nothing inherently wrong in just opposing for opposing's sake" lately on the part of the GOP which seems rather fruitless) before I got to the end and the bio of the author mentioned he works for the CATO institute.

    Sigh.

  • TofystedethTofystedeth veni, veneri, vamoosi Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    Shurakai wrote: »
    From Politico 44:

    POTUS ON BONUSES: “That is the height of irresponsibility. It is shameful. And part of what we’re going to need is for folks on Wall Street who are asking for help to show some restraint, and show some discipline and show some sense of responsibility.”

    “There will be time for them to get bonuses. Now’s not that time,” he said.


    ...pwnt
    Like, for a couple of years could you maybe settle for affluence instead of opulence?

    steam_sig.png
  • CommunistCowCommunistCow Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    Shurakai wrote: »
    From Politico 44:

    POTUS ON BONUSES: “That is the height of irresponsibility. It is shameful. And part of what we’re going to need is for folks on Wall Street who are asking for help to show some restraint, and show some discipline and show some sense of responsibility.”

    “There will be time for them to get bonuses. Now’s not that time,” he said.


    ...pwnt

    We need to have a new cabinet position called Secretary of Stabbing Stupid and/or Greedy People.

    No, I am not really communist. Yes, it is weird that I use this name.
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    Shurakai wrote: »
    From Politico 44:

    POTUS ON BONUSES: “That is the height of irresponsibility. It is shameful. And part of what we’re going to need is for folks on Wall Street who are asking for help to show some restraint, and show some discipline and show some sense of responsibility.”

    “There will be time for them to get bonuses. Now’s not that time,” he said.


    ...pwnt
    Like, for a couple of years could you maybe settle for affluence instead of opulence?

    Well, there is a good argument to be made that bonuses ensure you get the best and the brightest working for you which is what those firms desperately need right now. Those best and brightest just don't appear to actually be working there, though, to be given a bonus in order to keep them.

    tea-1.jpg
  • nexuscrawlernexuscrawler Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    moniker wrote: »
    Shurakai wrote: »
    From Politico 44:

    POTUS ON BONUSES: “That is the height of irresponsibility. It is shameful. And part of what we’re going to need is for folks on Wall Street who are asking for help to show some restraint, and show some discipline and show some sense of responsibility.”

    “There will be time for them to get bonuses. Now’s not that time,” he said.


    ...pwnt
    Like, for a couple of years could you maybe settle for affluence instead of opulence?

    Well, there is a good argument to be made that bonuses ensure you get the best and the brightest working for you which is what those firms desperately need right now. Those best and brightest just don't appear to actually be working there, though, to be given a bonus in order to keep them.

    The saddest part is entire sub-industries have spring up based on these people's earning and bonuses

    it is not a good time to be a 200 dollar a plate caterer right now I tell ya what

  • PantsBPantsB Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    Shurakai wrote: »
    From Politico 44:

    POTUS ON BONUSES: “That is the height of irresponsibility. It is shameful. And part of what we’re going to need is for folks on Wall Street who are asking for help to show some restraint, and show some discipline and show some sense of responsibility.”

    “There will be time for them to get bonuses. Now’s not that time,” he said.


    ...pwnt

    We need to have a new cabinet position called Secretary of Stabbing Stupid and/or Greedy People.

    Those responsibilities have already been divvied up
    Spoiler:

    edit
    The saddest part is entire sub-industries have spring up based on these people's earning and bonuses

    it is not a good time to be a 200 dollar a plate caterer right now I tell ya what

    The three jobs I did on the side in college - Private SAT Tutor for the rich (they paid me 18 and hour and the company $90+ an hour), wedding waiter/catering worker (once did a Mormon-Hindi wedding at a mansion on the Cape that cost $500K reception for less than 200 guests), and the corporate office for Talbots/working the phones during catalog sale season (a clothing company essentially designed for rich middle aged suburbanite women which is currently in the crapper). I would not be doing well if this had hit 5 years ago

    11793-1.png
    Spoiler:
  • sterling3763sterling3763 Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    When does the Senate vote on the stimulus?

  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    Unknown, maybe next week sometime.

    Lose: to suffer defeat, to misplace (Ex: "I hope I don't lose the match." "Did you lose your phone again?")
    Loose: about to slip, to release (Ex: "That knot is loose." "Loose arrows.")
  • sterling3763sterling3763 Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    thanks. Just wanted to make sure I wasn't missing the action.

  • lonelyahavalonelyahava One day, I will be able to say to myself "I am beautiful and I am perfect just the way I am"Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    So, Specter, Snowe, Collins...

    Anybody else think they can name Republicans that will vote with the Dems on this bill?

    Anybody think that there will be a Dem that's crazy enough to go against the grain and vote against it?

    My Little Corner of the World || I am ravelried! || My Steam!
    You have to fight through some bad days, to earn the best days of your life.
  • AegisAegis Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    Anybody think that there will be a Dem that's crazy enough to go against the grain and vote against it?

    They'll be dragging out the guillotine if Dems voting against it cause it to fail to pass.

  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    Evan Bayh would be the one to watch out for. He's the biggest deficit hawk in Senate Democrats wise. I'll go with Specter, Snowe, Collins and three others that I haven't decided on. It passes 64-35.

    Lose: to suffer defeat, to misplace (Ex: "I hope I don't lose the match." "Did you lose your phone again?")
    Loose: about to slip, to release (Ex: "That knot is loose." "Loose arrows.")
  • PantsBPantsB Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    Evan Bayh would be the one to watch out for. He's the biggest deficit hawk in Senate Democrats wise. I'll go with Specter, Snowe, Collins and three others that I haven't decided on. It passes 64-35.

    I'd say Baucus is to his right fiscally. But I think they'll hold the party line on HR 1 and there will be a least 4 GOP defectors

    11793-1.png
    Spoiler:
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    Family planning aid to be put back in something, possibly as early next week.

    Lose: to suffer defeat, to misplace (Ex: "I hope I don't lose the match." "Did you lose your phone again?")
    Loose: about to slip, to release (Ex: "That knot is loose." "Loose arrows.")
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    PantsB wrote: »
    Evan Bayh would be the one to watch out for. He's the biggest deficit hawk in Senate Democrats wise. I'll go with Specter, Snowe, Collins and three others that I haven't decided on. It passes 64-35.

    I'd say Baucus is to his right fiscally. But I think they'll hold the party line on HR 1 and there will be a least 4 GOP defectors

    I dunno, Baucus seems willing to spend if it's on the right thing. From what I've read his health care proposal is pretty well to the left of Obama's.

    Lose: to suffer defeat, to misplace (Ex: "I hope I don't lose the match." "Did you lose your phone again?")
    Loose: about to slip, to release (Ex: "That knot is loose." "Loose arrows.")
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    Yay! Samantha Power is getting a job in the White House.

    Lose: to suffer defeat, to misplace (Ex: "I hope I don't lose the match." "Did you lose your phone again?")
    Loose: about to slip, to release (Ex: "That knot is loose." "Loose arrows.")
«13456747
This discussion has been closed.