The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
Huh! Bipartisanship! What is it good for?
jungleroomx
It's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered User regular
It's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered User regular
Absolutely nothing?
With all of this talk of bipartisan this, we need to people to reach across the asile that, I have sat back and given just a cursory glance back at what bipartisanship has gotten us.
Bank deregulation.
NAFTA.
This current economic bailout.
The Patriot Act.
Support for the Iraq war.
This is for those more informed, and I'm trying to figure this out for myself as well: Has there actually been anything good to come out of bipartisan legislative efforts? I mean, common sense initiatives are one thing. But I mean serious, sweeping legislation.
With all of this talk of bipartisan this, we need to people to reach across the asile that, I have sat back and given just a cursory glance back at what bipartisanship has gotten us.
Bank deregulation.
NAFTA.
This current economic bailout.
The Patriot Act.
Support for the Iraq war.
This is for those more informed, and I'm trying to figure this out for myself as well: Has there actually been anything good to come out of bipartisan legislative efforts? I mean, common sense initiatives are one thing. But I mean serious, sweeping legislation.
jungleroomx on
0
Posts
That's seriously what it's starting to sound like to me.
NAFTA is not without its problems, of course, but overall I believe it's been a net economic positive for our three countries.
But those are individual instances. In more broad, general terms, what bipartisanship gives you is a climate where both parties cooperate for the benefit of America. As opposed to what you've had for the past decade, which is two parties vilifying each other and fostering a climate of divisiveness and hatred for the other side in the public, with the sole objective of wrestling power away from the other side and no regard for America.
I know there are good folks with good ideas, but they don't decide what gets made into law by themselves. I'm sure a lot of great bipartisan ideas have been reforged into total fuckwittery in the ideals that these legislators are really reaching across the asile and working together!
The puppies example is perfect.
I know what the definition of bipartisan is, but the end results seem to be more "Hey, we removed that thing that actually works and replaced it with this limp-wristed initiative that's all lip service, then added this sweet benefit that will totally help out our side. Now you can put another totally sweet benefit for your side and slash something we think will be effective down to a near irrelevant level. Bipartisanship feels so good!" as opposed to people actually working together.
A compromise is a settlement that neither side is happy with.
So, you know, like the SPCA.
So one side should have their way completely so at least a few people are happy?
If Obama wins, and there's a Democrat super-majority in Congress, they should just force-feed the pubs yards and yards of liberalfaeces for 4+ years, for as long as they can get away with it. Why not? Where was the bipartisanship under Dubya, Aitch, or Raygun?
Man spite is totally awesome you guys
We should absolutely cram everything imaginable we could ever dream of down the Republican's throat
I'm certain that that will improve the level of political discourse in the nation and that it totally just won't be repealed out of hand when the pendulum swings back
On no they might repeal. Just like the Democrats don't every blue moon they find themselves been handed the controls.
Dubya has spent the last the last 8 years sterilizing the common ground, I can see little to no benfit to the Dems wandering around spreading sweetness and light over it without first taking at least a few steps to bed in their agenda to some degree.
My argument is this - if, on the 5th of November, the Dems find themselves in the possession of an actual honest to gawd position of power, I'd like them to actually exercise it in accordance with the principles they espouse, as opposed to spend 3 to 3.5 years umming and ahhing about obsessing about how the wrong-wing feels about it. Because they sure as shit wouldn't reciprocate.
Of course I'm posting drunk, so I'm perfectly willing to accept that this may not be the most temperate course of action. How liberal am I - trying to to talk myself into "reasonableness" even when in a drunken grump.
Frankly only one man should get to decide what happens.
And he should be white, and male.
So you know, we don't have to worry about compromise.
Being in the majority means that they can shut the hell up.
Unfortunately the Republicans have gone bat shit crazy with power.
Oh wow. As someone known for my bad jokes, that one floored me.
To take this simple analogy and expand on it, lets say the far left says 'no puppies should ever die... EVER' and leave it at that. Then the less far left says, 'most puppies shouldn't die unless they kill a person'. Then you have the even less far left that says, 'puppies that don't kill people and don't have incurable deseases.' And so on and so forth down the political line until you get to 'all puppies should die' people. So obviously not one of those positions is going to have the manpower to pass a law and hello compromise.
I just think it's fucked that xenophobia exists when talking about people from your country or, hell, your own state, simply because they're red or blue. It's a fucking shame, and Washington was right when he said that political parties will destroy this country.
In the US at the moment it's never going to be more than, say, a 60-40 mandate in your favour, mind.
If the President is on your side, given that sixty is the number required to block a filibuster, that's mandate enough.
Barack Obama is ashamed of you.
I found that out in the penis thread.
The Forestry Industry* of Northern Ontario/BC would like to have a word with you, but unfortunately have no more presence left there to speak from.
* Notwithstanding their incredibly inflexible nature to adapt to new situations and their insistence of using horrible business practises that are completely unable to be supported (ie- paying their employees $Texas) in reality. Not naming names. Hai Kimberely Clark.
Currently DMing: None
Characters
[5e] Dural Melairkyn - AC 18 | HP 40 | Melee +5/1d8+3 | Spell +4/DC 12
As I recall, NAFTA wasn't the problem, it was somebody bitching in Congress and convincing the right people to violate NAFTA that was the problem.