US Politics Mega-thread - Page 1578
Forum Index > Closed |
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please. In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. | ||
farvacola
United States18828 Posts
| ||
dAPhREAk
Nauru12397 Posts
On January 17 2015 07:01 farvacola wrote: So will it be Roberts or Kennedy as the swing? My bet is on Roberts but its a pretty even chance on either. i think kennedy is a shoe in. not sure about roberts. but i read even scalia has said its an inevitability. edit: also, i forgot about the punt they did with California's gay marriage. doubt they will do that again. | ||
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
| ||
Introvert
United States4773 Posts
On January 17 2015 05:09 JinDesu wrote: Depends on the history class/location/etc I suppose. I don't think the majority of the people I knew in high school cared about these questions beyond specifically the history class, and if they were put to the test they might not graduate if it hinged on getting 60/100. I think redundant is not the correct word, since it puts a lot of onus students to pass this specific test. That being said, since it is "contingent upon students passing the same test given to candidates for U.S. citizenship", students who have to be aware of the U.S. citizenship test because of their immigrant status could have an advantage. It seems like the exact same objections apply- learn it for the test, then forget it. But perhaps not. And D-? Wtf? I'm curious to see if your theory is right, because it seems odd to me. | ||
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
TOPEKA, Kan. (AP) — Kansas would nearly triple its cigarette tax, raise taxes on alcohol and slow down promised income tax cuts to balance its budget under proposals Republican Gov. Sam Brownback outlined Friday. Brownback presented detailed recommendations to the GOP-dominated Legislature for eliminating projected shortfalls totaling more than $710 million in the current budget and for the fiscal year beginning July 1. He also presented a spending blueprint for the fiscal year beginning in July 2016 designed to leave the state with some cash reserves. The state's budget problems arose after lawmakers aggressively cut personal income taxes in 2012 and 2013 at Brownback's urging to stimulate the economy. Brownback's budget-balancing plans would make those reductions more gradual, without abandoning his long-term goal of eliminating income taxes. He proposed increasing the cigarette tax to $2.29 a pack from 79 cents and raising the tax on other tobacco products to 25 percent from 10 percent. The tax paid by consumers on beer, wine and liquor at liquor stores would jump to 12 percent from 8 percent. The increases would raise $394 million over two years, starting in July. Thomas Koehn, a 49-year-old unemployed Topeka resident, estimated that the cigarette tax increase would cost him $50 a month. Ruby Tate, a 47-year-old cashier at Discount Smokes and Convenience Store in central Topeka, said the proposals would hurt people on fixed incomes. "Do you cut back the smoking or do you cut back the medicine?" she said. "A lot of people are going to make the choice of the medicine." The governor's proposals also would divert funds for highway projects to general government programs and delay the elimination of a long-term funding gap in the pension system for teachers and government workers. Overall state aid for public schools would remain flat through June 2017 — with higher spending on teacher pensions. Brownback is proposing more than $15 billion in total spending for the current fiscal year and each of the next two fiscal years. The state would end June 2017 with $253 million in cash reserves. The Legislature's top Democrats said only that they're concerned about some of his proposals — without being specific — and would have more to say next week. Brownback promised during his State of the State address Thursday night that Kansas would keep moving to eliminate its income taxes, despite its budget problems. Source | ||
dAPhREAk
Nauru12397 Posts
"Do you cut back the smoking or do you cut back the medicine?" she said. "A lot of people are going to make the choice of the medicine." Darwin award winner there. surprised they arent increasing real property taxes ala Texas although that would tend to hurt the middle class and rich, which is the governor's base. | ||
IgnE
United States7681 Posts
| ||
Simberto
Germany11519 Posts
But yeah, cigarettes being more expensive is generally a good idea. More money for the country, less people smoking, less people starting to smoke. Smoking is a stupidly ridiculous activity that solves no purpose other than making people sick, and the only reason it sells is a combination of how addictive nicotion is and the fact that people for inexplicable reasons start smoking in high school. Some people get lucky and never get into it that much that they can stop it at some point, others get caught and continue for the rest of their life. But luckily enough, if there is one thing that highschoolers usually lack, it's money. So if smoking is more expensive, they will probably smoke less, and get addicted less. | ||
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
National Guard Sgt. Valerie Deant and her fellow soldiers went last month to a firing range in Medley, Fla. What they saw there made them angry. Not only had North Miami Beach Police snipers who had used the range before them used mug shots of six African-American men as targets, but one of the men pictured was Deant's brother. The mug shots were riddled with bullets. "I was like, 'Why is my brother being used for target practice?' " Deant told NBC6, which first reported this story on Thursday. The mug shot of Woody Deant, her brother, was taken 15 years earlier. She said it had bullet holes in the forehead and an eye. Woody Deant had been arrested in connection with a drag race in 2000 that left two people dead; he spent four years in prison. "I'm not even living that life according to how they portrayed me as," Woody Deant told the NBC6. "I'm a father. I'm a husband. I'm a career man. I work 9 to 5." North Miami Beach Police Chief J. Scott Dennis acknowledged that his officers, who had selected the targets, could have used better judgment. But he denied racial profiling was at play, noting that the sniper team included minority officers. He said his department also uses pictures of whites and Hispanics for target practice. Source | ||
GreenHorizons
United States23246 Posts
On January 17 2015 10:22 Simberto wrote: Probably because it's a crazy addictive drug. On the other hand, most people should be able to at least cut down their consumption a bit, just by cutting out habits like "If you are standing at a place for 5 minutes and don't have anything to do, light a cigarette." But yeah, cigarettes being more expensive is generally a good idea. More money for the country, less people smoking, less people starting to smoke. Smoking is a stupidly ridiculous activity that solves no purpose other than making people sick, and the only reason it sells is a combination of how addictive nicotion is and the fact that people for inexplicable reasons start smoking in high school. Some people get lucky and never get into it that much that they can stop it at some point, others get caught and continue for the rest of their life. But luckily enough, if there is one thing that highschoolers usually lack, it's money. So if smoking is more expensive, they will probably smoke less, and get addicted less. Nicotine does have medicinal purposes, kind of like another commonly smoked substance. Of course one kills nearly half a million people a year (just in the US) and is physically addictive the other not so much.... Of course keeping one legal and taxing the crap out of it is fine, but doing the same thing with a far less dangerous and addictive substance is a bridge too far for republicans.... But he denied racial profiling was at play, noting that the sniper team included minority officers. People who say stuff like that have no idea how racism works or what it is. | ||
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
If you take a random sampling of mugshots, it's bound to periodically be the case that you end up with all one race lineups from time to time. | ||
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
On January 17 2015 13:46 zlefin wrote: It could just have been random chance in that case. If you take a random sampling of mugshots, it's bound to periodically be the case that you end up with all one race lineups from time to time. Why would police be using mugshots as target practice in the first place? | ||
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
On January 17 2015 14:07 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: Why would police be using mugshots as target practice in the first place? That I don't know, I'd recommend against it. I'd rather use fake people, composite or some such. Practicing against man-shaped targets is important for the will and reflex to shoot, but I know of no reason to go beyond that. Only reason I can think of is that it's a cheap and available source of images. But I'd still really recommend against it, because you might run into some of those people someday. | ||
GreenHorizons
United States23246 Posts
On January 17 2015 14:07 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: Why would police be using mugshots as target practice in the first place? Particularly the mugshots of what are currently free citizens. It would be one thing if they were using death row inmates but it's a very different thing to be using the faces of people you might actually encounter on the job (and be expected to protect not execute). No question it was a poor decision. Question is who if anyone takes responsibility for making it? | ||
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
| ||
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
The Obama administration will formally ask the Supreme Court to "make marriage equality a reality for all Americans" in a landmark case. In a statement issued on Friday, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder said the Justice Department will file a friend-of-the-court brief calling for gay and lesbian Americans across the country to be able to marry. "The Supreme Court has announced that it will soon hear several cases raising core questions concerning the constitutionality of same-sex marriages. As these cases proceed, the Department of Justice will remain committed to ensuring that the benefits of marriage are available as broadly as possible. And we will keep striving to secure equal treatment for all members of society—regardless of sexual orientation," Holder said. Holder cited the Obama administration's decision to stop defending the Defense of Marriage Act in court, which led to a 2013 Supreme Court decision requiring federal recognition of legal same-sex marriages. "As such, we expect to file a ‘friend of the court’ brief in these cases that will urge the Supreme Court to make marriage equality a reality for all Americans," he said. "It is time for our nation to take another critical step forward to ensure the fundamental equality of all Americans—no matter who they are, where they come from, or whom they love." Source | ||
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
Net neutrality legislation unveiled by Republicans today would gut the ability of the Federal Communications Commission to regulate the broadband industry. As expected, the bill forbids the FCC from reclassifying broadband as a common carrier service, preventing the commission from using authority it has under Title II of the Communications Act of 1934. This is the statute the FCC uses to regulate landline telephone providers. The bill—full text here—also targets a portion of the Telecommunications Act of 1996. Section 706 of the Act instructs the FCC to accelerate deployment of broadband to all Americans “by removing barriers to infrastructure investment and by promoting competition in the telecommunications market.” The FCC is considering using this authority to preempt state laws that limit the rights of cities and towns to build broadband networks. That will be off the table if Republicans get their way. The bill text amends communications law “to prohibit the Commission or a State commission from relying on section 706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 as a grant of authority.” It also defines broadband as an “information service,” preventing the FCC from treating broadband providers as common carriers. Obama could veto the bill even if it passes through Congress. The FCC is expected to vote on reclassifying broadband providers and enforcing net neutrality rules on February 26. The bill released today does include the major net neutrality principles supported by President Obama and the FCC. It would prohibit paid prioritization, throttling, and blocking of “lawful content and non-harmful devices,” while requiring transparency of network management practices. The bill defines paid prioritization as “the speeding up or slowing down of some Internet traffic in relation to other Internet traffic over the consumer’s broadband Internet access service by prioritizing or deprioritizing packets based on compensation or lack thereof by the sender to the broadband Internet access service provider.” There are some exceptions, though. The bill allows broadband providers to offer “specialized services… other than broadband Internet access service that are offered over the same network as, and that may share network capacity with, broadband Internet access service.” Specialized services will be legal unless they are “offered or provided in ways that threaten the meaningful availability of broadband Internet access service or that have been devised or promoted in a manner designed to evade the purposes of this section.” One ambiguous line could be interpreted to allow “user-directed prioritization,” in which paid prioritization of certain Internet services is allowed in cases when consumers have specifically approved it. “Nothing in this section shall be construed to limit consumers’ choice of service plans or consumers’ control over their chosen broadband Internet access service,” the bill says. AT&T has supported user-directed prioritization. Republicans also want to make sure ISPs can seek out and prevent copyright infringement. Source | ||
GreenHorizons
United States23246 Posts
On January 16 2015 17:34 GreenHorizons wrote: Also from the article: Forgive my cynicism but I expect it's more likely the latter. Guess who's not surprised? Also this: + Show Spoiler + ![]() ST. ANN, Mo. (KMOV.com) – St. Ann Police apologized to a college student after they admitted to causing severe injuries to his face after accusing him of a crime he didn’t commit on Thursday. Police were in pursuit of Anton Simmons, who had 17 warrants our for his name, when 22-year-old Joseph Swink crashed his car trying to avoid the police pursuit on Interstate 70. “They ended up grabbing him [Swink], tossing him to the ground, and were trying to handcuff him,” said St. Ann Police Chief Aaron Jimenez. “All the sirens and lights were going off. It was very loud and they couldn’t hear anything the citizen was saying.” Swink is an accounting student at UMSL with no criminal record and was on his way home from an internship when he was accidentally involved in the pursuit. Police say they were able to get him into custody using the least amount of force necessary, but when they finally had him in handcuffs on the ground, they heard on their radios that the real suspect was in custody at a different location. Swink suffered severe damage to his ear and his vehicle was totaled. “I never really had 100 percent trust in police before,” Swink said. “But I really don’t now.” Source | ||
Gorsameth
Netherlands21700 Posts
| ||
Nyxisto
Germany6287 Posts
| ||
| ||