ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
whereas I never forget about your inability to recognize humor unless it's come from your own keyboard :chuckle:
:darwinsm:
you really don't get it, do you?
The long nightmare has just begun: Inauguration of a fraud.
- Thread starter annabenedetti
- Start date
whereas I never forget about your inability to recognize humor unless it's come from your own keyboard :chuckle:
:darwinsm:
you really don't get it, do you?
Nah, he doesn't get it.
Hang on a second there, the bold part is exactly why I started my landmark thread "The US Government, how does it work?";
http://theologyonline.com/showthread.php?122842-U-S-Government-How-does-it-work&highlight=
The disparity in the EC is born mostly out of the fact that the Senate features two votes per state.
The Senate is about to confirm a new Justice for life. Without the popular tempering of the House which is at least present in the EC. If you decry the disparity of the method of choosing the POTUS then you should be losing your mind over the disparity of confirming a JOTSCOTUS!
Wyoming gets 2 votes with half a million population.
California gets two votes with 39 million population.
So 250,000 people in wyoming get one vote.
20,000,000 people in California get one vote.
Enzi from Wyoming received 121,554 votes in his last election.
Feinstein from California received 7,864,624 votes in her last election.
7,864,624/ 121,554 = 64.7
One voter in Wyoming has the same voice in the SCOTUS confirmation as 65 voters in California.
And you think it's just the race for POTUS that has rare and troubling exceptions?
I get that a lot.
Sometimes even people who do don't. And let me tell you, that can get pretty confusing. :think:
I'm almost certain you don't recognize the confusion you create. I mean you have to know that your sense of humor relies on your amazing ability to perform "inside Jokes" at rapid speed. I don't mean to put you down, however, which direction you end up doesn't have anything to do with my criticism relating to your lack of timing. You must realize that timing is everything when it comes to humor/Wit.
The Senate is largely controlled by lawyers, unlike the House. And when it comes to selecting justices that's not the worst idea. I don't want a jurist decided on a vote by people who aren't competent to rate the man or woman.
Rare in the sense that the president has mostly been the fellow who won the most votes.
In the last, contentious 50 years there have been 25 attempts at nomination for the Court by the president. 17 went through. 4 withdrew (though 1 of those, Roberts, made it in his second try). Only 3 were rejected and 1 wasn't considered. Mostly, a president who proposes an able jurist will find him or her seated, though there are exceptions. Bork was one. Brilliant mind, but his legal philosophy was too radical for the Senate to swallow. I'd argue Gorsuch has a lesser but similar problem
Let me know when you get to my favorite ice cream, because I'd like to have that one settled.
lain:Quick, frequently referential humor aimed to give a chuckle to people with a broad education and cultural exposure. Sure. Though I also do pratfalls to mix it up.
So far so good. I omit the timing bit, because it's predicated on a flawed premise, by which I mean your judgement.
Elitist much?
Should the Secretary of Defense be decided by the Military?
Mostly, but as mechanized Agriculture reduces the number of people in the rural areas the disparity will only amplify.
That's a bizarre response.
I point out that one person has 65 times more power than another and you say "But it usually works out".
Moose TracksLet me know when you get to my favorite ice cream, because I'd like to have that one settled.
We don't have those around here. :noid:
How quick they forget - wasn't "The Donald" telling his supporters that the 2016 Presidential Election was "rigged?"wait - weren't all you whiny libs liberally whining about how the election was broken?
you'd think you'd be happy someone with some gumption and know-how (read: conservatives
but nooooo
just more whining
better get yerself a puppy and some playdough
ClimateSanity
New member
Yup, did you watch the video?
In exactly the same sense as you are when you need a specialist.
Is the Secretary of defense a lifetime appointment?
In point of fact, there's no good parallel for a sitting Justice, who will spend years or even decades deciding cases that impact our lives.
Then maybe it actually is worth the trouble to revisit. Maybe we'll have to.
No, I was noting that what typically happens is the president figures out who he wants and the Senate grills them, looks at their qualifications, and largely passes them through. It's not quite a fait accompli, but it's not far from it. Adding more politics into it won't guarantee a better outcome in what should really be a legal question, whereas the presidency is entirely a political, representative question. Different worlds inviting different approaches. I'm comfortable with a Senate largely comprised by peers of the Justice to be examining the prospective Jurist.
Who told you?
See, I knew Quixote's was mostly about Guests. :mmph:
:think: Or some around here would say gas. But then, you just eliminated them as judges...tricky business.
So it's pratfalls then. :smack:
At half the price.
Sorry, missed this in the pack.
What CS did (and your :freak wasn't humor. If he'd tried LSM it would have been humor. Lame humor, and unoriginal, but humor. MSM was just an acronym that I misread as a typo/stand-in for another one.
lain:
The reason for Sod trying to run that line on me involved his whiffing on a point of reason over several occasions the other day, even after I spelled the thing out. Put me in a very good mood...still does.
No, I even rep humor from people I don't particularly care for, the way I did your horse bit the other day.
What CS did (and your :freak
wasn't humor. If he'd tried LSM it would have been humor. Lame humor, and unoriginal, but humor. MSM was just an acronym that I misread as a typo/stand-in for another one.Main stream media? Sure. Once I realized he wasn't trying to run the "liberal, MSNBC watching" line.
lain:The reason for Sod trying to run that line on me involved his whiffing on a point of reason over several occasions the other day, even after I spelled the thing out.
Put me in a very good mood...still does.
Here comes Gorsuch !!!! Here come the Judge !!!
But there's no guarantee that the Senators are specialists so what you posit is not baked into the sauce in any way.
He serves for the rest of a lot of young soldiers lives.
There's a perfect parallel, the rest of the Federal Judiciary.
How can you posit that the Senate is a good judge because their "Mostly Lawyers" but over look the Judges who are actually........Judges.
You were gnashing at the bit to revisit the EC after a recent election.
Why is the Senate disparity any less important now?
How does being in the Senate make one a peer of the Justice?
Sarah Palin was considered for a Senate seat.
You did, just now.
That's one of them mind tricks I got.
Posit the wrong information, and the subject corrects you with the right information.
Unless you just happen to like one of the most popular ice cream flavors, then it's a coincidence.
The whole place is.
Out there we each have thousands of fans who follow us, we make their day sometimes with a well expressed thought or a word of encouragement. We do this not for ourselves, but for others. We know we can't change the world but we might change someones mind., and then there will be at least two of us who think that.
Low hanging fruit is the sustenance of the short people, who are still people.
Just like the rest of us. (except the alarming number of robots around these days)
We'll be going Nuclear. That will help with the 2 or 3 additional Justices that Trump appoints. Thanks dems !!!
Lon
Well-known member
At times, I admire the turn of phrase, more than the subject matter itself. When I hung around with writers, these were always those serendipitious moments when good writing dialogue occurred. So, sometimes, where it seems I randomly interject....er......I randomly interject and WAY off topic....
Okay, three levels then :mmph:
This kind of hurts on two levels 1) I don't get humor reps from you.....
Okay, three levels then :mmph:
I don't think a horse can do it much any other way.
I seldom get acronyms. They tend to be way OMH. I get this: UCD puppies? MNO puppies. DR2 Puppies. MR# puppies. OSDR2 puppies! UCM? OICM! DR puppies! Now that my kids are in their teens, I'm a bit embarrassed this is where I'm still at. About 10 years stuck. In ten years, my grandkids might appreciate it, but now its....well...What CS did (and your :freak
Really? Meshak jokes? Really?
This has nothing to do with puppies, does it?Once I realized he wasn't trying to run the "liberal, MSNBC watching" line.
I've had allergies so you'll have to ask someone else if it is bad or not
If it is the same word I'm thinking of, I'm reporting you.....again. :Zon a point of reason over several occasions the other day, even after I spelled the thing out.
Trump, in a brilliant move, has trapped the left in their own scheme. By suggesting that President Obama illegally spied on his conversations, he is forcing the Democrats to either admit Obama broke the law (thus damning his legacy once and for all) or backing down on their obviously false accusations about Russia.
Sent from my iPhone using TOL
Sent from my iPhone using TOL