US Elections 2012 Part II: The Conventions, Debates and Election results

[Vexx]

Originally Posted by Ithekro

That or they don't believe in the backing of said treaties. I seem to remember instances of doubt in such treaties because the committees were headed by Islamic counties that have a stereotypical poor record when if comes to Women or Children.

Stereotypical mind you.

Actually, yeah, some "hilarious' countries have signed onto the treaties (about like having China on any "Internet freedom" committee) ... but one signs treaties based on the words in them, not because some clowns are also signing it.

The US right wing likes to wave the "sovereignty flag" most often when trying to divert attention from the stuff kicking them in the ass (like a certain approaching cliff).

[0utf0xZer0]

In Canada, our courts often interpret our domestic laws to be consistent with the treaties we've signed (ie. Baker v. Canada, one of the most important cases in Canadian administrative law, where the Supreme Court said that for procedural fairness purposes, the rights of someone's children must be taken into account when considering whether to grant a humanitarian and compassionate exemption to a deportation order), but I was under the impression American judges tend to be more conservative about that kind of reasoning, at least at present.

(Baker, BTW, can be kind of amusing to read because part of the evidence submitted as to the immigration officer not being "fair and unbiased" were notes about how the appellant was a domestic worker, had eight kids, and still hadn't been deported after several years - IN ALL CAPS. Course, when it comes to "WTF were they thinking" things submitted as evidence in a Canadian administrative law case, it's hard to top Doré v. Barreau du Québec):

Spoiler for Actual excerpts from a letter to a judge that landed a lawyer in hot water in Doré v. Barreau du Québec:

"Your chronic inability to master any social skills (to use an expression in English, that language you love so much), which has caused you to become pedantic, aggressive and petty in your daily life..."
"Your determination to obliterate any humanity from your judicial position, your essentially non-existent listening skills, and your propensity to use your court – where you lack the courage to hear opinions contrary to your own – to launch ugly, vulgar, and mean personal attacks not only confirms that you are as loathsome as suspected, but also casts shame on you as a judge..."

[ganbaru]

Fox News Puts Karl Rove on the Bench
http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2012/12...the-bench.html

Multiple sources say that Ailes was angry at Rove’s election-night tantrum when he disputed the network’s call for Obama. While the moment made for riveting television — it was Ailes’s decision to have Kelly confront the statisticians on air — in the end, it provided another data point for Fox’s critics. A spokesperson for Ailes denied any rift between Ailes and Rove, and said the two plan to meet this week.

Edit: Right assails Boehner for new tax revenue
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2012/...2101354694400/

[Vallen Chaos Valiant]

I just met someone online who called Obama a Tyrant.

Can someone please explain why? Seriously, at this point the opposition does not appear to be talking sense any more.

Is there any reason why Obama is labelled as a Tyrant? Or is this just an extra label attached to the Muslim Atheist Jewish Nazi moniker?

Has Obama rounded up all the House Republicans and had them all shot? I have trouble finding anything tyrannical. Or did the GOP just invented a new definition for Tyranny?

Is it the Obamacare bill? The one that the GOP decided they aren't going to abolish any more because it got too much support? Is it the fact that Obama is trying to fulfil his new campaign promises to the letter?

Does anyone in America care what WORDS mean anymore?

[GDB]

Originally Posted by Vallen Chaos Valiant

Has Obama rounded up all the House Republicans and had them all shot? I have trouble finding anything tyrannical. Or did the GOP just invented a new definition for Tyranny?

He's clearly a tyrant because he didn't kneel before the mighty Zo... GOP, and let them have the presidency. Therefore, he is a tyrant of the worst proportions seen since Gilgamesh!

Does anyone in America care what WORDS mean anymore?

Depends on what the definition of "is", is.

[Mr. DJ]

From my vast resources of the internet comment sections.

Obama is a Atheist Communist Socialist Marxist Anti-Christian Muslim God and Jew hating Kenyan scumbag of a tyrant.

[Ithekro]

More titles than Lincoln.

[mangamuscle]

If you go to animenewsnetwork and look at the thread about loli dictators you will find several people saying that Obama should be included.

[Anh_Minh]

Originally Posted by Vallen Chaos Valiant

I just met someone online who called Obama a Tyrant.

Is it new? I thought he'd been a tyrant at least since he dared to win the 2008 elections. I know French president Sarkozy was. (Just one regularly scheduled election got rid of that particular tyrant. They don't make them like they used to.)

I guess people on the internet just like hyperbole. Or are completely delusional. I'm not sure I want to know which.

[Vexx]

Originally Posted by Vallen Chaos Valiant

Does anyone in America care what WORDS mean anymore?

Yes, but sane people can't win debates against insane people.

[ganbaru]

Originally Posted by Vexx

Yes, but sane people can't win debates against insane people.

No, they can but the insane one can't acknlowedge it.

[Xellos-_^]

Originally Posted by Vexx

Yes, but sane people can't win debates against insane people.

Originally Posted by ganbaru

No, they can but the insane one can't acknlowedge it.

Ever play Romance of the Three kingdom XI?

You guys just describe the Debate system in the game

[willx]

Originally Posted by Xellos-_^

Ever play Romance of the Three kingdom XI?

You guys just describe the Debate system in the game

"Sophistry!" "Ugh..!"



Outlook is positive

[lordblazer]

Hmmm so glad to have found this thread!! but so late!! Anyway yea, US politics have gotten pretty bad. If it isn't the media wanting to give everything to the republicans, it's people who are misinforme,d paranoid, and not part of the mainstream being given the platform to say Obama is some kind of manchurian candidate from Kenya.. Though if you say he's from Hawaii, they point out that it's unamerican to attend school outside of the US. That actually really well pisses me off. As someone who went to university overseas in JApan and China, worked in Turkey, got to travel to 12 different countries during this period. My overseas education made me appreciate the US more. I wish that ignorance wasn't something to be proud of in the US, but it seems to be the case. What do you do? I guess make money, accumulate currency, and don't care. :P (The American cure to everything )

[Kyuu]

I'll just leave this here. As it summarizes the past 30 years:

Yea, the story telling is in "fairy tale" format. But it spells out everything.

[ganbaru]

Jim DeMint to resign to head Heritage Foundation
http://www.politico.com/story/2012/1...7.html?hp=t1_3

[Xellos-_^]

Before the vote was to be taken, Dole rolled in a wheelchair onto the Senate floor, where, as Roll Call’s Meredith Shiner writes:

One by one, Senators of both parties approached [Dole], with former colleagues gently resting their hands on his shoulder or reaching out to his left hand. … Then, one by one, after Dole was wheeled off the floor, most Republicans voted against the measure. Many members did not register their “nay” votes verbally, instead whispering their opposition directly to the clerk or gesturing their hands from their chairs.

These senators shook Dole’s good hand, looked him in the eye and, once he left the floor, turned their backs on him, on his fellow disabled veterans and on disabled people throughout the world. They did not stand tall and proud against the treaty. No, these senators “whispered their opposition” or “gestured from their chairs.” (Remember that senators, no strangers to C-Span, know that the network’s microphones can pick up their votes if they wish to be heard.)
These were not the actions of men and women who were proud of their vote. These senators knew, privately, that their vote was wrong. And yet, pathetically, they did not have the courage or the decency to say so. It was nothing less than moral cowardice, a failure that should shame them for the rest of their lives.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...ral-cowardice/

i wonder how Dole feels, looking at what remain of his party. How much regret does he feel letting the lunatics into the party during the 70s?

[Irenicus]

^...I seriously don't understand. Why vote no? The United States lose literally not a single penny, not one pinch of "sovereignty" (whatever the hell that means to these people) for voting for this treaty, which only makes what is already US law part of the international framework of human rights agreements.

They betrayed their own Senator Emeritus that they "honored" in the most cowardly way possible for what? This isn't a major economics bill, no one sane seems to have any objections to it. It wasn't even on the political radar until this traitorous act makes decent people spit in disgust. They have nothing to lose. Do they hate human rights that much? Are they fucking nuts?

[mangamuscle]

Originally Posted by Irenicus

^...I serious don't understand. Why vote no? The United States lose literally not a single penny, not one pinch of "sovereignty" (whatever the fuck that mans) for voting for this treaty, which only makes what is already US law part of the international framework of human rights agreements.

They openly betrayed their own Senator Emeritus being honored for what? Do they hate human rights that much? Are they fucking nuts?

You answered your own question, they are only interested in making US laws into international laws, not the other way around.

[Irenicus]

Originally Posted by ogon_bat

You answered your own question, they are only interested in making US laws into international laws, not the other way around.

Um, no. This treaty will essentially make US law (the ADA) into international law, and if they want that they should just vote yes. The components and principles of the Treaty are already in the US legal code. Unless they're bizarrely planning to roll back the ADA by some witchery (and doom their party once and for all by making enemies with US veterans), there is absolutely nothing to lose just to honor what's basically Dole's last wish.