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.

2456747

Posts

  • 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.")
  • The Raging PlatypusThe Raging Platypus Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    Yay! Samantha Power is getting a job in the White House.

    YES! :^:

    I was really hoping this would happen.

    Spoiler:
  • IntangirIntangir Registered User
    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.

    Okay, yes, that is how Wall Street works. In order to acquire and keep talent, they pay moderate (speaking very relatively here) salaries and enormous bonuses when things are good. Things are not good. If your company royally screws up and loses billions upon billions of dollars to the point that they need billions upon billions from taxpayers, you do not 'reward' your employees with billions upon billions in bonuses, nor do you spend $1,200,000 remodeling your already opulent office.

    Besides, where would these people go to get jobs if they didn't get their bonuses? All of those firms are experiencing the same problems, and saying 'hey I just came from a failed company, and I'm a pompous jerk who left because I didn't get my bonus' is not gonna look good in an interview.

  • Grim SqueakerGrim Squeaker Registered User
    edited January 2009
    Yay! Samantha Power is getting a job in the White House.

    Hell yeah
    :^:

  • nexuscrawlernexuscrawler Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    Yay! Samantha Power is getting a job in the White House.

    Hell yeah
    :^:

    hehehe in foreign relations no less!

  • AegisAegis Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    Yay! Samantha Power is getting a job in the White House.

    Hell yeah
    :^:

    hehehe in foreign relations no less!

    Oh god yes this is awesome news. She's perfect for the job in multilateral affairs and hopefully something to do with the UN.

  • werehippywerehippy Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    Aegis wrote: »
    Yay! Samantha Power is getting a job in the White House.

    Hell yeah
    :^:

    hehehe in foreign relations no less!

    Oh god yes this is awesome news. She's perfect for the job in multilateral affairs and hopefully something to do with the UN.

    This is pretty fantastic.

  • ScalfinScalfin __BANNED USERS regular
    edited January 2009
    werehippy wrote: »
    Aegis wrote: »
    Yay! Samantha Power is getting a job in the White House.

    Hell yeah
    :^:

    hehehe in foreign relations no less!

    Oh god yes this is awesome news. She's perfect for the job in multilateral affairs and hopefully something to do with the UN.

    This is pretty fantastic.

    I want her to play The Monster Mash next time Clinton is in her office.

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    The rest of you, I fucking hate you for the fact that I now have a blue dot on this god awful thread.
  • ShadowfireShadowfire Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    werehippy wrote: »
    Aegis wrote: »
    Yay! Samantha Power is getting a job in the White House.

    Hell yeah
    :^:

    hehehe in foreign relations no less!

    Oh god yes this is awesome news. She's perfect for the job in multilateral affairs and hopefully something to do with the UN.

    This is pretty fantastic.

    I had to read her book for my history class last year... I enjoyed it quite a bit.

    Well, as much as one can enjoy a book all about genocide in the past century. :|

    steam_sig.png
    WiiU: Windrunner ; Guild Wars 2: Shadowfire.3940 ; PSN: Bradcopter
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    SCHIP expansion passed in the Senate. Yay.

    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.")
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    And we're making overtures to Iran. Which is great, because I'd love to travel to Tehran and Persepolis someday. Persia just seems so exotic.

    tea-1.jpg
  • Ain SophAin Soph Registered User
    edited January 2009
    moniker wrote: »
    And we're making overtures to Iran. Which is great, because I'd love to travel to Tehran and Persepolis someday. Persia just seems so exotic.

    Watch this http://www.ricksteves.com/iran/. It's interesting as hell. Made my rather ignorant father change his mind about Iran when he saw the whole thing.

    :whistle:
  • EmperorSethEmperorSeth Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    Any word on DADT yet? I know Obama plans to address it early, but I don't know when.

    EmperorSeth.png
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    Any word on DADT yet? I know Obama plans to address it early, but I don't know when.

    It will be repealed...at some point. I think they want to do it via legislation so the next President couldn't just repeal it.

    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.")
  • CygnusZCygnusZ Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    I'm sorry, does anybody have a link to a summary of Obama's proposed stimulus bill? My google-fu is failing me.

This discussion has been closed.