Do you even know how big the pile of bills from the House were that just collected dust on Harry Reid's desk? He refused to hold votes on them. And oh please, the Republicans did far better than anyone's wildest dreams this midterm. Idk what you're on about them having a veto proof majority.
Buckeye it would the same super majority used to pass Doma in 1996 . A supermajority allows the senate/congress to over turn a president's veto. Forcing legislation through even if the sitting president veto is used.
That's what called a "non sequitur". non se·qui·tur a conclusion or statement that does not logically follow from the previous argument or statement. I wasn't blaming Bush for unemployment. I was blaming Bush for Iraq. I blame Republicans for unemployment. Here's why. I think many people tend to forget just how bad it was in 2009. We were looking at the collapse of the global economy. In America, we were losing an average of about 700,000 jobs a month. GDP had shrank by 4.7% and the stock market had plunged to 6500. Our banking system was on the verge of collapse and major industries were close to going out of business. We hadn't seen anything like it since the Great Depression. When Obama took office in the middle of all that, the first the Republicans did was to vow to make him a one term President. Let that sink in. They didn't vow to do everything possible to fix the economy. They vowed to destroy Obama. And the way they did that was to do everything possible to keep the economy bad. They DELIBERATELY pursued an agenda of obstructing everything they could. They even DELIBERATELY pushed an agenda of austerity to make things worse. They DELIBERATELY did everything they could to prolong the economic suffering of millions of Americans just so they could win an election. And now they have the balls to complain that the recovery has been too slow and we haven't reached full employment yet. It's as if you burned the family house down, threw away your fathers tools, hid his credit card so he couldn't buy materials, then complained to him that he hadn't fixed the house fast enough. If you were my son and did that, I'd ***** slap you. Your party did that. So please, don't come here and whine to me about employment.
Politician: one who runs on values he will not be able to hold true too because he had to borrow millions of dollars from private/cooperate sponsers enslaving his term to vote on their political agenda
Well ever since the infamous removal of homosexuality from the DSM (I believe in the 1970's, meaning it was no longer characterized as a mental illness), I think it's time to change the LGTB acronym to LGTBP. Pedophilia is undergoing the same process the LGTB group did in the 1970's. It's only a matter of time before they give full recognition to these "oppressed" people. "According to the DSM-5, pedophilia “refers to a sexual orientation or profession of sexual preference devoid of consummation, whereas pedophilic disorder is defined as a compulsion and is used in reference to individuals who act on their sexuality,” NeonTommy wrote. Pedophilia is not a “sexual orientation,” and erroneous use of that phrase will be corrected soon in its new manual on mental illnesses, the American Psychiatric Association said Thursday. The APA’s statement came in response to media inquiries, including from The Washington Times, about an uproar on the Internet that the APA had designated pedophilia as a sexual orientation in its new Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, known as DSM-5 or DSM-V." http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/oct/31/apa/ The APA has already begun to flirt with the idea. Like I said before, it's only a matter of time. The Pedophilic community is simply behind because they do not use the mafia style tactics in trying to get what they want that the LGTB community has adopted. So it's hardly fair to call Cheese's argument dishonest when the actual experts are beginning to you with the idea. Come on.
That whole labor force thing is actually expected and part of a recession like symptom. Is it good? No, is it entirely horrible? No, due to tons of mitigating factors (baby boomers retiring, elderly surviving longer increasing this age group in the population, our population growth in total, etc.) this number was going to go up naturally in totality. Let's not forget this recession was caused by less regulation, so let's not acted shocked when it's said these are all symptoms of Republican politics and economics policy. :roll:
Ehh. Political parties are just a mess. Independent all the way. George Washington? You know? The first president? The general of the Revolutionary war? Yeah, that guy. Now quoting him,"...political parties will destroy our nation..." Now look at us. We have a false sense of freedom. We can't get anything passed through congress because of the two opposing sides. Political parties will be the downfall of our nation. Let me ask you one thing, has there ever been a country to not fall?
You have got to be kidding me. Two CONSENTING adults is FAR different than an adult taking advantage of a minor. Two consenting adults in a relationship is a victimless act. Once upon a time people like you thought interracial consenting adults was a bad thing (wouldn't shock me if you still did) but guess what. It's completely alright as long as they treat each other well. Just like consenting adults of different religious backgrounds, surprisingly enough they can have healthy relationships too. To even compare a consenting relationship to a heinous crime in which there is a victim is atrocious in and of itself. I'm sorry your made up morals disagree with equality when it's actually proposed. Maybe you missed the entire "separation of church and state" thing. You probably think we're a "Christian nation" when a good handful of our countries forefathers were outright not Christians but actually simply Theists (trust me, the difference is big enough). I'm sorry, just can't stand bigotry (and that's exactly what it is, don't fool yourself).
Um, no. You bigots keep pushing that crap in order to justify your bigotry. It's another one of your BS scare tactics called "the slippery slope". It works like this. "OMG we can't do this! It MIGHT lead to that!" It's the same way marijuana has been kept illegal, because hey, smoking a joint leads to heroin. As has already been explained to you, marriage is a legal social contract between adults. Not children. Adults.
You guys probably don't even know the circumstances surrounding Homosexuality's removal from the DSM I bet. Cheese is very eloquent in this field (far more than I). History and political correctness has buried it I'm afraid. If he wants, he can explain it to you.
Buck, do you know how much time and tax paying dollars were wasted on repealing Obamacare? "since Republicans took control of the House in 2011, they have voted 54 times to undo/tweak the law" Those were bills that had zero chances to pass. Of course they would sit on his desk/be vetoed.
How's it equality when you refer to a group as pedophiles, that's bashing a minority how ever you like to hide it behind what ever twisted religious justification you choose to use.
Actually, I do. Allow me to give you the short version of it. Back in the day, being gay was thought to be immoral, "unnatural" (even though it occurs frequently in nature) and a sin. This view primarily resulted from centuries of conditioning pushed mainly by the church and based on the bible. When the first DSM was written back in 1952, a bunch of people who held these views classified being gay as a "mental disorder". As more and more research was done on the subject, and the influence of the church waned, it was realized that this classification was wrong. So it was removed. That's the wonderful thing about science. Science looks at the facts and asks "what conclusion can we draw from them?" Unlike theology, which says "This is the conclusion. What facts can we find to support it?" Science holds views tentatively, not dogmatically.
My ass. Your justifications damn sure aren't based on science. Don't even try to go down that path. I will embarrass you.
Based on the objections raised by cheese ( by your words the eloquent one) you object to gay marriage because it's meant to be one man one woman. That's sounding very much like a religious argument to me. If it's not based on a religious principle would you care to explain where the one man one woman argument comes from ? That argument then lead into the describing gays as like pedophiles which is both wrong on every level. If your dislike isn't based on your religion then what is it based off? If the conservatives are for equality what is the Doma all about ? If not stripping loving couples of legal protections that you don't feel they should enjoy what was it's motivation ? How is that not against the full faith and credit parts of the constitution?
As for the DSM removal of homosexuality that was due to the overwhelming weight of scientific evidence from studies run correctly with blind data collection over misrepresented and opinionated evidence from some psychoanalysts who objected to Freud and his theories of development.
Just for giggles one of the studies used to back the change was done by that bastion of free love and hippy values the united states army during World War Two. A common conclusion in their wartime studies was that, in the words of Maj. Carl H. Jonas, who studied fifty-three white and seven black men at Camp Haan, California, "overt homosexuality occurs in a heterogeneous group of individuals." Dr. Clements Fry, director of the Yale University student clinic, and Edna Rostow, a social worker, who together studied the service records of 183 servicemen, discovered that there was no evidence to support the common belief that "homosexuality is uniformly correlated with specific personality traits" and concluded that generalizations about the homosexual personality "are not yet reliable." .... Sometimes to their amazement, [researchers] described what they called the "well-adjusted homosexuals" who, in [William] Menninger's words, "concealed their homosexuality effectively and, at the same time, made creditable records for themselves in the service." Some researchers spoke in glowing terms of these men. "The homosexuals observed in the service," noted Navy doctors Greenspan and Campbell, "have been key men in responsible positions whose loss [by discharge] was acutely felt in their respective departments." They were "conscientious, reliable, well-integrated and abounding in emotional feeling and sincerity." In general, "the homosexual leads a useful productive life, conforming with all dictates of the community, except its sexual requirements" and was "neither a burden nor a detriment to society." Fry and Rostow reported that, based on evidence in service records, homosexuals were no better or worse than other soldiers and that many "performed well in various military jobs" including combat (Berube, 1990, pp. 170-171, footnotes omitted).
The transition to "adulthood" is not well-defined, and many prominent psychologists have argued that most young americans remain "adolescent" well into their late twenties, not making the full transition to "adult" until their thirties. Conversely, many young americans have also been tried as an adult. In legal terms, that means the court has deemed that (although the defendant is under 18) they were of adult judgement. This has happened with people as young as 12. So the definition of "adult" is changing from being defined by age to being judged by behavior (which more accurately reflects reality).