• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EST 19:59
CET 01:59
KST 09:59
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
Behind the Blue - Team Liquid History Book10Clem wins HomeStory Cup 289HomeStory Cup 28 - Info & Preview13Rongyi Cup S3 - Preview & Info7herO wins SC2 All-Star Invitational14
Community News
Weekly Cups (Feb 2-8): Classic, Solar, MaxPax win1Nexon's StarCraft game could be FPS, led by UMS maker1PIG STY FESTIVAL 7.0! (19 Feb - 1 Mar)9Weekly Cups (Jan 26-Feb 1): herO, Clem, ByuN, Classic win2RSL Season 4 announced for March-April7
StarCraft 2
General
Behind the Blue - Team Liquid History Book Weekly Cups (Feb 2-8): Classic, Solar, MaxPax win Nexon's StarCraft game could be FPS, led by UMS maker Rongyi Cup S3 - Preview & Info How do you think the 5.0.15 balance patch (Oct 2025) for StarCraft II has affected the game?
Tourneys
PIG STY FESTIVAL 7.0! (19 Feb - 1 Mar) WardiTV Mondays $21,000 Rongyi Cup Season 3 announced (Jan 22-Feb 7) Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament $5,000 WardiTV Winter Championship 2026
Strategy
Custom Maps
Map Editor closed ? [A] Starcraft Sound Mod
External Content
Mutation # 512 Overclocked The PondCast: SC2 News & Results Mutation # 511 Temple of Rebirth Mutation # 510 Safety Violation
Brood War
General
Gypsy to Korea BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ [ASL21] Potential Map Candidates BW General Discussion Liquipedia.net NEEDS editors for Brood War
Tourneys
[Megathread] Daily Proleagues Escore Tournament StarCraft Season 1 Small VOD Thread 2.0 KCM Race Survival 2026 Season 1
Strategy
Zealot bombing is no longer popular? Simple Questions, Simple Answers Current Meta Soma's 9 hatch build from ASL Game 2
Other Games
General Games
Diablo 2 thread ZeroSpace Megathread Battle Aces/David Kim RTS Megathread EVE Corporation Nintendo Switch Thread
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Deck construction bug Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
Vanilla Mini Mafia Mafia Game Mode Feedback/Ideas
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread Russo-Ukrainian War Thread YouTube Thread The Games Industry And ATVI Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine
Fan Clubs
The herO Fan Club! The IdrA Fan Club
Media & Entertainment
[Manga] One Piece Anime Discussion Thread
Sports
2024 - 2026 Football Thread
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
TL Community
The Automated Ban List
Blogs
Play, Watch, Drink: Esports …
TrAiDoS
My 2025 Magic: The Gathering…
DARKING
Life Update and thoughts.
FuDDx
How do archons sleep?
8882
StarCraft improvement
iopq
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 2325 users

US Politics Mega-thread - Page 551

Forum Index > Closed
Post a Reply
Prev 1 549 550 551 552 553 10093 Next
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.
oneofthem
Profile Blog Joined November 2005
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
October 18 2013 21:58 GMT
#11001
On October 19 2013 00:55 DoubleReed wrote:
How would that solve our illegal immigration problem? Annex them and make them all American?

legalize the fuck outta them
We have fed the heart on fantasies, the heart's grown brutal from the fare, more substance in our enmities than in our love
Acrofales
Profile Joined August 2010
Spain18213 Posts
October 18 2013 23:39 GMT
#11002
On October 19 2013 06:58 Falling wrote:
Show nested quote +
On October 19 2013 06:53 Sub40APM wrote:
On October 19 2013 06:52 Falling wrote:
On October 19 2013 06:04 Souma wrote:
On October 19 2013 05:57 Mohdoo wrote:
On October 19 2013 05:48 GreenHorizons wrote:
I don't know what's funnier that Arnold Schwarzenegger is petitioning to to amend the constitution so he can run for president, or that I would be more likely to vote for him than any of the other potential Republican candidates to date...

I would love to see him and Christie debating with the Tea Party loons... hahaha


Source


Is there anyone actually opposed to amending the constitution so he can run? I think its a really, really silly rule. It doesn't make any amount of practical sense. Am I missing something? I wouldn't be surprised if there was an actually legit reason for this, but I'm not seeing it right now.


You'd be surprised... In fact, I wouldn't doubt that a majority of Americans do not want to amend that clause.

Given how much weight was put on Obama the Kenyan, birth certificates long or short I would not be surprised that most would not want it changed. The entire controversy was predicated that being foreign born would be a bad thing. Could people's love for Arnie overcome their hatred for Obama? Doubt it. But considering how well the Republicans last president who was both governor of California and a former actor did for their party, maybe just maybe

Even if there was a strict residency requirements, I just can not see it changing. The rule has been around for too long and I'm sure out of 300 million people, they can find someone else.

The people in the GOP who had a problem with Obama's heritage didnt have a problem with it because he was merely a 'foreigner'

Well that's true. Something about his uncle or father holding anti-American views and that Obama was going to intentionally tear America down from the inside, 5th column style. I can't remember who I got the flurry of PMs at the height of that controversy. But anyways, that part was mostly a joke. It might sound like an arbitrary rule, but I think you need to draw a line at some point of what does it mean to be an American citizen and be able to run for president rather than having hypothetical foreign celebrities parachuting into election cycles. Dalai Lama for president anyone? lol


Sure, but why your place of birth? Seems really arbitrary. How about nationality and living a minimum of 25 years in the US (last 25 years)?

Are children of military families living abroad on a US base considered to be born abroad? Same for diplomats and other US citizens abroad on US business?
Sub40APM
Profile Joined August 2010
6336 Posts
October 18 2013 23:57 GMT
#11003
US bases abroad are considered American soil.
Sbrubbles
Profile Joined October 2010
Brazil5776 Posts
October 19 2013 00:28 GMT
#11004
On October 19 2013 08:39 Acrofales wrote:
Show nested quote +
On October 19 2013 06:58 Falling wrote:
On October 19 2013 06:53 Sub40APM wrote:
On October 19 2013 06:52 Falling wrote:
On October 19 2013 06:04 Souma wrote:
On October 19 2013 05:57 Mohdoo wrote:
On October 19 2013 05:48 GreenHorizons wrote:
I don't know what's funnier that Arnold Schwarzenegger is petitioning to to amend the constitution so he can run for president, or that I would be more likely to vote for him than any of the other potential Republican candidates to date...

I would love to see him and Christie debating with the Tea Party loons... hahaha


Source


Is there anyone actually opposed to amending the constitution so he can run? I think its a really, really silly rule. It doesn't make any amount of practical sense. Am I missing something? I wouldn't be surprised if there was an actually legit reason for this, but I'm not seeing it right now.


You'd be surprised... In fact, I wouldn't doubt that a majority of Americans do not want to amend that clause.

Given how much weight was put on Obama the Kenyan, birth certificates long or short I would not be surprised that most would not want it changed. The entire controversy was predicated that being foreign born would be a bad thing. Could people's love for Arnie overcome their hatred for Obama? Doubt it. But considering how well the Republicans last president who was both governor of California and a former actor did for their party, maybe just maybe

Even if there was a strict residency requirements, I just can not see it changing. The rule has been around for too long and I'm sure out of 300 million people, they can find someone else.

The people in the GOP who had a problem with Obama's heritage didnt have a problem with it because he was merely a 'foreigner'

Well that's true. Something about his uncle or father holding anti-American views and that Obama was going to intentionally tear America down from the inside, 5th column style. I can't remember who I got the flurry of PMs at the height of that controversy. But anyways, that part was mostly a joke. It might sound like an arbitrary rule, but I think you need to draw a line at some point of what does it mean to be an American citizen and be able to run for president rather than having hypothetical foreign celebrities parachuting into election cycles. Dalai Lama for president anyone? lol


Sure, but why your place of birth? Seems really arbitrary. How about nationality and living a minimum of 25 years in the US (last 25 years)?

Are children of military families living abroad on a US base considered to be born abroad? Same for diplomats and other US citizens abroad on US business?


I'm pretty sure there is a specific legislation for US officials who have to live and end up having children abroad. I'd be really surprised if there wasn't, anyway.
Bora Pain minha porra!
{CC}StealthBlue
Profile Blog Joined January 2003
United States41117 Posts
Last Edited: 2013-10-19 00:47:05
October 19 2013 00:46 GMT
#11005
Only 19 percent of the American public trusts the federal government to do what's right, a seven point drop since January, according to a new Pew poll released Friday.

That measure is now equivalent to the level in August 2011, when the last debt ceiling debate rocked Washington.

Thirty percent are angry with the federal government, up four points since September, while twelve percent are content with the government.

A Gallup Poll released at the beginning of October found that 33 percent of Americans said that government dysfunction is the biggest problem in the nation, the highest percentage in a Gallup poll since 1939. Those surveyed placed government dysfunction above the economy, unemployment, the deficit and healthcare as the biggest problem plaguing the country.

The Pew poll, conducted Oct. 9-13, surveyed 1,504 adults via phone with a margin of error sampling of plus or minus 2.9 percentage points. The Gallup poll, conducted Oct. 3-6, surveyed 1,028 adults via telephone with a margin of error sampling of plus or minue 4 percentage points.


Source
"Smokey, this is not 'Nam, this is bowling. There are rules."
Funnytoss
Profile Blog Joined August 2007
Taiwan1471 Posts
October 19 2013 00:52 GMT
#11006
On October 19 2013 09:28 Sbrubbles wrote:
Show nested quote +
On October 19 2013 08:39 Acrofales wrote:
On October 19 2013 06:58 Falling wrote:
On October 19 2013 06:53 Sub40APM wrote:
On October 19 2013 06:52 Falling wrote:
On October 19 2013 06:04 Souma wrote:
On October 19 2013 05:57 Mohdoo wrote:
On October 19 2013 05:48 GreenHorizons wrote:
I don't know what's funnier that Arnold Schwarzenegger is petitioning to to amend the constitution so he can run for president, or that I would be more likely to vote for him than any of the other potential Republican candidates to date...

I would love to see him and Christie debating with the Tea Party loons... hahaha


Source


Is there anyone actually opposed to amending the constitution so he can run? I think its a really, really silly rule. It doesn't make any amount of practical sense. Am I missing something? I wouldn't be surprised if there was an actually legit reason for this, but I'm not seeing it right now.


You'd be surprised... In fact, I wouldn't doubt that a majority of Americans do not want to amend that clause.

Given how much weight was put on Obama the Kenyan, birth certificates long or short I would not be surprised that most would not want it changed. The entire controversy was predicated that being foreign born would be a bad thing. Could people's love for Arnie overcome their hatred for Obama? Doubt it. But considering how well the Republicans last president who was both governor of California and a former actor did for their party, maybe just maybe

Even if there was a strict residency requirements, I just can not see it changing. The rule has been around for too long and I'm sure out of 300 million people, they can find someone else.

The people in the GOP who had a problem with Obama's heritage didnt have a problem with it because he was merely a 'foreigner'

Well that's true. Something about his uncle or father holding anti-American views and that Obama was going to intentionally tear America down from the inside, 5th column style. I can't remember who I got the flurry of PMs at the height of that controversy. But anyways, that part was mostly a joke. It might sound like an arbitrary rule, but I think you need to draw a line at some point of what does it mean to be an American citizen and be able to run for president rather than having hypothetical foreign celebrities parachuting into election cycles. Dalai Lama for president anyone? lol


Sure, but why your place of birth? Seems really arbitrary. How about nationality and living a minimum of 25 years in the US (last 25 years)?

Are children of military families living abroad on a US base considered to be born abroad? Same for diplomats and other US citizens abroad on US business?


I'm pretty sure there is a specific legislation for US officials who have to live and end up having children abroad. I'd be really surprised if there wasn't, anyway.


Yes, John McCain was born in Panama, but on a U.S. Military Base, and he was considered eligible. Honestly, the definition isn't all that clear-cut yet. I've heard it argued that Ted Cruz would arguably be eligible even though he was born in Canada, due to one of his parents being American. It's really about the definition of "natural-born American".
AIV_Funnytoss and sGs.Funnytoss on iCCup
DeltaX
Profile Joined August 2011
United States287 Posts
October 19 2013 00:59 GMT
#11007
On October 19 2013 09:52 Funnytoss wrote:
Show nested quote +
On October 19 2013 09:28 Sbrubbles wrote:
On October 19 2013 08:39 Acrofales wrote:
On October 19 2013 06:58 Falling wrote:
On October 19 2013 06:53 Sub40APM wrote:
On October 19 2013 06:52 Falling wrote:
On October 19 2013 06:04 Souma wrote:
On October 19 2013 05:57 Mohdoo wrote:
On October 19 2013 05:48 GreenHorizons wrote:
I don't know what's funnier that Arnold Schwarzenegger is petitioning to to amend the constitution so he can run for president, or that I would be more likely to vote for him than any of the other potential Republican candidates to date...

I would love to see him and Christie debating with the Tea Party loons... hahaha


Source


Is there anyone actually opposed to amending the constitution so he can run? I think its a really, really silly rule. It doesn't make any amount of practical sense. Am I missing something? I wouldn't be surprised if there was an actually legit reason for this, but I'm not seeing it right now.


You'd be surprised... In fact, I wouldn't doubt that a majority of Americans do not want to amend that clause.

Given how much weight was put on Obama the Kenyan, birth certificates long or short I would not be surprised that most would not want it changed. The entire controversy was predicated that being foreign born would be a bad thing. Could people's love for Arnie overcome their hatred for Obama? Doubt it. But considering how well the Republicans last president who was both governor of California and a former actor did for their party, maybe just maybe

Even if there was a strict residency requirements, I just can not see it changing. The rule has been around for too long and I'm sure out of 300 million people, they can find someone else.

The people in the GOP who had a problem with Obama's heritage didnt have a problem with it because he was merely a 'foreigner'

Well that's true. Something about his uncle or father holding anti-American views and that Obama was going to intentionally tear America down from the inside, 5th column style. I can't remember who I got the flurry of PMs at the height of that controversy. But anyways, that part was mostly a joke. It might sound like an arbitrary rule, but I think you need to draw a line at some point of what does it mean to be an American citizen and be able to run for president rather than having hypothetical foreign celebrities parachuting into election cycles. Dalai Lama for president anyone? lol


Sure, but why your place of birth? Seems really arbitrary. How about nationality and living a minimum of 25 years in the US (last 25 years)?

Are children of military families living abroad on a US base considered to be born abroad? Same for diplomats and other US citizens abroad on US business?


I'm pretty sure there is a specific legislation for US officials who have to live and end up having children abroad. I'd be really surprised if there wasn't, anyway.


Yes, John McCain was born in Panama, but on a U.S. Military Base, and he was considered eligible. Honestly, the definition isn't all that clear-cut yet. I've heard it argued that Ted Cruz would arguably be eligible even though he was born in Canada, due to one of his parents being American. It's really about the definition of "natural-born American".


I think natural born is generally taken to be that you were born a US citizen as opposed to a naturalized citizen.
{CC}StealthBlue
Profile Blog Joined January 2003
United States41117 Posts
October 19 2013 18:48 GMT
#11008
As part of its state-by-state effort to dismantle the Affordable Care Act, a group backed by billionaire conservative benefactors Charles and David Koch is going after a Republican lawmaker in Virginia who has signaled an openness to the law's Medicaid expansion.

An article published Saturday in The New York Times details how the conservative advocacy group Americans for Prosperity is employing a grassroots campaign to pressure state lawmakers to reject the Medicaid expansion under the health care law.

The group is currently going all out in Virginia, where this year's gubernatorial race pits a Democrat who favors expansion (Terry McAuliffe) against a Republican who opposes (Ken Cuccinelli). It's also targeting Republican state Sen. Emmett W. Hanger Jr., who is considering signing off on the expansion.

“This has been one of those trench warfare kind of efforts for a year now, and I think it is one of those hidden stories of the whole fight against Obamacare,” Tim Phillips, president of Americans for Prosperity, told the Times. “It’s not flashy; it’s just in a whole bunch of state capitals and in the districts of a whole lot of state legislators, but it’s such a crucial aspect of the overall long-term effort to roll back Obamacare.”


Source
"Smokey, this is not 'Nam, this is bowling. There are rules."
aksfjh
Profile Joined November 2010
United States4853 Posts
October 19 2013 19:23 GMT
#11009
On October 19 2013 09:59 DeltaX wrote:
Show nested quote +
On October 19 2013 09:52 Funnytoss wrote:
On October 19 2013 09:28 Sbrubbles wrote:
On October 19 2013 08:39 Acrofales wrote:
On October 19 2013 06:58 Falling wrote:
On October 19 2013 06:53 Sub40APM wrote:
On October 19 2013 06:52 Falling wrote:
On October 19 2013 06:04 Souma wrote:
On October 19 2013 05:57 Mohdoo wrote:
On October 19 2013 05:48 GreenHorizons wrote:
I don't know what's funnier that Arnold Schwarzenegger is petitioning to to amend the constitution so he can run for president, or that I would be more likely to vote for him than any of the other potential Republican candidates to date...

I would love to see him and Christie debating with the Tea Party loons... hahaha


Source


Is there anyone actually opposed to amending the constitution so he can run? I think its a really, really silly rule. It doesn't make any amount of practical sense. Am I missing something? I wouldn't be surprised if there was an actually legit reason for this, but I'm not seeing it right now.


You'd be surprised... In fact, I wouldn't doubt that a majority of Americans do not want to amend that clause.

Given how much weight was put on Obama the Kenyan, birth certificates long or short I would not be surprised that most would not want it changed. The entire controversy was predicated that being foreign born would be a bad thing. Could people's love for Arnie overcome their hatred for Obama? Doubt it. But considering how well the Republicans last president who was both governor of California and a former actor did for their party, maybe just maybe

Even if there was a strict residency requirements, I just can not see it changing. The rule has been around for too long and I'm sure out of 300 million people, they can find someone else.

The people in the GOP who had a problem with Obama's heritage didnt have a problem with it because he was merely a 'foreigner'

Well that's true. Something about his uncle or father holding anti-American views and that Obama was going to intentionally tear America down from the inside, 5th column style. I can't remember who I got the flurry of PMs at the height of that controversy. But anyways, that part was mostly a joke. It might sound like an arbitrary rule, but I think you need to draw a line at some point of what does it mean to be an American citizen and be able to run for president rather than having hypothetical foreign celebrities parachuting into election cycles. Dalai Lama for president anyone? lol


Sure, but why your place of birth? Seems really arbitrary. How about nationality and living a minimum of 25 years in the US (last 25 years)?

Are children of military families living abroad on a US base considered to be born abroad? Same for diplomats and other US citizens abroad on US business?


I'm pretty sure there is a specific legislation for US officials who have to live and end up having children abroad. I'd be really surprised if there wasn't, anyway.


Yes, John McCain was born in Panama, but on a U.S. Military Base, and he was considered eligible. Honestly, the definition isn't all that clear-cut yet. I've heard it argued that Ted Cruz would arguably be eligible even though he was born in Canada, due to one of his parents being American. It's really about the definition of "natural-born American".


I think natural born is generally taken to be that you were born a US citizen as opposed to a naturalized citizen.

This is how it's treated under the law, afaik.
Scareb
Profile Joined October 2010
Germany173 Posts
October 19 2013 20:22 GMT
#11010
On October 20 2013 03:48 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
Show nested quote +
As part of its state-by-state effort to dismantle the Affordable Care Act, a group backed by billionaire conservative benefactors Charles and David Koch is going after a Republican lawmaker in Virginia who has signaled an openness to the law's Medicaid expansion.

An article published Saturday in The New York Times details how the conservative advocacy group Americans for Prosperity is employing a grassroots campaign to pressure state lawmakers to reject the Medicaid expansion under the health care law.

The group is currently going all out in Virginia, where this year's gubernatorial race pits a Democrat who favors expansion (Terry McAuliffe) against a Republican who opposes (Ken Cuccinelli). It's also targeting Republican state Sen. Emmett W. Hanger Jr., who is considering signing off on the expansion.

“This has been one of those trench warfare kind of efforts for a year now, and I think it is one of those hidden stories of the whole fight against Obamacare,” Tim Phillips, president of Americans for Prosperity, told the Times. “It’s not flashy; it’s just in a whole bunch of state capitals and in the districts of a whole lot of state legislators, but it’s such a crucial aspect of the overall long-term effort to roll back Obamacare.”


Source

I love how the "old white bastards", aka Koch brothers are acting! They are a good indicator whats wrong with some old rich folks.
Adila
Profile Joined April 2010
United States874 Posts
October 19 2013 21:11 GMT
#11011
On October 20 2013 04:23 aksfjh wrote:
Show nested quote +
On October 19 2013 09:59 DeltaX wrote:
On October 19 2013 09:52 Funnytoss wrote:
On October 19 2013 09:28 Sbrubbles wrote:
On October 19 2013 08:39 Acrofales wrote:
On October 19 2013 06:58 Falling wrote:
On October 19 2013 06:53 Sub40APM wrote:
On October 19 2013 06:52 Falling wrote:
On October 19 2013 06:04 Souma wrote:
On October 19 2013 05:57 Mohdoo wrote:
[quote]

Is there anyone actually opposed to amending the constitution so he can run? I think its a really, really silly rule. It doesn't make any amount of practical sense. Am I missing something? I wouldn't be surprised if there was an actually legit reason for this, but I'm not seeing it right now.


You'd be surprised... In fact, I wouldn't doubt that a majority of Americans do not want to amend that clause.

Given how much weight was put on Obama the Kenyan, birth certificates long or short I would not be surprised that most would not want it changed. The entire controversy was predicated that being foreign born would be a bad thing. Could people's love for Arnie overcome their hatred for Obama? Doubt it. But considering how well the Republicans last president who was both governor of California and a former actor did for their party, maybe just maybe

Even if there was a strict residency requirements, I just can not see it changing. The rule has been around for too long and I'm sure out of 300 million people, they can find someone else.

The people in the GOP who had a problem with Obama's heritage didnt have a problem with it because he was merely a 'foreigner'

Well that's true. Something about his uncle or father holding anti-American views and that Obama was going to intentionally tear America down from the inside, 5th column style. I can't remember who I got the flurry of PMs at the height of that controversy. But anyways, that part was mostly a joke. It might sound like an arbitrary rule, but I think you need to draw a line at some point of what does it mean to be an American citizen and be able to run for president rather than having hypothetical foreign celebrities parachuting into election cycles. Dalai Lama for president anyone? lol


Sure, but why your place of birth? Seems really arbitrary. How about nationality and living a minimum of 25 years in the US (last 25 years)?

Are children of military families living abroad on a US base considered to be born abroad? Same for diplomats and other US citizens abroad on US business?


I'm pretty sure there is a specific legislation for US officials who have to live and end up having children abroad. I'd be really surprised if there wasn't, anyway.


Yes, John McCain was born in Panama, but on a U.S. Military Base, and he was considered eligible. Honestly, the definition isn't all that clear-cut yet. I've heard it argued that Ted Cruz would arguably be eligible even though he was born in Canada, due to one of his parents being American. It's really about the definition of "natural-born American".


I think natural born is generally taken to be that you were born a US citizen as opposed to a naturalized citizen.

This is how it's treated under the law, afaik.


I'm really hoping Cruz runs so people like Orly Taitz has anther target to troll.

Of course, if the Birthers decide to keep quiet on Cruz, then everyone would know why they really targetted Obama.
Dimagus
Profile Joined December 2010
United States1004 Posts
October 19 2013 21:58 GMT
#11012
Someone needs to start the Get RID o' T campaign. Get Republicans, Independents, Democrats opposing Tea Party campaign.

Now that would make the news more interesting.
aksfjh
Profile Joined November 2010
United States4853 Posts
October 19 2013 22:36 GMT
#11013
On October 20 2013 06:58 Dimagus wrote:
Someone needs to start the Get RID o' T campaign. Get Republicans, Independents, Democrats opposing Tea Party campaign.

Now that would make the news more interesting.

I really wish that were an option in my area. Sadly, my representative(s) were all Tea Party approved incumbents. In other words, my district(s) aligned with the Tea Party long before it existed in the first place.
FeUerFlieGe
Profile Joined April 2011
United States1193 Posts
October 19 2013 22:45 GMT
#11014
On October 19 2013 09:46 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
Show nested quote +
Only 19 percent of the American public trusts the federal government to do what's right, a seven point drop since January, according to a new Pew poll released Friday.

That measure is now equivalent to the level in August 2011, when the last debt ceiling debate rocked Washington.

Thirty percent are angry with the federal government, up four points since September, while twelve percent are content with the government.

A Gallup Poll released at the beginning of October found that 33 percent of Americans said that government dysfunction is the biggest problem in the nation, the highest percentage in a Gallup poll since 1939. Those surveyed placed government dysfunction above the economy, unemployment, the deficit and healthcare as the biggest problem plaguing the country.

The Pew poll, conducted Oct. 9-13, surveyed 1,504 adults via phone with a margin of error sampling of plus or minus 2.9 percentage points. The Gallup poll, conducted Oct. 3-6, surveyed 1,028 adults via telephone with a margin of error sampling of plus or minue 4 percentage points.


Source


You'd think with numbers that low people would actually want to do something about it.
To unpathed waters, undreamed shores. - Shakespeare
aksfjh
Profile Joined November 2010
United States4853 Posts
October 19 2013 23:07 GMT
#11015
On October 20 2013 07:45 FeUerFlieGe wrote:
Show nested quote +
On October 19 2013 09:46 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
Only 19 percent of the American public trusts the federal government to do what's right, a seven point drop since January, according to a new Pew poll released Friday.

That measure is now equivalent to the level in August 2011, when the last debt ceiling debate rocked Washington.

Thirty percent are angry with the federal government, up four points since September, while twelve percent are content with the government.

A Gallup Poll released at the beginning of October found that 33 percent of Americans said that government dysfunction is the biggest problem in the nation, the highest percentage in a Gallup poll since 1939. Those surveyed placed government dysfunction above the economy, unemployment, the deficit and healthcare as the biggest problem plaguing the country.

The Pew poll, conducted Oct. 9-13, surveyed 1,504 adults via phone with a margin of error sampling of plus or minus 2.9 percentage points. The Gallup poll, conducted Oct. 3-6, surveyed 1,028 adults via telephone with a margin of error sampling of plus or minue 4 percentage points.


Source


You'd think with numbers that low people would actually want to do something about it.


You really have to understand where the sentiment is coming from. I overhear people talk politics in the office and around school, and a lot of people's opinions are shaped by half-listening to 20-30 second sound clips on the news. They know the government shut down, they know it's Congress' fault, but they're confused about how it started and why. Had a coworker mix up Obama's and Boehner's statements, thinking that Obama had asked for "unconditional surrender," Thus, he (and others) sit around and wrongly think that everything is broken and are discouraged from participating in the process. They don't want to take the time to understand whether it was one of their representatives or not.
Souma
Profile Blog Joined May 2010
2nd Worst City in CA8938 Posts
October 20 2013 00:52 GMT
#11016
JPMorgan Chase has reached a tentative agreement with the Justice Department to pay a record $13 billion to settle civil investigations into faulty mortgage securities the bank sold to investors in the lead up to the financial crisis, according to two people familiar with the negotiations.

The tentative deal was reached Friday night in a call involving Attorney General Eric Holder and JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon, one of the sources said. It would be the largest settlement ever between Justice and a single company.

The package is expected to include $9 billion in penalties paid to the government and $4 billion in relief for consumers.

The deal would mark a victory for the Obama administration, which has been criticized for not being more agressive in pressing cases against Wall Street firms following the 2008 financial crisis.

...

Over the past year JPMorgan has faced a series of investigations that dented the reputation of both the bank and Dimon, who won plaudits following the financial crisis for his risk management skills.

In recent weeks, the bank has struck deals with various regulators intended to put an end to the firm’s legal woes.

Last month the bank agreed to a $920 million settlement with regulators over the London Whale trading debacle, along with separate deals over credit card and debt collection problems, as part of an effort to move past its legal woes.

JPMorgan’s legal troubles caused it to this month report its first quarterly loss since Dimon became CEO in 2005. The bank reported that it lost $380 million in the third quarter after spending about $9.3 billion on legal expenses. It is now reserving roughly $23 billion for litigation costs.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/10/jpmorgan-department-of-justice-settlement-98559.html?hp=f1
Writer
ticklishmusic
Profile Blog Joined August 2011
United States15977 Posts
October 20 2013 01:02 GMT
#11017
On October 20 2013 09:52 Souma wrote:
Show nested quote +
JPMorgan Chase has reached a tentative agreement with the Justice Department to pay a record $13 billion to settle civil investigations into faulty mortgage securities the bank sold to investors in the lead up to the financial crisis, according to two people familiar with the negotiations.

The tentative deal was reached Friday night in a call involving Attorney General Eric Holder and JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon, one of the sources said. It would be the largest settlement ever between Justice and a single company.

The package is expected to include $9 billion in penalties paid to the government and $4 billion in relief for consumers.

The deal would mark a victory for the Obama administration, which has been criticized for not being more agressive in pressing cases against Wall Street firms following the 2008 financial crisis.

...

Over the past year JPMorgan has faced a series of investigations that dented the reputation of both the bank and Dimon, who won plaudits following the financial crisis for his risk management skills.

In recent weeks, the bank has struck deals with various regulators intended to put an end to the firm’s legal woes.

Last month the bank agreed to a $920 million settlement with regulators over the London Whale trading debacle, along with separate deals over credit card and debt collection problems, as part of an effort to move past its legal woes.

JPMorgan’s legal troubles caused it to this month report its first quarterly loss since Dimon became CEO in 2005. The bank reported that it lost $380 million in the third quarter after spending about $9.3 billion on legal expenses. It is now reserving roughly $23 billion for litigation costs.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/10/jpmorgan-department-of-justice-settlement-98559.html?hp=f1


To put that in perspective, $13 billion will cover about half of what was wasted by the government shutdown.
(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻
blomsterjohn
Profile Joined June 2008
Norway472 Posts
Last Edited: 2013-10-20 02:18:05
October 20 2013 01:26 GMT
#11018
On October 20 2013 10:02 ticklishmusic wrote:
Show nested quote +
On October 20 2013 09:52 Souma wrote:
JPMorgan Chase has reached a tentative agreement with the Justice Department to pay a record $13 billion to settle civil investigations into faulty mortgage securities the bank sold to investors in the lead up to the financial crisis, according to two people familiar with the negotiations.

The tentative deal was reached Friday night in a call involving Attorney General Eric Holder and JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon, one of the sources said. It would be the largest settlement ever between Justice and a single company.

The package is expected to include $9 billion in penalties paid to the government and $4 billion in relief for consumers.

The deal would mark a victory for the Obama administration, which has been criticized for not being more agressive in pressing cases against Wall Street firms following the 2008 financial crisis.

...

Over the past year JPMorgan has faced a series of investigations that dented the reputation of both the bank and Dimon, who won plaudits following the financial crisis for his risk management skills.

In recent weeks, the bank has struck deals with various regulators intended to put an end to the firm’s legal woes.

Last month the bank agreed to a $920 million settlement with regulators over the London Whale trading debacle, along with separate deals over credit card and debt collection problems, as part of an effort to move past its legal woes.

JPMorgan’s legal troubles caused it to this month report its first quarterly loss since Dimon became CEO in 2005. The bank reported that it lost $380 million in the third quarter after spending about $9.3 billion on legal expenses. It is now reserving roughly $23 billion for litigation costs.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/10/jpmorgan-department-of-justice-settlement-98559.html?hp=f1


To put that in perspective, $13 billion will cover about half of what was wasted by the government shutdown.


To put that in further perspective, JP Morgan had (according to wiki) a net profit of 21.30 billion in 2012.

edit: corrected
DeltaX
Profile Joined August 2011
United States287 Posts
October 20 2013 01:53 GMT
#11019
On October 20 2013 10:26 blomsterjohn wrote:
Show nested quote +
On October 20 2013 10:02 ticklishmusic wrote:
On October 20 2013 09:52 Souma wrote:
JPMorgan Chase has reached a tentative agreement with the Justice Department to pay a record $13 billion to settle civil investigations into faulty mortgage securities the bank sold to investors in the lead up to the financial crisis, according to two people familiar with the negotiations.

The tentative deal was reached Friday night in a call involving Attorney General Eric Holder and JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon, one of the sources said. It would be the largest settlement ever between Justice and a single company.

The package is expected to include $9 billion in penalties paid to the government and $4 billion in relief for consumers.

The deal would mark a victory for the Obama administration, which has been criticized for not being more agressive in pressing cases against Wall Street firms following the 2008 financial crisis.

...

Over the past year JPMorgan has faced a series of investigations that dented the reputation of both the bank and Dimon, who won plaudits following the financial crisis for his risk management skills.

In recent weeks, the bank has struck deals with various regulators intended to put an end to the firm’s legal woes.

Last month the bank agreed to a $920 million settlement with regulators over the London Whale trading debacle, along with separate deals over credit card and debt collection problems, as part of an effort to move past its legal woes.

JPMorgan’s legal troubles caused it to this month report its first quarterly loss since Dimon became CEO in 2005. The bank reported that it lost $380 million in the third quarter after spending about $9.3 billion on legal expenses. It is now reserving roughly $23 billion for litigation costs.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/10/jpmorgan-department-of-justice-settlement-98559.html?hp=f1


To put that in perspective, $13 billion will cover about half of what was wasted by the government shutdown.


To put that in further perspective, JP Morgan had (according to wiki) a net income of 21.30 billion in 2012.


Profit, not income, it had ~100 billion in income.
{CC}StealthBlue
Profile Blog Joined January 2003
United States41117 Posts
October 20 2013 02:02 GMT
#11020
PORTLAND, Maine (AP) -- Advocates of recreational marijuana use are looking to an upcoming vote in Maine as an indicator of whether the East Coast is ready to follow in the footsteps of Colorado and Washington by legalizing cannabis.

Voters in Portland are being asked whether they want to make it legal for adults 21 and over to possess -- but not purchase or sell -- up to 2.5 ounces of pot. The Nov. 5 vote is being eyed nationally as momentum grows in favor of legalizing marijuana use.

The Marijuana Policy Project, a Washington, D.C.-based group that supports legalization, says it targeted Portland because it's Maine's largest city and because, unlike many other states and cities, it has an initiative process to get the referendum on the ballot. Organizers hope passage of the Portland initiative could spur similar results in other liberal Northeast cities.

"I think there's national implications, keeping the momentum that Washington and Colorado started last November in ending marijuana prohibition," said David Boyer, the organization's political director in Maine. "This is just the next domino."

There's no organized opposition to the referendum, but law enforcement and substance abuse groups are speaking out against it.


Source
"Smokey, this is not 'Nam, this is bowling. There are rules."
Prev 1 549 550 551 552 553 10093 Next
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
Next event in 9h 1m
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
PiGStarcraft511
SpeCial 99
Nathanias 99
CosmosSc2 54
StarCraft: Brood War
Artosis 718
Shuttle 29
Dota 2
syndereN733
monkeys_forever373
NeuroSwarm6
League of Legends
C9.Mang0331
Counter-Strike
taco 623
Foxcn297
Super Smash Bros
hungrybox225
Mew2King88
PPMD55
Other Games
summit1g10864
ToD186
Maynarde115
ForJumy 55
Organizations
Other Games
gamesdonequick1120
BasetradeTV31
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 16 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• Hupsaiya 86
• davetesta32
• intothetv
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Migwel
• sooper7s
StarCraft: Brood War
• BSLYoutube
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
Dota 2
• masondota21943
League of Legends
• Stunt484
Other Games
• imaqtpie1405
• Shiphtur240
Upcoming Events
Sparkling Tuna Cup
9h 1m
LiuLi Cup
10h 1m
Reynor vs Creator
Maru vs Lambo
PiGosaur Monday
1d
Replay Cast
1d 8h
LiuLi Cup
1d 10h
Clem vs Rogue
SHIN vs Cyan
Replay Cast
1d 23h
The PondCast
2 days
KCM Race Survival
2 days
LiuLi Cup
2 days
Scarlett vs TriGGeR
ByuN vs herO
Replay Cast
2 days
[ Show More ]
Online Event
3 days
LiuLi Cup
3 days
Serral vs Zoun
Cure vs Classic
RSL Revival
4 days
RSL Revival
4 days
LiuLi Cup
4 days
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
4 days
RSL Revival
4 days
Replay Cast
4 days
Sparkling Tuna Cup
5 days
LiuLi Cup
5 days
Replay Cast
5 days
Replay Cast
6 days
LiuLi Cup
6 days
Wardi Open
6 days
Monday Night Weeklies
6 days
Replay Cast
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

CSL 2025 WINTER (S19)
Rongyi Cup S3
Underdog Cup #3

Ongoing

KCM Race Survival 2026 Season 1
LiuLi Cup: 2025 Grand Finals
Nations Cup 2026
IEM Kraków 2026
BLAST Bounty Winter 2026
BLAST Bounty Winter Qual
eXTREMESLAND 2025
SL Budapest Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 8

Upcoming

Escore Tournament S1: W8
Acropolis #4
IPSL Spring 2026
HSC XXIX
uThermal 2v2 2026 Main Event
Bellum Gens Elite Stara Zagora 2026
RSL Revival: Season 4
WardiTV Winter 2026
CCT Season 3 Global Finals
FISSURE Playground #3
IEM Rio 2026
PGL Bucharest 2026
Stake Ranked Episode 1
BLAST Open Spring 2026
ESL Pro League Season 23
ESL Pro League Season 23
PGL Cluj-Napoca 2026
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2026 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.