News Stories

[Vexx]

Here's an interesting loophole:

The 22nd Amendment states that no person elected president and no person to hold the office of president for more than two years is allowed to be elected more than once more. It makes no difference whether the two terms are consecutive.
This amendment also makes it clear that if Vice President Al Gore had taken over for President Clinton during the first two years of Clinton's first term, then he would have only been allowed to run once more.
What's interesting about Clinton's situation is that the 22nd Amendment only makes two-term presidents ineligible to "be elected to the office of President." But is Clinton allowed to serve as president? For example, what if Clinton were the Democratic nominee for vice president, and his party won? If his candidate couldn't finish his/her term, could Clinton be president again? Or would he be unable to serve as vice president in the first place? For now, this is an unresolved question.

[DonQuigleone]

Originally Posted by Vexx

Here's an interesting loophole:

The 22nd Amendment states that no person elected president and no person to hold the office of president for more than two years is allowed to be elected more than once more. It makes no difference whether the two terms are consecutive.
This amendment also makes it clear that if Vice President Al Gore had taken over for President Clinton during the first two years of Clinton's first term, then he would have only been allowed to run once more.
What's interesting about Clinton's situation is that the 22nd Amendment only makes two-term presidents ineligible to "be elected to the office of President." But is Clinton allowed to serve as president? For example, what if Clinton were the Democratic nominee for vice president, and his party won? If his candidate couldn't finish his/her term, could Clinton be president again? Or would he be unable to serve as vice president in the first place? For now, this is an unresolved question.

An interesting loophole, though in practice I doubt it would ever happen. My guess is that Clinton could run as vice-president, and the president elect could resign just after being sworn into office, leaving Clinton in charge for another 4 years.

However, this sort of thing would go against the spirit of the law, and I can only see it happening if Clinton had gained so much popularity and personal power that he would already be able to scrap that amendment entirely with full voter approval.

[willx]

Originally Posted by SaintessHeart

If Clinton wasn't such an intern-con, he would have made another great and sensible term.

My friend and I argued about his presidency as well --

Other than the fact that he's already done two terms.. 1) He repealed Glass-Steagell and 2) he was one of only two presidents that have ever been impeached. Both were acquitted afterwards, but still..

[AnimeFan188]

Brazil judge orders arrest of Google president:

"A Brazilian judge ordered the arrest of the head of Google's operations in Brazil
for failure to remove YouTube videos that attacked a mayoral candidate, which
runs counter to the South American nation's strict pre-vote electoral laws."

See:

http://news.yahoo.com/brazil-judge-o...--finance.html

[SaintessHeart]

Originally Posted by AnimeFan188

Brazil judge orders arrest of Google president:

"A Brazilian judge ordered the arrest of the head of Google's operations in Brazil
for failure to remove YouTube videos that attacked a mayoral candidate, which
runs counter to the South American nation's strict pre-vote electoral laws."

See:

http://news.yahoo.com/brazil-judge-o...--finance.html

So who does the internet belong to?

[Archon_Wing]

Originally Posted by Endless Soul

Stories like this make me rage.l

Some people shouldn't be allowed to have kids. It's fine if they want to drown themselves in their own idiocy but when they bring another life to the world and bring misery upon it with the same idiocy, well... f that.

[SeijiSensei]

Originally Posted by willx

My friend and I argued about his presidency as well --

Other than the fact that he's already done two terms.. 1) He repealed Glass-Steagell and 2) he was one of only two presidents that have ever been impeached. Both were acquitted afterwards, but still..

More accurately, Clinton is one of only two presidents (along with Andrew Johnson) who were tried in the Senate after the House of Representatives passed a bill of impeachment. The Judiciary Committee in the House voted to impeach Richard Nixon in 1974, but he resigned from office before the full House could vote on the bill and was thus never tried.

The impeachment of Bill Clinton had as much to do with Republicans getting even for the impeachment of Nixon as any supposed crimes Clinton had committed while President. Nixon's fate was sealed when half a dozen members of his own Republican Party sitting on the Judiciary Committee voted to impeach. Not one Democrat voted to impeach Clinton in 1998. That difference reflected the enormous contrast between the crimes with which the two men were accused. For Clinton, see this; for Nixon, this.

[Roger Rambo]

Clinton did weird things with a cigar to a consenting woman.

Nixon was staging breaking and entering espionage against his political rival.



It's obvious which is more serious if you're taking anything seriously.

[SaintessHeart]

Originally Posted by Roger Rambo

Clinton did weird things with a cigar to a consenting woman.

He probably missed his childhood where he can do weird things with a magic wand prop to a princess in a fairytale school play.

[RRW]

YouTube

https://youtu.be/rLHU-_OhT8g

Sorry; dynamic content not loaded. Reload?

[Vexx]

Originally Posted by SaintessHeart

So who does the internet belong to?

I think that's going to be a primary "discussion" between the traditional city-states, corporations, religious institutions, and the human race for this century.

[Endless Soul]

Originally Posted by SaintessHeart

So who does the internet belong to?

Sora Aoi, and who does she belong to?

Endless "Experiencing nickname laziness" Soul

[ganbaru]

Motion to study right of the foetus defeated in commons vote
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...rticle4569871/
Bad news, there's 10 ministers than voted for this and one of them is the Status of Women Minister .

[ganbaru]

California man linked to anti-Islam film in custody for hearing
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/...88Q1VE20120927

Netanyahu draws "red line" on Iran's nuclear program
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/...88Q0GI20120927

[willx]

No one has addressed Clinton repelling Glass-Steagel.. It's a pretty big deal. I'm not a Republican, but at the same time people need to have all the facts and understand them

[Sumeragi]

Originally Posted by Vexx

-Snip-

Depending on how you interpret it, it can be considered that the position of Vice President is the same as the position of President when being elected. Therefore, supposing the Vice Presidency is considered the same as the Presidency, Clinton wouldn't be able to run as Vice President in the first place.

Originally Posted by willx

No one has addressed Clinton repelling Glass-Steagel.. It's a pretty big deal. I'm not a Republican, but at the same time people need to have all the facts and understand them

Given that Glass–Steagall was for all purposes dead, I don't see it as being Clinton's fault.

[willx]

Originally Posted by Sumeragi

Given that Glass–Steagall was for all purposes dead, I don't see it as being Clinton's fault.

Not sure I completely agree with that, although I'll concede most of the point. His presidency ran from 1993 to 2001. So yes, much of the groundwork to end Glass-Steagall had already been put in place prior to him taking office, but he has to accept some of the blame, no? He did sign the dotted line.

http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2012/05...lass-steagall/

Simultaneously, the popularity of his presidency and public image to-date is based on the notion that he presided over a period of significant economic progress, which in hindsight now, was really "funny money" due to massive increases in consumer debt and unsustainable market practices in both the securities and mortgage lending businesses.

Even if one takes away some of the blame, one must still take away the credit. So remember folks, everyone should keep an open mind, regardless of one's political leanings.

EDIT: Just saw this hit the newswire, but didn't want to double-post.. so now I'm diluting my own posts.. but.. here's some actual "news"!

France hits rich and business to slash deficit

(Reuters) - Socialist President Francois Hollande unveiled higher levies on business and a 75-percent tax for the super-rich on Friday in a 2013 budget aimed at showing France has the fiscal rigor to remain at the core of the euro zone.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/...88R0AK20120928

[Der Langrisser]

"Gospel of Jesus' wife" fragment is a fake, Vatican says.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/...88R0NT20120928

[RRW]

Originally Posted by Der Langrisser

"Gospel of Jesus' wife" fragment is a fake, Vatican says.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/...88R0NT20120928

why i am not surprised

[Vexx]

Originally Posted by Der Langrisser

"Gospel of Jesus' wife" fragment is a fake, Vatican says.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/...88R0NT20120928

So far, almost no "expert" with an actual *clue* has weighed in on the matter. You know, someone with a historical forensics background who can, for instance, analyze the age of the paper and ink. So everyone is just waving their predetermined flags. This Vatican idiot hasn't even seen it, for example. And the professor who found it may know her religious studies but forgery analysis isn't part of her training.

Keep in mind, the Vatican still holds the Shroud of Turin and other faux-relics to be "authentic" last I checked.