Octopus Overlords

"The words 'We The People' are now meaningless"? No, they're not.

It was "By the People" when the law was passed in California and the election of the Congresspeople, who are "Of the People," that passed DOMA. Today, we're doing "For the People", in that we live in a representative republic where the tyranny of the majority can be overthrown on a legal basis by referring to the laws in place.

A list of Scalia rage quotes from his dissent.


What a piece of shit.

Great couple days for libertarians. I think the only group to file amicus on the winning side of DOMA, Prop 8, and the Voting Rights Act was Cato.

That didn't take long - Rep. Tim Huelskamp said he will join other conservative legislators in an effort to restore the discriminatory Defense of Marriage Act

“My response to this will be later this week to file a federal marriage amendment,” Huelskamp said at a Conversation with Conservatives lunch this morning.

Maybe craft a bill that addresses both the Affordable Care Act and the restoration of DOMA and save yourselves some time.

Isgrimnur wrote:"The words 'We The People' are now meaningless"? No, they're not.

It was "By the People" when the law was passed in California and the election of the Congresspeople, who are "Of the People," that passed DOMA. Today, we're doing "For the People", in that we live in a representative republic where the tyranny of the majority can be overthrown on a legal basis by referring to the laws in place.

Unless of course it has to do with spying on you. Then all bets are off.

For your own safety and security.....of course.

Curtailing domestic spying would be a job-killer!

Smoove_B wrote:That didn't take long - Rep. Tim Huelskamp said he will join other conservative legislators in an effort to restore the discriminatory Defense of Marriage Act

“My response to this will be later this week to file a federal marriage amendment,” Huelskamp said at a Conversation with Conservatives lunch this morning.

Maybe craft a bill that addresses both the Affordable Care Act and the restoration of DOMA and save yourselves some time.

Oh for fucks sake. (Huelskamp, et al. not Smoove B)

noxiousdog wrote:I can vouch for the fact that getting a birth certificate can be a real pain in the ass.

On the other hand, the solution is to make those documents more readily available, not to pretend like it's an insurmountable hurdle.

Why do you assume it will stop with this? Look at the Wendy Davis thread - Texas (and other states) are passing laws that don't outlaw abortion, but do everything in their power to make getting one impossible.

Why will voter ID be any different? Next thing you know, there will be mandatory DNA swabs in certain districts, etc... Look at the quote/unquote war on women's rights if you want to see the future of Voter ID with respect to minority voting.

There sure are a lot of butthurt folks on Twitter today.


I'm trying not to indulge in too much schadenfreude.

Pyperkub wrote:

noxiousdog wrote:I can vouch for the fact that getting a birth certificate can be a real pain in the ass.

On the other hand, the solution is to make those documents more readily available, not to pretend like it's an insurmountable hurdle.

Why do you assume it will stop with this? Look at the Wendy Davis thread - Texas (and other states) are passing laws that don't outlaw abortion, but do everything in their power to make getting one impossible.

Why will voter ID be any different? Next thing you know, there will be mandatory DNA swabs in certain districts, etc... Look at the quote/unquote war on women's rights if you want to see the future of Voter ID with respect to minority voting.

I know right. And we'll have people marrying animals and it will be illegal to own property if you have your way.

noxiousdog wrote:

Pyperkub wrote:

noxiousdog wrote:I can vouch for the fact that getting a birth certificate can be a real pain in the ass.

On the other hand, the solution is to make those documents more readily available, not to pretend like it's an insurmountable hurdle.

Why do you assume it will stop with this? Look at the Wendy Davis thread - Texas (and other states) are passing laws that don't outlaw abortion, but do everything in their power to make getting one impossible.

Why will voter ID be any different? Next thing you know, there will be mandatory DNA swabs in certain districts, etc... Look at the quote/unquote war on women's rights if you want to see the future of Voter ID with respect to minority voting.

I know right. And we'll have people marrying animals and it will be illegal to own property if you have your way.

You do recognize the effort to deny women their constitutional right to get an abortion here, correct? Since the Governor explicitly said that was the goal...

Pyperkub wrote: You do recognize the effort to deny women their constitutional right to get an abortion here, correct? Since the Governor explicitly said that was the goal...

You do recognize that I'm pretty sick of the extremism from both sides, correct?

I'm not really that politically smart, but it seems to me that if there was compromise on some of these issues, a lot of the support would go away.

noxiousdog wrote:I'm not really that politically smart

Why do I get the feeling this might come in handy some day?

noxiousdog wrote:but it seems to me that if there was compromise on some of these issues, a lot of the support would go away.

How do you compromise on issues that are apparently cornerstone philosophies (no abortions ever, sanctity of marriage, etc...) without jeopardizing your eternal soul?

We're not talking about building a road or funding a class to train people in CPR.

Sepiche wrote:

noxiousdog wrote:I'm not really that politically smart

Why do I get the feeling this might come in handy some day?

This isn't news. I'm not nearly subtle or nuanced enough to be politically smart.

noxiousdog wrote:

Pyperkub wrote: You do recognize the effort to deny women their constitutional right to get an abortion here, correct? Since the Governor explicitly said that was the goal...

You do recognize that I'm pretty sick of the extremism from both sides, correct?

I'm not really that politically smart, but it seems to me that if there was compromise on some of these issues, a lot of the support would go away.

Not that I really disagree with you, but with abortion it's a question of legalizing murder. We've had that conversation before. How can you compromise on murder? If it's not murder how can you allow someone dominance to your personal reproduction. The only place a compromise can come from is it being both fetucide and a necessary byproduct of human society. Like death in war. And then finding the arbitrary line of distinction.

Sent courtesy of the Galaxy.... note2.

noxiousdog wrote:

Pyperkub wrote: You do recognize the effort to deny women their constitutional right to get an abortion here, correct? Since the Governor explicitly said that was the goal...

You do recognize that I'm pretty sick of the extremism from both sides, correct?

I'm not really that politically smart, but it seems to me that if there was compromise on some of these issues, a lot of the support would go away.

Agreed, but I don't think that the Voting Rights Act prior to the current decision was extreme - and was actually approved by "extremists from both sides" (or Congress, which currently seems to constitute the same perspective.

It also seems to me that most of the Voter ID type laws are being written to make voting more restrictive and less inclusive, which really shouldn't be a partisan issue at all.

Combustible Lemur wrote:

noxiousdog wrote:

Pyperkub wrote: You do recognize the effort to deny women their constitutional right to get an abortion here, correct? Since the Governor explicitly said that was the goal...

You do recognize that I'm pretty sick of the extremism from both sides, correct?

I'm not really that politically smart, but it seems to me that if there was compromise on some of these issues, a lot of the support would go away.

Not that I really disagree with you, but with abortion it's a question of legalizing murder. We've had that conversation before. How can you compromise on murder?

But also part of that discussion was that many birth control pills are effectively an abortion, but much, much fewer people have a problem with that. In that case, it is a matter of degrees and some compromise should be possible.

Granted, I have no idea what that compromise might be.

Combustible Lemur wrote: Not that I really disagree with you, but with abortion it's a question of legalizing murder. We've had that conversation before. How can you compromise on murder? If it's not murder how can you allow someone dominance to your personal reproduction. The only place a compromise can come from is it being both fetucide and a necessary byproduct of human society. Like death in war. And then finding the arbitrary line of distinction.

Sent courtesy of the Galaxy.... note2.

Euthanasia, war, death penalty, self defense/stand your ground.

We compromise all the time.

noxiousdog wrote:

Combustible Lemur wrote: Not that I really disagree with you, but with abortion it's a question of legalizing murder. We've had that conversation before. How can you compromise on murder? If it's not murder how can you allow someone dominance to your personal reproduction. The only place a compromise can come from is it being both fetucide and a necessary byproduct of human society. Like death in war. And then finding the arbitrary line of distinction.

Sent courtesy of the Galaxy.... note2.

Euthanasia, war, death penalty, self defense/stand your ground.

We compromise all the time.

Sure, but in the current climate abortion will have to be re framed. In all of the cases you stated there are still vehement groups fighting both sides. But it's difficult to rally support for killing more people! Abortion happens to be easy to rally the troops around. It's for the children...

Sent courtesy of the Galaxy.... note2.

Exodor wrote:There sure are a lot of butthurt folks on Twitter today.


I'm trying not to indulge in too much schadenfreude.

Twitter is nothing. Facebook is a war zone.

I'm on hiatus from Facebook. My population is evenly divided and completely partisan, and I just can't stand the noise.

Well, I live in a bubble. All I see on FB is high fives.

Kraken wrote:Well, I live in a bubble. All I see on FB is high fives.

Same. I purged all the morons last time.

Combustible Lemur wrote:

noxiousdog wrote:

Combustible Lemur wrote: Not that I really disagree with you, but with abortion it's a question of legalizing murder. We've had that conversation before. How can you compromise on murder? If it's not murder how can you allow someone dominance to your personal reproduction. The only place a compromise can come from is it being both fetucide and a necessary byproduct of human society. Like death in war. And then finding the arbitrary line of distinction.

Sent courtesy of the Galaxy.... note2.

Euthanasia, war, death penalty, self defense/stand your ground.

We compromise all the time.

Sure, but in the current climate abortion will have to be re framed. In all of the cases you stated there are still vehement groups fighting both sides. But it's difficult to rally support for killing more people! Abortion happens to be easy to rally the troops around. It's for the children...

Sent courtesy of the Galaxy.... note2.

Sure. But what I'm interested in is instead of it being 40/40/20 yes/no/don't care it becomes 20/20/40 yes/no/don't care.

noxiousdog wrote:

Combustible Lemur wrote:

noxiousdog wrote:

Combustible Lemur wrote: Not that I really disagree with you, but with abortion it's a question of legalizing murder. We've had that conversation before. How can you compromise on murder? If it's not murder how can you allow someone dominance to your personal reproduction. The only place a compromise can come from is it being both fetucide and a necessary byproduct of human society. Like death in war. And then finding the arbitrary line of distinction.

Sent courtesy of the Galaxy.... note2.

Euthanasia, war, death penalty, self defense/stand your ground.

We compromise all the time.

Sure, but in the current climate abortion will have to be re framed. In all of the cases you stated there are still vehement groups fighting both sides. But it's difficult to rally support for killing more people! Abortion happens to be easy to rally the troops around. It's for the children...

Sent courtesy of the Galaxy.... note2.

Sure. But what I'm interested in is instead of it being 40/40/20 yes/no/don't care it becomes 20/20/40 yes/no/don't care.

That's what you want or that's what it is? That is the trick with don't care. If you don't care you don't advocate, you sit in forums and complain about advocacy

Sent courtesy of the Galaxy.... note2.

If anyone's running low on schadenfreude, the Doma thread on (god help me) Glenn Beck's site is a pretty good place to stock up:
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/06 ... t-of-doma/" target="_blank

My favorite logic so far is:
Homosexuals take over and destroy the family and American way, which leads to the Muslims taking over, and since the Muslims hate gay people and will slaughter them if they take over, gay people are killing themselves if they demand equal rights.

You can't argue with that logic!

The Onion was funny today.

Scalia, Thomas, Roberts, Alito Suddenly Realize They Will Be Villains In Oscar-Winning Movie One Day

“Oh, God, the major social ramifications, the political intrigue, all the important people involved in the case—I’m going to be played by some sinister character actor in a drama with tons of award buzz, aren’t I?” said Scalia, joining his fellow dissenting justices in realizing they would be antagonists in a film potentially titled Defense Of Marriage and probably written by Tony Kushner.

Good enough for Kenya but not us?

Much us it on our dime, BTW.

As President Obama and his family continue their tour of Africa, the White House put out a Fact Sheet entitled "U.S. Support for Strengthening Democratic Institutions, Rule of Law, and Human Rights in Sub-Saharan Africa." One of the first items highlighted by the White House is a $53 million program in Kenya that helps young people "obtain National identification cards, a prerequisite to voter registration."

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/wh- ... 37990.html

Which is it? Do you want national ID cards or the feds to actually respect the 10th amendment?

Rip wrote:Good enough for Kenya but not us?

Much us it on our dime, BTW.

As President Obama and his family continue their tour of Africa, the White House put out a Fact Sheet entitled "U.S. Support for Strengthening Democratic Institutions, Rule of Law, and Human Rights in Sub-Saharan Africa." One of the first items highlighted by the White House is a $53 million program in Kenya that helps young people "obtain National identification cards, a prerequisite to voter registration."

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/wh- ... 37990.html

So what you're saying is the federal government should have an assistance program set up for US citizens in order to help everyone in the United States with getting an ID card that would then be required to open a bank account, get a job, apply for a loan or vote?

Can't blame Obama for organizing the youth vote in the Republican state of Kenya.

By the way, the latest Kenyan Constitution expressly requires evidence for voter registration, something our founding fathers never considered necessary. And those National ID cards haven't turned out so well for Kenyan minority populations.

PLW wrote:

Awesome. Though the New Yorker has it off in that Burt is gay, but Ernie is not. It is tragic, unrequited love, like Sam and Frodo.

Rip wrote:Good enough for Kenya but not us?

Much us it on our dime, BTW.

As President Obama and his family continue their tour of Africa, the White House put out a Fact Sheet entitled "U.S. Support for Strengthening Democratic Institutions, Rule of Law, and Human Rights in Sub-Saharan Africa." One of the first items highlighted by the White House is a $53 million program in Kenya that helps young people "obtain National identification cards, a prerequisite to voter registration."

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/wh- ... 37990.html

Despite what the Weekly Standard seems to be implying, this is not a contradiction. The WH wants to make it easier for people to vote. Given that Kenya (apparently) has a national ID card that's legally required to vote, the way to make that easier is to help young people obtain the required cards. It doesn't follow that the WH thinks that Kenya's voting set up is ideal or the way to go.

Also, there was nice e-mail at work yesterday saying that, on account of the DOMA decision, effectively immediately MA Attorney General employees will no longer have taxes taken out of their paycheck for covering their same sex spouses under their health insurance plans. Nice reminder of the impact of the decision, and of how prior to it some couples were paying more in taxes effectively just because they happened to be gay.

El Guapo wrote:

PLW wrote:

Awesome. Though the New Yorker has it off in that Burt is gay, but Ernie is not. It is tragic, unrequited love, like Sam and Frodo.

That's the least what the New York "has it off" on.

A CRT TV? Two guys (gay or not) sharing a place and having a CRT TV? Rabbit ears even? Are we still living in the 50s?

I have never understood taking Bert and Ernie are gay thing seriously. They're puppets talking to preschoolers. Even if that was CTW's agenda, they're puppets talking to preschoolers. I think it's a pretty big leap from The New Yorker. Does CTW have a response to this? If they do, I'd imagine it would not be one that sheds a good light on The New Yorker.

The picture was created back in 2012, and not explicitly for the New Yorker.

The "Ernie & Burt as couple" meme transcends anything CTW has to say about it. It took on a life of its own many years ago.

If it feels better, you can say they play straight roommates on the show.