• Cyburbia is a friendly big tent, where we share our experiences and thoughts about urban planning practice, the built environment, planning adjacent topics, and anything else that comes to mind. No ads, no spam, and it's free. It's easy to join!

NEVERENDING ♾️ The NEVERENDING Political Discussion Thread

Blide said:
Yes and no. While I agree this particular issue is much ado about nothing, she is putting herself out there to humanize Mitt. When she's out stumping for her husband on the campaign trail, she is inevitably going to draw criticism just as Michelle Obama does. It may not be fair or justified but what she does reflects on her husband.
Click to expand...

This kind of stuff is so damn silly. Times and time again someone takes a shot at an opponent or, in this case, his spouse, and then, oh my god, that person and the people in their political sphere takes offense. :-c Who wouda thunk it? Then the people in the camp of the offender throw him or her under the bus and the offender has to do a mea culpa. Jeezus.

If you can't be trusted not to say something you will regret, then take the advice of Calvin Coolidge. "If you don't say anything, you won't be called upon to repeat it." Or retract it.

If you are going to take a shot, then stick by it. If you haven't pissed off your opponent and his people at least once a day, then you aren't doing your job. Stir the damn pot and then whack them with the spoon. And don't apologize. Don't equivocate. The only thing worse than being seen as being an a-hole is being seen as being an a-hole who folds like a house of cards when the slightest breeze of dissent comes your way.

And the people on your side should just turn, shake their heads and walk away whistling - "Nope. Nothing happening here." All the while chuckling to themselves. And they should never ask you to apologize unless they are your boss.

Politics is a bloodsport. If you are too thin-skinned or a political hemophiliac, then you should find something less strenuous to participate in.

And being the spouse of a candidate is like being in the front row of a Gallagher concert. When the Sledge-o-Matic comes out, you are gonna get stuff all over you. So wear your plastic sheet and don't whine if your hair gets messed up.
 
It's going to be a NASTY couple of months here.....

:not:

Already, the two major Democrats in the forthcoming (and likely to be unsuccessful) attempt to fire our governor have set out to totally destroy each other in the partisan primary - the 'do nothing' (and two-time loser in governor elections) Mayor of Milwaukee and the waaaaay out in left field la-la-land former Dane County (Madison, et al) Executive. The Mayor is despised by most union types because he used the recent collective bargaining reforms to save his city's taxpayers some significant money this year - and even proposed government worker union reforms similar to what passed in the state well before they were introduced into the legislature - while the former county executive is well to the left of most of the rest of the state and has already promised AFSCME, WEAC and other unions that she'll essentially hold the state hostage unless and until the reforms are undone, refusing to exercise any of the responsibilities of the office. Of the two, statewide polling shows the Mayor as the least likely to lose, but still behind.

An interesting thing here, marketing studies (for lack of a better term) done by the Democrats have shown to them that their disgust over the government worker union reforms is an issue that is not resonating with the state's voters as services are being maintained and even expanded with either no tax rate increases or tax rate cuts in jurisdictions that adopted the reforms. Thus, we'll be seeing very little chatter from them on union issues and pretty much a normal 'other issues' campaign with stuff like what we are seeing at the national level (the supposed 'war on women', ginned-up improprieties and so forth).

Also, when pressed by a reporter from a Milwaukee radio station a couple of days ago on what they would have done to close the state's $3.6 billion budget gap last year (the state's finances are now in balance), they both essentially told the reporter to "F*** OFF! :-@".

:r:

Mike
 
Last edited:
Which is worse ?

either

The Secret Service's Columbian prostitutes

OR

The GSA's $820,000 conference & the official pleading the 5th
 
JNA said:
Which is worse ?

either

The Secret Service's Columbian prostitutes

OR

The GSA's $820,000 conference & the official pleading the 5th
Click to expand...

Well, I haven't heard that any prostitutes complained about not being paid by the GSA, so it must be the Secret Service. ;)
 
Honestly neither one of those bothers me that much. The GSA conference may have been excessive but conferences are still necessary and cost a lot of money to hold. The conference just cost twice as much as it should have. That's definitely a problem but nothing earth shattering when you see the amount of waste coming from others areas of the government such as the military.

Then the Secret Service, the only news here is that they actually got caught with prostitutes, not that they were utilizing their services. I'm sure many politicians, military, and other US personnel abroad use prostitutes on a regular basis but they don't start an incident by having the police get involved while the President is in town.
 
JNA said:
Which is worse ?

either

The Secret Service's Columbian prostitutes

OR

The GSA's $820,000 conference & the official pleading the 5th
Click to expand...

Hey those Secret Service and military personnel are only human. Colombian women are muy caliente!

(Full disclosure statement: I am married to a Colombian woman.) ;) :D :h:
 
JNA said:
:-o What can you say about Ted Nugent comments at NRA convention ? :r: :not:
Click to expand...

That he's an entertainer playing to the crowd. He's no different than Rush, except Ted actually has talent.:D

The whole investigation thing is stupid and only serves to rile people up.
 
Whose Yur Planner said:
That he's an entertainer playing to the crowd. He's no different than Rush, except Ted actually has talent.:D

The whole investigation thing is stupid and only serves to rile people up.
Click to expand...

Two points. 1) The Secret Service always investigates threats to the President, and what Ted said was stupid and not a serious threat I'm sure, but it was a threat nonetheless.
and 2) Ted is not talented. He was sort of talented, but he never was that great a guitarist and a horrible singer. He has remained famous because of his antics, not his talent. Cat Scratch Fever is one of the worst and most annoying songs to ever be a hit.
 
[OT]
imaplanner said:
Two points. 1) The Secret Service always investigates threats to the President, and what Ted said was stupid and not a serious threat I'm sure, but it was a threat nonetheless.
and 2) Ted is not talented. He was sort of talented, but he never was that great a guitarist and a horrible singer. He has remained famous because of his antics, not his talent. Cat Scratch Fever is one of the worst and most annoying songs to ever be a hit.
Click to expand...



While I agree that Cat Scratch Fever is an awfully annoying song and that The Nuge cannot sing, I think he's a pretty good guitarist (albeit not a very imaginative one). Stranglehold is a great example of what he can do on guitar and is one of my favorite rock songs of that era.[/OT]
 
WSU MUP Student said:
[OT]



While I agree that Cat Scratch Fever is an awfully annoying song and that The Nuge cannot sing, I think he's a pretty good guitarist (albeit not a very imaginative one). Stranglehold is a great example of what he can do on guitar and is one of my favorite rock songs of that era.[/OT]
Click to expand...

[OT]

I'm not a fan. I like the bassline for Stranglehold quite a bit, and I concede the guy is an acceptable lead guitarist, but I still think he gets way too much credit for being some sort of great guitarist and I just don't see it. Limbaugh on the other hand is quite talented in radio. All IMO of course. [/OT]
 
Is this guy serious ? :r: :p :lmao: 8-!

despite having no ties whatsoever to the Hoosier state — "I've never been further west than Buffalo, N.Y. ... — his name will appear on Democratic primary ballots on May 8.

So how could Southwestern Indiana voters trust a man who has never visited the area to represent their interests?

"I don't think that the question of trust is because I don't live there at the moment is necessarily relevant.

"It's one of the elements of the genius of the founding fathers that they required that senators and representatives be merely residents of the state from which they were elected on the date of their election," he said. "It allows us to hire our help where we can, and it's conceivable that the folks who live in the area may not always be what we want."

He has no plans for a trip to Indiana any time soon, but Bryk said if he somehow manages to win the May 8 primary, he will "absolutely" relocate to Indiana.
Click to expand...

Of course the reader comments are just as entertaining. :lmao:

http://www.courierpress.com/news/2012/apr/23/no-headline---ev_dist8_bryk/
 
Game of Thrones, White House version.

fLdcP.jpg
 
Politics has been much less interesting now that the primaries are over. Republicans just keep putting their foot in their mouths on any number of issues. They really need to step up their game if they want to beat the Democrats. As time goes on, it's looking increasingly likely the Democrats will hold on to the Presidency and the Senate while possibly taking back much of the House.
 
Political Question Unrelated to Presidential Election Contest

If the U.S. is in fact a world power, why do we almost invariably end up being the ones who travel to other countries to negotiate? Doesn't that diminish our bargaining position?
 
I wouldn't think so since it shows the United States as showing initiative and reaching out. Anyways, plenty of world leaders do come to the US to negotiate various issues but it doesn't really make the news since it is so routine. It's only the big meetings with multiple world leaders that really make the news here.

Also the US does have quite a history of meddling...
 
ofos said:
If the U.S. is in fact a world power, why do we almost invariably end up being the ones who travel to other countries to negotiate? Doesn't that diminish our bargaining position?
Click to expand...

I think of it a little like dad coming and knocking on the teenage son's door to check up on him and exercise a little moral pressure.
 
Any thoughts on Tuesday's (2012-05-08) results?

In Indiana, six-term incumbant Republican USSenator Richard Lugar lost his bid for a seventh term to a Tea-Party backed opponent (Richard Mourdock) in his party's primary.

In Wisconsin, there were no surprises in the partisan primaries in the latest round of recall elections, other than IMHO, there was much higher interest on the Republican side than I expected - Incumbent Governor Scott Walker received nearly as many votes against a token 'fake' Republican (a professional leftist protestor from Madison whom he beat by about a 97-3% margin) as the entire slate received on the Democrats' side of the ballot (614K to about 650K with 99% of precincts reporting).

In North Carolina, voters approved a binding state constitution amendment referendum to define a legal marriage in the state as a union between one male and one female.

Mike
 
Bryk got 2,970 votes in the Indiana 8th Bongressional District primary.

What's funny & sad those voters didn't care or know that Bryk does not even live in Indiana let alone in the 8th District..
 
mgk920 said:
Any thoughts on Tuesday's (2012-05-08) results?

In Indiana, six-term incumbant Republican USSenator Richard Lugar lost his bid for a seventh term to a Tea-Party backed opponent (Richard Mourdock) in his party's primary.

In Wisconsin, there were no surprises in the partisan primaries in the latest round of recall elections, other than IMHO, there was much higher interest on the Republican side than I expected - Incumbent Governor Scott Walker received nearly as many votes against a token 'fake' Republican (a professional leftist protestor from Madison whom he beat by about a 97-3% margin) as the entire slate received on the Democrats' side of the ballot (614K to about 650K with 99% of precincts reporting).

In North Carolina, voters approved a binding state constitution amendment referendum to define a legal marriage in the state as a union between one male and one female.

Mike
Click to expand...

Personally, if Dick Lugar is being called a moderate, the Indiana GOP should be worried. I don't think the Tea Party has the strength or support they did in 2010, and Mourdock is questionable at best. I don't see Indiana voting D anytime soon, but they are put in a much better position to run against Mourdock than Lugar.

I think North Carolina is beyond reprehensible. Sorry those who live there. But that amendment didn't just discriminate against gay people who want to marry, but now civil unions aren't even considered. I just don't understand how people can be so bigoted. You really don't think that two people who love each other, should have ANY rights because they happen to be of the same gender? It is just amazing to me. I look forward to seeing the demographic break downs of the voting in hopes that it is largely the over 60's who voted yes, and the under 40's who voted no. At least that way there is hope that such bigotry will die off sooner than later....
 
Hink said:
Personally, if Dick Lugar is being called a moderate, the Indiana GOP should be worried. I don't think the Tea Party has the strength or support they did in 2010, and Mourdock is questionable at best. I don't see Indiana voting D anytime soon, but they are put in a much better position to run against Mourdock than Lugar.

I think North Carolina is beyond reprehensible. Sorry those who live there. But that amendment didn't just discriminate against gay people who want to marry, but now civil unions aren't even considered. I just don't understand how people can be so bigoted. You really don't think that two people who love each other, should have ANY rights because they happen to be of the same gender? It is just amazing to me. I look forward to seeing the demographic break downs of the voting in hopes that it is largely the over 60's who voted yes, and the under 40's who voted no. At least that way there is hope that such bigotry will die off sooner than later....
Click to expand...
I would not be surprised if that measure was very popular in the highly religious rural black areas.

Also, from I am seeing here in Wisconsin, yesterday was a very bad day, indeed, for the unions in the state who forced the election in the first place as AFSCME/WEA's hand-picked and backed candidate (former Dane County Executive Kathy Falk) lost in the Democrat primary by a nearly 2-1 margin (58%-34%) - and at a cost to those unions of over $5M.

Mike
 
mgk920 said:
Any thoughts on Tuesday's (2012-05-08) results?

In Indiana, six-term incumbant Republican USSenator Richard Lugar lost his bid for a seventh term to a Tea-Party backed opponent (Richard Mourdock) in his party's primary.

In Wisconsin, there were no surprises in the partisan primaries in the latest round of recall elections, other than IMHO, there was much higher interest on the Republican side than I expected - Incumbent Governor Scott Walker received nearly as many votes against a token 'fake' Republican (a professional leftist protestor from Madison whom he beat by about a 97-3% margin) as the entire slate received on the Democrats' side of the ballot (614K to about 650K with 99% of precincts reporting).

In North Carolina, voters approved a binding state constitution amendment referendum to define a legal marriage in the state as a union between one male and one female.

Mike
Click to expand...

Hi Ho a trolling we will go.:r:
 
mgk920 said:
Any thoughts on Tuesday's (2012-05-08) results?

In Indiana, six-term incumbant Republican USSenator Richard Lugar lost his bid for a seventh term to a Tea-Party backed opponent (Richard Mourdock) in his party's primary.

In Wisconsin, there were no surprises in the partisan primaries in the latest round of recall elections, other than IMHO, there was much higher interest on the Republican side than I expected - Incumbent Governor Scott Walker received nearly as many votes against a token 'fake' Republican (a professional leftist protestor from Madison whom he beat by about a 97-3% margin) as the entire slate received on the Democrats' side of the ballot (614K to about 650K with 99% of precincts reporting).

In North Carolina, voters approved a binding state constitution amendment referendum to define a legal marriage in the state as a union between one male and one female.

Mike
Click to expand...

Don't know much about cheesehead state politics.

As far as Lugar goes, a turd sandwich could have beaten him in the primary. He had a completely inept campaign, which I guess is to be expected since he hasn't really had to campaign seriously in a couple of decades. He could have learned a lot from how Olympia Snow and John McCain survived attacks from the Tea-Party Right, but failed to adapt.

North Carolina, well, is disappointing but not surprising. But I've been here in Texas and a similar amendment passed here several years ago. I really just don't understand this hatred for LGBTQ that is manifesting itself in these types of amendments. And I'm dismayed not just by the church's positions on it, but HOW they are stating their positions and how they are actively engaged in campaigning.
 
The elections were very disappointing in several respects here in our piece of NC.

The marriage amendment is just awful - the people are screaming about having less governemnt and getting it out of our lives, but then pass a law thats tells people who they can be with. Talk about irony and forked tongue speak. The result was not surprising however.

The rest of the ballots were pretty disheartening as well.
 
Hink said:
Personally, if Dick Lugar is being called a moderate, the Indiana GOP should be worried. I don't think the Tea Party has the strength or support they did in 2010, and Mourdock is questionable at best. I don't see Indiana voting D anytime soon, but they are put in a much better position to run against Mourdock than Lugar.

:scissors:
Click to expand...

Lugar was apparently convinced that the image of him in DC was the image we Hoosiers have of him, and he was wrong this time. He ran a horrid campaign, dismissing professionals and sticking with DC insider folks. He was out of touch with the indignation some felt about his lack of a residence here (though per several Indiana AGs, that was not a legal issue) and tried to reply to it too late. A lot of people look at him, at age 80, and think he could do the job a while longer, but were not as convinced about him at say, 85 or 86. Certainly the tea partiers had something to do with it, but I think it is more-so the above than the tp.

Let's not forget that Evan Bayh was US Senator for quite some time until he decided not to run last year. Indiana was narrowly carried by President Obama (first time since 1964), so while it does tend R, the right Dems can win. Donnelly is a Blue Dog who could very well pull off an upset especially if he can pull some moderate R votes angry over Lugar's loss or aghast at Mourdock's assertion that HE WILL NOT COMPROMISE.
 
Looks like Lugar just threw Mourdock and the Tea Party under the boss in his concession. That'll give plenty of fodder for Democrats in the fall.
 
Really, it is too bad about Lugar. He is a good man and a great senator who represented Indiana very well for a long time. I voted for him every time I could.
 
Mastiff said:
If a church wants to be involved in politics, they need to pay taxes. :-@
Click to expand...

I can't find it at the moment, but I stumbled upon a document that was produced by an interfaith group in NC that was against Amendment 1 and it had a chart that said yes or no whether a pastor or church could do such things as; have a sermon on the amendment, lobby politicians, make donations, etc. The bottom line, from this pro-gay publication was that pastors and churches had the right to preach on the subject and hold meetings and lobby but couldn't make donations in the name of the church to a political organization or politician.

The sword cuts both ways.

If I find it I will post a link.

Here, page 3; http://www.nccouncilofchurches.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Amendment_1_Toolkit.pdf
 
Obama supports Same Sex marriage

Oh this is a big one. Can't wait to see what comes from this announcement. Biden and another Obama staffer sort of greased the skids earlier supporting same sex rights and unions, but now the Big Guy has spoken.

His enemies will make hay as a result. The right-wing talking heads will have fodder for a few days. Some folks in his camp may desert. Maybe he might pick up some voters who were wishing he'd get off the fence on the issue.

A lot of married people will just say why shouldn't gay and lesbian couples be as happy ot unhappy as the rest of us. :D
 

Excellent signature Otterpop :D


otterpop said:
Oh this is a big one.
Click to expand...

It certainly is a big deal, and Romney was quick to say he opposes same sex marriage, so this could be the main issue of the election. I wonder if this helps or hurts Obama. It certainly energizes his base, and energizes the conservatives against him. My take is that it will hurt him, since the people who support same sex marriage (younger generations) vote less.
 
WTF - Keith Judd, an inmate in Texas, got 41 percent of the vote in the West Virginia primary. :lmao:
 
imaplanner said:
It certainly is a big deal, and Romney was quick to say he opposes same sex marriage, so this could be the main issue of the election. I wonder if this helps or hurts Obama. It certainly energizes his base, and energizes the conservatives against him. My take is that it will hurt him, since the people who support same sex marriage (younger generations) vote less.
Click to expand...

The fact that he took a huge political risk to take a stand of an issue really says a lot about the president's character. I really admire that and hope that other politicans can start thinking less about the election and more about being leaders.
 
imaplanner said:
It certainly is a big deal, and Romney was quick to say he opposes same sex marriage, so this could be the main issue of the election. I wonder if this helps or hurts Obama. It certainly energizes his base, and energizes the conservatives against him. My take is that it will hurt him, since the people who support same sex marriage (younger generations) vote less.
Click to expand...
The kicker is that Romney supported gay marriage before he was against it. His record in Massachusetts on the issue is pretty clear.
 
Blide said:
The kicker is that Romney supported gay marriage before he was against it. His record in Massachusetts on the issue is pretty clear.
Click to expand...

Let it not be said Obama is an inept campaigner. There's a reason he won the last election and it's becoming clearer he's going to win this one too.
 
I said it before and I will say it again. The government needs to get out of regulating or banning any aspect of marriage. Be it same sex or the traditional sense.
 
michaelskis said:
I said it before and I will say it again. The government needs to get out of regulating or banning any aspect of marriage. Be it same sex or the traditional sense.
Click to expand...
I agree and have stated before that I would eliminate the entire concept of 'marriage' from civil laws, instead regulating the creation, registration, continuance and dissolution of domestic partnerships, leaving the actual institution of 'marriage' to whatever church, temple, mosque, coven or whatever else one professes to.

As for any effects on the election that BHO's (groundbreaking :r: ) announcement will have? IMHO, those who supported Him before will continue to do so and those who did not before will continue to not.

Mike
 
mgk920 said:
I agree and have stated before that I would eliminate the entire concept of 'marriage' from civil laws, instead regulating the creation, registration, continuance and dissolution of domestic partnerships, leaving the actual institution of 'marriage' to whatever church, temple, mosque, coven or whatever else one professes to.

As for any effects on the election that BHO's (groundbreaking :r: ) announcement will have? IMHO, those who supported Him before will continue to do so and those who did not before will continue to not.

Mike
Click to expand...

And for those of us who don't belong to any organized religion? How do we get married? According to your suggestion, we couldn't go to the Justice of the Peace, correct?

The other issue here is upholding the laws that govern rights associated with married couples. That is not something a church or synagogue, etc. can do. Visitation rights, issues of kids, estates, etc. What happens to people's assets when they die? What about divorce? All of these are governed by laws and that is why the government has a role in marriage. And there is a need to define the nature of partnerships to the extent that we need to distinguish a roommate (who should have no right to, say, a dead person's estate or their children) from a real, committed couple who has overtly agreed to such shared rights. Without some kind of legal identifier that two people have agreed to live as a unified household (and I don't care at all what their genders are), these rights to offspring and co-mingled assets become very murky indeed.

As for the President's announcement about gay marriage, I guess I feel that its about time and the right position to have. Is the timing politically motivated? Of course. I wish this stance had been taken earlier, but at least there is a firm position and not a wishy washy, dodgy position that is a moving target. I'm actually surprised that he made this announcement at this point in time. There is a part of me that fears that social conservatives who may not be excited about Romney and would consider just sitting the election out rather than vote for him might be motivated to vote just to oppose this stance. Though times have changed and I don't think this is the wedge issue it once was. Heck, Dick Cheney has endorsed gay marriage - in 2009!
 
Blide said:
The kicker is that Romney supported ________ before he was against it. His record in Massachusetts on the issue is pretty clear.
Click to expand...

I don't think you need to have any specific wording in there... I would imagine you could really put any word... ;)
 
Blide said:
The House just voted to eliminate the American Community Survey...

This is honestly the stupidest thing I've seen come out of this Congress. Good thing Obama and the Senate likely won't let it fly.
Click to expand...

I've been following this since the measure was proposed and was upset when it passed yesterday. I work in economic development and use the data from the ACS extensively in everything from marketing materials to building models and producing impact analysis. If it comes into law, it will make this type of work much more difficult and expensive, especially for organizations that do not have the resources to go out and purchase similar data from private providers. I'm keeping my fingers crossed that it doesn't make it far in the Senate.

However, part of me would love for it to pass, and then the Census Bureau, BLS, BEA, etc. all just shut down for a year or so so that those who rely on the data, but don't support its collection, can discover just how important it is for local governments, schools, businesses, etc. Basically, it would be amusing if the folks at the Department of Commerce who oversee all this data collection and dissemination just said a big FU and took everything down except the basic population counts from the Decennial Censuses...
 
Back
Top