Don't like the snow? You can make a bookmark with the following text instead of a url: javascript:snowStorm.toggleSnow(). Clicking it will toggle the snow on and off.
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!

Sen. Ted Kennedy dies at 77

2456789

Posts

  • HachfaceHachface Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    They gave him like six months a year ago, as I recall.

    Pfft. Doctors always give low estimates on these things.

    Does Kennedy qualify for a state funeral?

  • SenjutsuSenjutsu fiddy too Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    They gave him like six months a year ago, as I recall.

    at the time it seemed unlikely he would live to see the election, and then it seemed unlikely he'd make it to the inauguration

    dude was a fighter

    Sarksus wrote: »
    I'm gonna get a PhD in incest.
  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    They gave him like six months a year ago, as I recall.
    Yeah, but he was Ted Kennedy; you don't really think of him as mortal like the rest of us.

  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    The Kennedy family releases an official statement.
    Edward M. Kennedy -- the husband, father, grandfather, brother and uncle we loved so deeply -- died late Tuesday night at home in Hyannis Port.

    "We've lost the irreplaceable center of our family and joyous light in our lives, but the inspiration of his faith, optimism, and perseverance will live on in our hearts forever.

    "We thank everyone who gave him care and support over this last year, and everyone who stood with him for so many years in his tireless march for progress toward justice, fairness and opportunity for all.

    "He loved this country and devoted his life to serving it.

    "He always believed that our best days were still ahead, but it's hard to imagine any of them without him.

    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum
    Spoiler:
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    Hachface wrote: »
    Does Kennedy qualify for a state funeral?

    It would require a resolution in the Congress, but wouldn't be out of the question. Assuming the family would actually want another one.

    tea-1.jpg
  • Nimble CatNimble Cat Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    He lived a fulfilling life.

  • HachfaceHachface Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    moniker wrote: »
    Hachface wrote: »
    Does Kennedy qualify for a state funeral?

    It would require a resolution in the Congress, but wouldn't be out of the question. Assuming the family would actually want another one.

    I'd bet money on Congress giving him one.

  • Clutch414Clutch414 Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    Well, since the Massachusetts legislature seems cool to the idea of changing the law back (meaning that there will only be 59 Dems in the Senate for the near future) this makes using the "nuclear option" of passing health care through budget reconciliation a much greater possibility. No Republicans are going to vote for the bill anyways, save for Olympia Snowe, but she would most likely vote against a bill containing a public option.

    Using the budget reconcilliation process the bill would only require 50 votes in the Senate with VP Biden casting the tie break.

    I think this puts the public option squarely back on the table in the Senate. Last I heard was that the public option had around 40 votes in the senate (Chuck Todd on Real Time FWIW). If that's true (not saying it is) that means that the Dem leadership would only need flip 10 Dem senators that are on the proverbial fence, instead of 20 to get the bill through the normal process.

    September should be pretty interesting.

  • AridholAridhol Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
  • AridholAridhol Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    Clutch414 wrote: »
    Well, since the Massachusetts legislature seems cool to the idea of changing the law back (meaning that there will only be 59 Dems in the Senate for the near future) this makes using the "nuclear option" of passing health care through budget reconciliation a much greater possibility. No Republicans are going to vote for the bill anyways, save for Olympia Snowe, but she would most likely vote against a bill containing a public option.

    Using the budget reconcilliation process the bill would only require 50 votes in the Senate with VP Biden casting the tie break.

    I think this puts the public option squarely back on the table in the Senate. Last I heard was that the public option had around 40 votes in the senate (Chuck Todd on Real Time FWIW). If that's true (not saying it is) that means that the Dem leadership would only need flip 10 Dem senators that are on the proverbial fence, instead of 20 to get the bill through the normal process.

    September should be pretty interesting.


    Ted Kennedy Memorial Health Care Reform?

  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    Hachface wrote: »
    moniker wrote: »
    Hachface wrote: »
    Does Kennedy qualify for a state funeral?

    It would require a resolution in the Congress, but wouldn't be out of the question. Assuming the family would actually want another one.

    I'd bet money on Congress giving him one.

    And do it unanimously. Seriously, this is only below the "Puppies and Kittens Are Awesome Act of 2009" when it comes to slam dunks.

    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum
    Spoiler:
  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    Aridhol wrote: »
    Clutch414 wrote: »
    Well, since the Massachusetts legislature seems cool to the idea of changing the law back (meaning that there will only be 59 Dems in the Senate for the near future) this makes using the "nuclear option" of passing health care through budget reconciliation a much greater possibility. No Republicans are going to vote for the bill anyways, save for Olympia Snowe, but she would most likely vote against a bill containing a public option.

    Using the budget reconcilliation process the bill would only require 50 votes in the Senate with VP Biden casting the tie break.

    I think this puts the public option squarely back on the table in the Senate. Last I heard was that the public option had around 40 votes in the senate (Chuck Todd on Real Time FWIW). If that's true (not saying it is) that means that the Dem leadership would only need flip 10 Dem senators that are on the proverbial fence, instead of 20 to get the bill through the normal process.

    September should be pretty interesting.


    Ted Kennedy Memorial Health Care Reform?

    When it's signed into law, it WILL have Ted's name on it. It would be the memorial he earned, and the one he deserves.

    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum
    Spoiler:
  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    Hachface wrote: »
    moniker wrote: »
    Hachface wrote: »
    Does Kennedy qualify for a state funeral?
    It would require a resolution in the Congress, but wouldn't be out of the question. Assuming the family would actually want another one.
    I'd bet money on Congress giving him one.
    And do it unanimously. Seriously, this is only below the "Puppies and Kittens Are Awesome Act of 2009" when it comes to slam dunks.
    You'll have a bunch of Southern cunts voting against it to score points with the Retarded Right.

  • themightypuckthemightypuck MontanaRegistered User regular
    edited August 2009
    I guess this might be off topic, but vis health care what are the Mass rules about appointing a new Senator?

    “Reject your sense of injury and the injury itself disappears.”
    ― Marcus Aurelius
  • LightRiderLightRider __BANNED USERS
    edited August 2009
  • HachfaceHachface Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    I guess this might be off topic, but vis health care what are the Mass rules about appointing a new Senator?

    Special election, but that's a new rule they invented circa 2004 to prevent Mitt Romney from ever appointing a Senator.

    So they might change it back to governor appointment. No really, they might. They're being that transparent.

  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    I guess this might be off topic, but vis health care what are the Mass rules about appointing a new Senator?

    Changed in 2004 (to make sure Mittens wouldn't be allowed to appoint Kerry's replacement had he won the election) to a special election to be held not more than 180 days after the vacancy has occurs.

    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum
    Spoiler:
  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    Hachface wrote: »
    I guess this might be off topic, but vis health care what are the Mass rules about appointing a new Senator?
    Special election, but that's a new rule they invented circa 2004 to prevent Mitt Romney from ever appointing a Senator.

    So they might change it back to governor appointment. No really, they might. They're being that transparent.
    Massachusetts is a one-party state. They can do pretty much whatever they want.

  • Clutch414Clutch414 Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    I guess this might be off topic, but vis health care what are the Mass rules about appointing a new Senator?

    There's a link in the OP, but due to a 2004 law change the successor is now chosen by special election. So only 59 Dems in the senate for the near future due to the logistics of putting on a special election.

  • HachfaceHachface Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Hachface wrote: »
    I guess this might be off topic, but vis health care what are the Mass rules about appointing a new Senator?
    Special election, but that's a new rule they invented circa 2004 to prevent Mitt Romney from ever appointing a Senator.

    So they might change it back to governor appointment. No really, they might. They're being that transparent.
    Massachusetts is a one-party state. They can do pretty much whatever they want.

    Oh I miss it so.

  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum
    Spoiler:
  • deadonthestreetdeadonthestreet Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    The way it should work is a temporary appointment, approved by the state congress, followed by a special election within three months.

  • HachfaceHachface Registered User regular
    edited August 2009

    You just know the obituary writer has been dying to see this published. I'm sure it's his/her masterpiece.

  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    The way it should work is a temporary appointment, approved by the state congress, followed by a special election within three months.

    Yes, but really - would you want to give even a temp appointment to Mittens?

    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum
    Spoiler:
  • SenjutsuSenjutsu fiddy too Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    Hachface wrote: »

    You just know the obituary writer has been dying to see this published. I'm sure it's his/her masterpiece.

    undoubtedly he's spent months rewriting and polishing it

    Sarksus wrote: »
    I'm gonna get a PhD in incest.
  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum
    Spoiler:
  • deadonthestreetdeadonthestreet Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    The way it should work is a temporary appointment, approved by the state congress, followed by a special election within three months.

    Yes, but really - would you want to give even a temp appointment to Mittens?
    I was pretty ok with Willard's tenure here, actually. It wasn't until he got on the national stage that he turned completely stupid. He was a better than competent governor.

  • HachfaceHachface Registered User regular
    edited August 2009

    Was there an entire department at the Times preparing for this man's death?

    (probably)

  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    GQ wrote:
    Even a partial listing of the major bills in whose passage Kennedy has played a part is impressive. Whether you admire them or not, these are the measures that transformed—mostly liberalized—America in our time: the first Immigration Reform Act; the Voting Rights Act and its extensions; the Freedom of Information Act; the Gun Control Act; the Campaign Financing Reform law; the Comprehensive Selective Service Reform Act; the Eighteen-Year-Old Vote law; the Occupational Safety and Health Act; the War on Cancer bills; the recodification of federal criminal laws; the Bilingual Education Act; the Fair Housing Acts; the Age Discrimination Act; the Airline and Trucking Deregulation bills; the Job Training Partnership Act; the South African sanctions; and the Grove City Civil Rights Restoration Act.

    Far more than either of his brothers, who were lackluster senators, Kennedy, over the past three decades, has been responsible for changes in the complexion of this country and in the lives of its citizens. He has been an ally of blacks, American Indians, the poor, the sick, the aged, the mentally ill, starving refugees worldwide and immigrants. He has been an outspoken liberal, unafraid to take the controversial positions—on issues such as busing, abortion, gun control, the Vietnam War (late but forcefully), the nuclear freeze and capital punishment—that other senators clearly avoided.

    Fuck. Other senators wish they were half as effective as Ted.

    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum
    Spoiler:
  • Eat it You Nasty Pig.Eat it You Nasty Pig. tell homeland security 'we are the bomb'Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    It's sort of funny, how history has forgotten how close Ted Kennedy was to becoming President Kennedy v2.0. If not for the unfortunate episode with his car, a bridge and that young woman, he very probably would've been.

    gkcmatch_zps97480250.jpg
    remember pluto? Once a planet but now a pseudo
    funny how information changes the facts that you know
  • HachfaceHachface Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    Dyscord wrote: »
    It's sort of funny, how history has forgotten how close Ted Kennedy was to becoming President Kennedy v2.0. If not for the unfortunate episode with his car, a bridge and that young woman, he very probably would've been.

    Really this universe came extremely close to having three President Kennedys.

  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    Dyscord wrote: »
    It's sort of funny, how history has forgotten how close Ted Kennedy was to becoming President Kennedy v2.0. If not for the unfortunate episode with his car, a bridge and that young woman, he very probably would've been.

    And you know, I think he did more for the country in the Senate then he ever could have as President.

    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum
    Spoiler:
  • themightypuckthemightypuck MontanaRegistered User regular
    edited August 2009
    It seems to me that Mass should be able and want to appoint a new Senator fast. Why would any state want to lose a vote in the Senate?

    “Reject your sense of injury and the injury itself disappears.”
    ― Marcus Aurelius
  • Eat it You Nasty Pig.Eat it You Nasty Pig. tell homeland security 'we are the bomb'Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    Dyscord wrote: »
    It's sort of funny, how history has forgotten how close Ted Kennedy was to becoming President Kennedy v2.0. If not for the unfortunate episode with his car, a bridge and that young woman, he very probably would've been.

    And you know, I think he did more for the country in the Senate then he ever could have as President.

    It's impossible to really say of course, but if he beats Nixon in 72 or Ford in 76, who knows how things turn out? Would Reagan have won if he faced Kennedy instead of a crippled Jimmy Carter?

    gkcmatch_zps97480250.jpg
    remember pluto? Once a planet but now a pseudo
    funny how information changes the facts that you know
  • HachfaceHachface Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    Dyscord wrote: »
    Dyscord wrote: »
    It's sort of funny, how history has forgotten how close Ted Kennedy was to becoming President Kennedy v2.0. If not for the unfortunate episode with his car, a bridge and that young woman, he very probably would've been.

    And you know, I think he did more for the country in the Senate then he ever could have as President.

    It's impossible to really say of course, but if he beats Nixon in 72 or Ford in 76, who knows how things turn out? Would Reagan have won if he faced Kennedy instead of a crippled Jimmy Carter?

    Oh man that would have been an epic election.

  • themightypuckthemightypuck MontanaRegistered User regular
    edited August 2009
    Reagan was a sure thing in 80.

    “Reject your sense of injury and the injury itself disappears.”
    ― Marcus Aurelius
  • EvanderEvander Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    Hachface wrote: »
    Dyscord wrote: »
    It's sort of funny, how history has forgotten how close Ted Kennedy was to becoming President Kennedy v2.0. If not for the unfortunate episode with his car, a bridge and that young woman, he very probably would've been.

    Really this universe came extremely close to having three President Kennedys.

    And instead we never had a President Kennedy who completed a full term.

    Odd how things work out.

    georgersig.jpg
  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    Reagan was a sure thing in 80.

    No, not really. Why do you think the story of the October Surprise persists?

    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum
    Spoiler:
  • themightypuckthemightypuck MontanaRegistered User regular
    edited August 2009
    Reagan was a sure thing in 80.

    No, not really. Why do you think the story of the October Surprise persists?

    Lousy polling? In any case I'm not saying the Reagan was a sure thing regardless of circumstances, I'm just saying Reagan would have beat any Democrat given the existing circumstances.

    “Reject your sense of injury and the injury itself disappears.”
    ― Marcus Aurelius
  • Eat it You Nasty Pig.Eat it You Nasty Pig. tell homeland security 'we are the bomb'Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    I don't really buy that. Reagan only won by eight points, and Carter was a spectacularly terrible politician considering the level he ascended to.

    Sort of more interesting to think about what the result of a Kennedy win in 72 might've been. Watergate never happens, the Great Society keeps chugging along, and nearly an entire generation develops a different view about government.

    gkcmatch_zps97480250.jpg
    remember pluto? Once a planet but now a pseudo
    funny how information changes the facts that you know
Sign In or Register to comment.