Making term limits a law simply covers up for the fact that most voters don't pay attention. Forcing them to choose someone new doesn't really address that.
Not only that, requiring term limits doesn't get rid of the problem, it just pushes it into the party bureaucracy. The party in power gets to draw the districts, therefore the party in power controls who gets elected. So term limits don't matter - the party who draws the districts can run a shaved dead dog and it'd still win. We need to stop gerrymandering in addition to imposing term limits. In the best of all worlds we'd get a few mathematicians to develop a "fair" district drawing algorithm that does not take into account any demographic information - just population densities, and simply apply that algorithm after each census to re-draw the districts.
Will this happen? Never - it will never happen. The parties in power have *way* too much power and money to let this happen even though it is in the best interest of every single American including themselves, their children, and their children's children.
The people in this game universe would be able to infer the existence of "the creator" as the "miracles" effect their universe. They would observe these things happening. Thus they could prove the existence of their creator using scientific methods.
While that may be true, your assertion was that there was a there was a non-smoking new york city marathon runner whose lungs became "as black as a life long smoker of 60 years, a 3 pack a day smoker's". Words have meaning, you can't just make stuff up. So I called you out on that.
I live in NYC and it's not that bad. Saying you "could" suffer a heart attack is miles from having lungs "as black as a life long smoker of 60 years, a 3 pack a day smoker's". Jeeze. Arguments are better when they are based on facts. Hyperbole is a million billion times worse for an argument* than just stating the bloody facts.
Accountability Now is the a-partisan "strange bedfellows" group that consists of groups from the left and right pissed off about the FISA cave in. http://accountabilitynowpac.com/
How is this insightful? "People" don't want anything as a group. "People" believe in nearly as many things as there are people. Assuming that all people are lazy, stupid, and unimaginative is just as bad as assuming the opposite. Cynical != insightful.
McCain likely has 10-15 states because he is conservative, older, and his opponent is not white. Obama might have 5-10. Therefore Oboma has to reassure the people by making them aware that he was born inside the contiguous united states, in fact the heartland, unlike his opponent, and he will not shake things up too much.
Obama is not behind though, he's actually way ahead. Current electoral college votes according to the most recent polls: Obama 320 McCain 218. Check out http://electoral-vote.com/ for the skinny on current polls. Given that, there is no real reason for him to shift to the center. He seems to be doing fine right where he is.
Wow. You need to relax a little. I'm not trying to imply that gun owners are more likely to commit family violence. I'm not trying to imply that because you own a gun you're more violent. I'm just using simple logic. If there is no gun in a house - it cannot be used to hurt someone. If there is a gun in the house, it can. Therefore if there is a gun in the house it is much more likely to be used than not. See? That is difficult to refute!
I try to keep an open mind, I'd be interested to read your work on the subject. Can you point me to links from your studies/papers?
If owning a gun made sense in 1776, well, that's great. Let's just leave it in there and not ban it. If owning slaves made sense in 1776, well, that's great. Let's just leave it in there and not ban it.
Although in the real world what is much more likely to happen is that the gun in your house will be used to kill an innocent person, be that a friend, relative, loved one, self, or someone mistaken for a criminal.
And that's a bad thing.
Let's watch the accidental death, manslaughter, and suicide rates in DC go up.
According to Portfolio, which broke the story last week, the lower rates Dodd received saved him "about $58,000 on his Washington residence over the life of the loan, and $17,000 on the Connecticut home."
Dodd borrowed $506,000 at 4.25 percent to refinance a Capitol Hill townhouse, originally purchased in 1999, and $275,042 at 4.5 percent to refinance a home in East Haddam, Conn.
Rather than requiring him to pay the full amount to obtain the reduced mortgage rates, as other customers must, Countrywide waived three-eighths of a point, or about $2,000, on the first loan and a quarter-point, or $700, on the second.
Nah, NCLB is just a new system with the same outcome.
No, it's not. It makes things worse. I agree buracracy is generally a bad thing, but taking a bad burcracy and putting more constraints on it just makes it that much worse.
Slashdot Mirror
This seems like a reasonable proposal. But don't think it goes far enough. I think it's just too modest.
Making term limits a law simply covers up for the fact that most voters don't pay attention. Forcing them to choose someone new doesn't really address that.
Not only that, requiring term limits doesn't get rid of the problem, it just pushes it into the party bureaucracy. The party in power gets to draw the districts, therefore the party in power controls who gets elected. So term limits don't matter - the party who draws the districts can run a shaved dead dog and it'd still win. We need to stop gerrymandering in addition to imposing term limits. In the best of all worlds we'd get a few mathematicians to develop a "fair" district drawing algorithm that does not take into account any demographic information - just population densities, and simply apply that algorithm after each census to re-draw the districts.
Will this happen? Never - it will never happen. The parties in power have *way* too much power and money to let this happen even though it is in the best interest of every single American including themselves, their children, and their children's children.
P.S. Get the hell off of my lawn.
So true! Here's a cite: http://www.craigslist.org/about/best/nfk/718445793.html
Notlob!
The people in this game universe would be able to infer the existence of "the creator" as the "miracles" effect their universe. They would observe these things happening. Thus they could prove the existence of their creator using scientific methods.
While that may be true, your assertion was that there was a there was a non-smoking new york city marathon runner whose lungs became "as black as a life long smoker of 60 years, a 3 pack a day smoker's". Words have meaning, you can't just make stuff up. So I called you out on that.
"A couple years back"? His ratings have been in the low thirties for years.
I live in NYC and it's not that bad. Saying you "could" suffer a heart attack is miles from having lungs "as black as a life long smoker of 60 years, a 3 pack a day smoker's". Jeeze. Arguments are better when they are based on facts. Hyperbole is a million billion times worse for an argument* than just stating the bloody facts.
[*] See what I did there? :)
I doubt you can back up this anecdote. Cite?
Not that it matters much to he point in your post, but the Law School she went to, Regent University, was founded by Pat Robertson, not Jerry Falwell.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monica_Goodling
Accountability Now is the a-partisan "strange bedfellows" group that consists of groups from the left and right pissed off about the FISA cave in.
http://accountabilitynowpac.com/
How is this insightful? "People" don't want anything as a group. "People" believe in nearly as many things as there are people. Assuming that all people are lazy, stupid, and unimaginative is just as bad as assuming the opposite. Cynical != insightful.
...it's a game about rainbow-colored horses galloping across fields where the trees blossom lollipops killing hookers on the way.
Fixed that for you. :)
Logging in without having to navigate away from the page when replying would be nice.
So, in the old system, you hit reply, realise you aren't logged in, type in ...
Crap!
McCain likely has 10-15 states because he is conservative, older, and his opponent is not white. Obama might have 5-10. Therefore Oboma has to reassure the people by making them aware that he was born inside the contiguous united states, in fact the heartland, unlike his opponent, and he will not shake things up too much.
Obama is not behind though, he's actually way ahead. Current electoral college votes according to the most recent polls: Obama 320 McCain 218. Check out http://electoral-vote.com/ for the skinny on current polls. Given that, there is no real reason for him to shift to the center. He seems to be doing fine right where he is.
Maybe just divorce your wife?
You'd trust someone else to make your tin-foil hat? What are you - crazy? TRUST NO ONE
Atheism is not a religion. Religion requires faith and absence of faith is not faith. Insistence on evidence is the inverse of faith.
Wow. You need to relax a little. I'm not trying to imply that gun owners are more likely to commit family violence. I'm not trying to imply that because you own a gun you're more violent. I'm just using simple logic. If there is no gun in a house - it cannot be used to hurt someone. If there is a gun in the house, it can. Therefore if there is a gun in the house it is much more likely to be used than not. See? That is difficult to refute!
I try to keep an open mind, I'd be interested to read your work on the subject. Can you point me to links from your studies/papers?
Although in the real world what is much more likely to happen is that the gun in your house will be used to kill an innocent person, be that a friend, relative, loved one, self, or someone mistaken for a criminal.
And that's a bad thing.
Let's watch the accidental death, manslaughter, and suicide rates in DC go up.
It ain't exactly nothing:
According to Portfolio, which broke the story last week, the lower rates Dodd received saved him "about $58,000 on his Washington residence over the life of the loan, and $17,000 on the Connecticut home." Dodd borrowed $506,000 at 4.25 percent to refinance a Capitol Hill townhouse, originally purchased in 1999, and $275,042 at 4.5 percent to refinance a home in East Haddam, Conn.Rather than requiring him to pay the full amount to obtain the reduced mortgage rates, as other customers must, Countrywide waived three-eighths of a point, or about $2,000, on the first loan and a quarter-point, or $700, on the second.
From this article.No, it's not. It makes things worse. I agree buracracy is generally a bad thing, but taking a bad burcracy and putting more constraints on it just makes it that much worse.
How about after the campaign is over? What then?
Yeah - that BANANA menality is definitely a slippery slope...