Your "ramming shit through" was entirely because of your party's (you seem to be a Republican) inability to bargain in good faith, c.f. the health-care debate, where Dems would give an inch to court GOP votes, the GOP would say "hee, just kidding, but if you'll give me/this/ I'll vote for you", ad nauseam, and we ended up with a shitty law.
After that, I frankly can't blame 'em for not letting the Republicans offer amendments, especially after some that were done for political points, e.g. so that some challenger could say "the incumbent voted to let incarcerated sex offenders have Viagra!", even though that amendment was attached to a wholly unrelated bill.
As to not being able to read stuff? I take it you've never head of thomas.loc.gov, and that excuse is the same one your senators used to cry about the START treaty they'd had several months to read.
You're still a tool, and you're enabling the Republican Temper Tantrum.
Seriously. I thought that Kerry was either the worst or second-worst of the stable of Dem candidates in early '04, and couldn't at all fathom why people voted him to be the nominee.
You must be one of those Beck-watching morons too.
The President has nothing to do with the amendment process. An amendment makes its way through congress, gets passed, and then enough of the state legislatures have to approve it as well. The most Wilson could do was lobby for it.
When the Senate Republicans all vote as a bloc to say "we're going to filibuster this, now you need 60 votes to pass", then that's a filibuster, no matter how you'd like to pretend otherwise.
The ordinary state of affairs for most bills is that you must have a majority (51) votes to pass them, but the Republicans were so butt-hurt about losing in '08 that they did everything they could to stall what they didn't like, including abusing the filibuster, holds, and secret holds.
The Democrats saying "OK, we're going through the motions and we'll make you vote to end cloture for all of these" would be playing right into their hands; the Republican game this whole time has been to run out the clock until they could get some more votes after an election. So instead of pointlessly wasting time, they tried to get something else done, but the GOP just kept screaming "no!" and filibustering.
Yes. Back in '08 NPR went around interviewing people about the presidential race. Sometime late in the year they interviewed these Texas Baptists and asked what they thought about McCain and Obama:
One of their females said that that she'd hold her nose and vote for McCain, because even though he's a "liberal", Obama's an "ultra liberal".
One suspects she hasn't changed her mind in the past two years, or rather that she's still being spoon-fed the same pap by Fox &c.
Bull-fucking-shit. They filibustered all the time - there were countless Senate votes that were basically along party lines - 59-41 - and this wasn't enough to avoid the "automatic" Republican filibuster.
Fact: Senator Blowhard doesn't have to stand up and read from the phonebook anymore to infinitely prolong debate on a bill (unless maybe he's in the majority party). You just need enough minority senators say that they'll filibuster, and bam, your bill is dead. Given that the Republicans, bless their simple minds, will usually vote lockstep, this means that they had a very successful 2-year-long tantrum, and we rewarded them for it.
As it is, in the primaries you pick either the "electable" one who's milquetoast enough to draw a few votes away from the other party (usually the Dems will do this), or you get the fringe candidate who gives the base a huge boner (Republicans). Neither results in someone who's actually a good candidate.
I promise you that the elected teabaggers won't be as effective as they think they'll be, and they'll end up getting corrupted by Washington soon enough ayway.
I'd love it if the Republicans actually stood for anything[1] besides enriching the wealthy and powerful while keeping the base scared and angry enough to vote for them, but I just don't see it happening with the current party leadership. Given that the previous party leadership from the late Bush days is still in place... the teabaggers just aren't going to change much.
They already do that to some extent. The party elites choose who they'll even allow to run under their party's banner, then we're allowed the illusion of choice during the primaries.
But as a sidebar I just want to point out how lame "college" has become. It used to be for those serious about their education or the academic subjects, but now it is just another mandatory level of education with the same behavioural problems from those who really have no wish to be in attendance. The fact that we're talking about treating 19 to 24 year olds like small children should tell you how silly the situation is becoming.
It's because one can't get a decent white-collar job in the USA these days without a college diploma. HR departments all use that diploma as a filter to reduce their workload, so anyone who doesn't want to work on those fast-disappearing factory floors or have a career at McDonald's needs to go to college.
I don't know what the exact cause of this is - if it's the well-intentioned GI Bill that got the WWII generation their college degrees, if they wanted them, or something else entirely.
It's distributed under the GPL and there are no ROM files, as such, included with it.
Back in the day, Apple was really open about their design; they'd even post ROM listings. With all that information, perhaps the project reverse-engineered the ROMs, or Apple was cool with them including 30-year-old software that they had no hope of making a single dollar on ever again.
I very much doubt your putative school district would have anything to worry about. Further, I doubt they'd go to the trouble of using an emulator; more likely they'd teach the kids Visual Basic or AppleScript or Python.
Let's not kid ourselves: old line-number BASIC without any sort of proper text editor is a nasty and frustrating way to learn programming. I was there.
Slashdot Mirror
You can tell a Fox News viewer, but you can't tell him much.
Wrong.
Your "ramming shit through" was entirely because of your party's (you seem to be a Republican) inability to bargain in good faith, c.f. the health-care debate, where Dems would give an inch to court GOP votes, the GOP would say "hee, just kidding, but if you'll give me /this/ I'll vote for you", ad nauseam, and we ended up with a shitty law.
After that, I frankly can't blame 'em for not letting the Republicans offer amendments, especially after some that were done for political points, e.g. so that some challenger could say "the incumbent voted to let incarcerated sex offenders have Viagra!", even though that amendment was attached to a wholly unrelated bill.
As to not being able to read stuff? I take it you've never head of thomas.loc.gov, and that excuse is the same one your senators used to cry about the START treaty they'd had several months to read.
You're still a tool, and you're enabling the Republican Temper Tantrum.
Seriously. I thought that Kerry was either the worst or second-worst of the stable of Dem candidates in early '04, and couldn't at all fathom why people voted him to be the nominee.
You must be one of those Beck-watching morons too.
The President has nothing to do with the amendment process. An amendment makes its way through congress, gets passed, and then enough of the state legislatures have to approve it as well. The most Wilson could do was lobby for it.
Ever read the semi-anonymous comments on news websites? I promise there are people out there who are that stupid.
Really. Just take a random sampling of the comments on a Yahoo News story.
When the Senate Republicans all vote as a bloc to say "we're going to filibuster this, now you need 60 votes to pass", then that's a filibuster, no matter how you'd like to pretend otherwise.
The ordinary state of affairs for most bills is that you must have a majority (51) votes to pass them, but the Republicans were so butt-hurt about losing in '08 that they did everything they could to stall what they didn't like, including abusing the filibuster, holds, and secret holds.
The Democrats saying "OK, we're going through the motions and we'll make you vote to end cloture for all of these" would be playing right into their hands; the Republican game this whole time has been to run out the clock until they could get some more votes after an election. So instead of pointlessly wasting time, they tried to get something else done, but the GOP just kept screaming "no!" and filibustering.
Don't be a fucking tool.
Anything they can do to make scientists look bad, right?
Yes. Back in '08 NPR went around interviewing people about the presidential race. Sometime late in the year they interviewed these Texas Baptists and asked what they thought about McCain and Obama:
One of their females said that that she'd hold her nose and vote for McCain, because even though he's a "liberal", Obama's an "ultra liberal".
One suspects she hasn't changed her mind in the past two years, or rather that she's still being spoon-fed the same pap by Fox &c.
A FoaF was described as "he's of the Republican religion".
Bull-fucking-shit. They filibustered all the time - there were countless Senate votes that were basically along party lines - 59-41 - and this wasn't enough to avoid the "automatic" Republican filibuster.
Fact: Senator Blowhard doesn't have to stand up and read from the phonebook anymore to infinitely prolong debate on a bill (unless maybe he's in the majority party). You just need enough minority senators say that they'll filibuster, and bam, your bill is dead. Given that the Republicans, bless their simple minds, will usually vote lockstep, this means that they had a very successful 2-year-long tantrum, and we rewarded them for it.
Perchance do you watch Glenn Beck?
Two words: Unitary Executive .
Well over a hundred times.
right?
I disagree with her, but I'm pretty sure she's not Hitler.
The country will go to hell in a handbasket, but we'll still not have gas chambers. Lebensraum, maybe, but not that.
Some say this has already happened...
As it is, in the primaries you pick either the "electable" one who's milquetoast enough to draw a few votes away from the other party (usually the Dems will do this), or you get the fringe candidate who gives the base a huge boner (Republicans). Neither results in someone who's actually a good candidate.
What makes you think that Canada can escape the fallout of our poor choices?
I promise you that the elected teabaggers won't be as effective as they think they'll be, and they'll end up getting corrupted by Washington soon enough ayway.
I'd love it if the Republicans actually stood for anything[1] besides enriching the wealthy and powerful while keeping the base scared and angry enough to vote for them, but I just don't see it happening with the current party leadership. Given that the previous party leadership from the late Bush days is still in place... the teabaggers just aren't going to change much.
[1] heh, careful what I wish for...
Not to mention that at that moment, satire will be dead, and the joke's on the whole world.
/eyeroll
Yeah, because their recent period of controlling both houses and the White House told us nothing.
They already do that to some extent. The party elites choose who they'll even allow to run under their party's banner, then we're allowed the illusion of choice during the primaries.
Just because the likes of Limbaugh and the dittoheads thought this was a good idea doesn't mean that it is,
In fact, it should tell them that it's exactly the opposite.
But as a sidebar I just want to point out how lame "college" has become. It used to be for those serious about their education or the academic subjects, but now it is just another mandatory level of education with the same behavioural problems from those who really have no wish to be in attendance. The fact that we're talking about treating 19 to 24 year olds like small children should tell you how silly the situation is becoming.
It's because one can't get a decent white-collar job in the USA these days without a college diploma. HR departments all use that diploma as a filter to reduce their workload, so anyone who doesn't want to work on those fast-disappearing factory floors or have a career at McDonald's needs to go to college.
I don't know what the exact cause of this is - if it's the well-intentioned GI Bill that got the WWII generation their college degrees, if they wanted them, or something else entirely.
It's distributed under the GPL and there are no ROM files, as such, included with it.
Back in the day, Apple was really open about their design; they'd even post ROM listings. With all that information, perhaps the project reverse-engineered the ROMs, or Apple was cool with them including 30-year-old software that they had no hope of making a single dollar on ever again.
I very much doubt your putative school district would have anything to worry about. Further, I doubt they'd go to the trouble of using an emulator; more likely they'd teach the kids Visual Basic or AppleScript or Python.
Let's not kid ourselves: old line-number BASIC without any sort of proper text editor is a nasty and frustrating way to learn programming. I was there.
Beats me. Maybe Apple released them gratis like they did some of their older software, like System 6 for the //gs and Mac System 7.