timschochet's thread- Mods, please move this thread to the Politics Subforum, thank you (1 Viewer)

[timschochet]

Very shortly now I'm going to learn whether or not I owe tommyboy $500.00 or if I am to collect the same amount from him.

For those who don't know, here are the exact terms of the bet (as redefined and agreed to on November 7, 2014:

If President Obama vetoes a bill which repeals the Affordable Care Act:

1. If the bill removes the major points of Obamacare (the individual mandate and the pre-existing conditions exemption), I will pay tommyboy $500.00

2. If the bill only removes the individual mandate but leaves the pre-existing conditions exemption intact, then neither of us owes each other anything.

3. If the bill only removes the device tax, or other minor stuff, but leaves the individual mandate and pre-existing conditions intact, or if this bill for whatever reason never comes before President Obama and so he never vetoes it, tommyboy pay me $500.00.

Of course, for such a bill to come before Obama in the first place, it has to be passed by both House and Senate. In the Senate, either the Dems could filibuster, or Mitch McConnell could decide never to even bring up such a bill, since he knows it will be vetoed.

I figure this is all going to be decided within the first month. The Republicans aren't going to wait several months before they tackle Obamacare if indeed they are going to tackle it. So we'll see what happens. I still feel pretty good about this wager, but anything's possible.

 

[otello]

I resign. 1-0. I screwed up that opening and you never let me off the hook. Well played. Rematch?

1. d4

Nf6

2. Nf3

g6

3. Nbd2

Bg7

 

[jon_mx]

Seems like an odd bet with lots of possible nuances.

 

[hagmania]

You should both buy out of it and give some money to C4H imo.

 

[DA RAIDERS]

go donate to chance's charity, ya bunch liberals. it's pinned on the front page of the ffa. great charity

 

[Arsenal of Doom]

Every one of you posting in here needs to get to the raffle thread that is pinned and donate $10. Now. This is not an option.

go donate to chance's charity, ya bunch liberals. it's pinned on the front page of the ffa. great charity

Done and done. Thanks for the heads up.

 

[timschochet]

1. d4 Nf6

2. Nf3 g6

3. Nbd2 Bg7

4. e4

 

[otello]

1. d4 Nf6
2. Nf3 g6
3. Nbd2 Bg7
4. e4 d6

 

[timschochet]

1. d4 Nf6

2. Nf3 g6

3. Nbd2 Bg7

4. e4 d6

5. Bd3

 

[otello]

1. d4 Nf6

2. Nf3 g6

3. Nbd2 Bg7

4. e4 d6

5. Bd3

O-O

 

[timschochet]

1. d4 Nf6

2. Nf3 g6

3. Nbd2 Bg7

4. e4 d6

5. Bd3

O-O

6. O-O

 

[GrandpaRox]

This is the best ever.

 

[otello]

1. d4 Nf6
2. Nf3 g6
3. Nbd2 Bg7
4. e4 d6
5. Bd3 O-O
6. O-O Nc6

 

[Scoresman]

BJ69

 

[timschochet]

1. d4 Nf6

2. Nf3 g6

3. Nbd2 Bg7

4. e4 d6

5. Bd3 O-O

6. O-O Nc6

6. c3

 

[bostonfred]

BJ69

O-O

 

[timschochet]

Seems like an odd bet with lots of possible nuances.

The original bet was simply "Obama won't be forced to veto a repeal of Obamacare." The first test was of course the election in November. After Republicans took over the Senate, we discussed it and found that we disagreed on what a repeal would mean. This was because McConnell suggested that the individual mandate might be repealed but that the pre-existing condition stuff might stay. It's my contention that if they do that it's not really a repeal of Obamacare. That's why we had to revise the bet and make it all conditional.

 

[timschochet]

I want to rant a little bit about that story in Idaho. I realize that's a state with a serious gun culture, but it disturbs me that women are carrying loaded pistols in their purses ready to fire. Why do they do this? Not to hunt. Because the NRA tells them they'll be safer with a gun for self protection. I don't know the statistics offhand but I have read before that one is much more likely to suffer an accident due to having a loaded weapon than to ever have to use it in self defense. And here of course is an example of that.

No I am not suggesting it should be illegal for this woman to have a loaded gun in her purse. I'm just saying its stupid, and I am angry at the NRA and gun manufacturers for peddling this nonsense that you have to have a loaded gun to defend yourself.

 

[bostonfred]

it disturbs me that women are carrying loaded pistols in their purses ready to fire.

Women? Or people in general?

 

[timschochet]

it disturbs me that women are carrying loaded pistols in their purses ready to fire.

Women? Or people in general?

People in general.

 

[otello]

1. d4 Nf6
2. Nf3 g6
3. Nbd2 Bg7
4. e4 d6
5. Bd3 O-O
6. O-O Nc6

7. c3 e5

8.

 

[timschochet]

1. d4 Nf6

2. Nf3 g6

3. Nbd2 Bg7

4. e4 d6

5. Bd3 O-O

6. O-O Nc6

7. c3 e5

8.

8. h3

 

[otello]

1. d4 Nf6

2. Nf3 g6
3. Nbd2 Bg7
4. e4 d6
5. Bd3 O-O
6. O-O Nc6
7. c3 e5
8. h3 Nh5

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

So did we get to the two Senators per state yet or not? Total crap.

 

[timschochet]

1. d4 Nf6

2. Nf3 g6

3. Nbd2 Bg7

4. e4 d6

5. Bd3 O-O

6. O-O Nc6

7. c3 e5

8. h3 Nh5

9. d5

 

[timschochet]

So did we get to the two Senators per state yet or not? Total crap.

No. We're just about to though. But why is it total crap, in your opinion?

 

[otello]

1. d4 Nf6

2. Nf3 g6

3. Nbd2 Bg7

4. e4 d6

5. Bd3 O-O

6. O-O Nc6

7. c3 e5

8. h3 Nh5

9. d5 Ne7

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

So did we get to the two Senators per state yet or not? Total crap.

No. We're just about to though. But why is it total crap, in your opinion?

States aren't people.

 

[timschochet]

So did we get to the two Senators per state yet or not? Total crap.

No. We're just about to though. But why is it total crap, in your opinion?

States aren't people.

Well, that's why we also have a House of Representatives, right? Would you prefer to do away with states altogether?

 

[timschochet]

1. d4 Nf6

2. Nf3 g6

3. Nbd2 Bg7

4. e4 d6

5. Bd3 O-O

6. O-O Nc6

7. c3 e5

8. h3 Nh5

9. d5 Ne7

10. Re1

 

[timschochet]

Hey look, as a resident of California, the most populated state in the union, it frustrates me that I only get 2 senators, same as Hawaii or Rhode Island. But I'm not sure there's a better alternative.

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

So did we get to the two Senators per state yet or not? Total crap.

No. We're just about to though. But why is it total crap, in your opinion?

States aren't people.

Well, that's why we also have a House of Representatives, right? Would you prefer to do away with states altogether?

We can still have states for more localized governments. But federal power should be allocated by population, not by imaginary lines on the ground. When a state tries to allocate power in the same way, it's unconstitutional.

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

Hey look, as a resident of California, the most populated state in the union, it frustrates me that I only get 2 senators, same as Hawaii or Rhode Island. But I'm not sure there's a better alternative.

There are a zillion better alternatives.

 

[timschochet]

So did we get to the two Senators per state yet or not? Total crap.

No. We're just about to though. But why is it total crap, in your opinion?

States aren't people.

Well, that's why we also have a House of Representatives, right? Would you prefer to do away with states altogether?

We can still have states for more localized governments. But federal power should be allocated by population, not by imaginary lines on the ground. When a state tries to allocate power in the same way, it's unconstitutional.

But if we got rid of states' rights, wouldn't my ability to own slaves be hampered?

 

[otello]

1. d4 Nf6

2. Nf3 g6

3. Nbd2 Bg7

4. e4 d6

5. Bd3 O-O

6. O-O Nc6

7. c3 e5

8. h3 Nh5

9. d5 Ne7

10. Re1

Nf4

 

[timschochet]

1. d4 Nf6
2. Nf3 g6
3. Nbd2 Bg7
4. e4 d6
5. Bd3 O-O
6. O-O Nc6
7. c3 e5
8. h3 Nh5

9. d5 Ne7

10. Re1 Nf4

11. Nf1

 

[timschochet]

http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities

1. Princeton

2. Harvard

3. Yale

4. Columbia

5. Stanford

6. University of Chicago

7. MIT

8. Duke

9. University of Pennsylvania

10. Cal Tech

As we watch Stanford tonight, think about what an amazing accomplishment it is that they play football at such a high level. Stanford is the only traditional "football" school in this top 10 list. They are only 1 of 2 traditional "football" schools in the top 20 academic universities. (The other is Notre Dame at 16.)

And no, Duke is not a traditional football power, despite recent success.

 

[joffer]

I want to rant a little bit about that story in Idaho. I realize that's a state with a serious gun culture, but it disturbs me that women are carrying loaded pistols in their purses ready to fire. Why do they do this? Not to hunt. Because the NRA tells them they'll be safer with a gun for self protection. I don't know the statistics offhand but I have read before that one is much more likely to suffer an accident due to having a loaded weapon than to ever have to use it in self defense. And here of course is an example of that.

No I am not suggesting it should be illegal for this woman to have a loaded gun in her purse. I'm just saying its stupid, and I am angry at the NRA and gun manufacturers for peddling this nonsense that you have to have a loaded gun to defend yourself.

It's Idaho

 

[timschochet]

I want to rant a little bit about that story in Idaho. I realize that's a state with a serious gun culture, but it disturbs me that women are carrying loaded pistols in their purses ready to fire. Why do they do this? Not to hunt. Because the NRA tells them they'll be safer with a gun for self protection. I don't know the statistics offhand but I have read before that one is much more likely to suffer an accident due to having a loaded weapon than to ever have to use it in self defense. And here of course is an example of that.

No I am not suggesting it should be illegal for this woman to have a loaded gun in her purse. I'm just saying its stupid, and I am angry at the NRA and gun manufacturers for peddling this nonsense that you have to have a loaded gun to defend yourself.

It's Idaho

it could be any state at this point. The NRA has spread their pervasive poison everywhere.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities

1. Princeton

2. Harvard

3. Yale

4. Columbia

5. Stanford

6. University of Chicago

7. MIT

8. Duke

9. University of Pennsylvania

10. Cal Tech

As we watch Stanford tonight, think about what an amazing accomplishment it is that they play football at such a high level. Stanford is the only traditional "football" school in this top 10 list. They are only 1 of 2 traditional "football" schools in the top 20 academic universities. (The other is Notre Dame at 16.)

And no, Duke is not a traditional football power, despite recent success.

OTOH Yale, Harvard, Columbia, Princeton, Penn and UChi were the cradle of the early game.

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities

1. Princeton

2. Harvard

3. Yale

4. Columbia

5. Stanford

6. University of Chicago

7. MIT

8. Duke

9. University of Pennsylvania

10. Cal Tech

As we watch Stanford tonight, think about what an amazing accomplishment it is that they play football at such a high level. Stanford is the only traditional "football" school in this top 10 list. They are only 1 of 2 traditional "football" schools in the top 20 academic universities. (The other is Notre Dame at 16.)And no, Duke is not a traditional football power, despite recent success.

None of the other schools on the list are even trying to be good at football. They don't even give scholarships.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities

1. Princeton

2. Harvard

3. Yale

4. Columbia

5. Stanford

6. University of Chicago

7. MIT

8. Duke

9. University of Pennsylvania

10. Cal Tech

As we watch Stanford tonight, think about what an amazing accomplishment it is that they play football at such a high level. Stanford is the only traditional "football" school in this top 10 list. They are only 1 of 2 traditional "football" schools in the top 20 academic universities. (The other is Notre Dame at 16.)And no, Duke is not a traditional football power, despite recent success.

None of the other schools on the list are even trying to be good at football. They don't even give scholarships.

I'll hand it to Duke, Stanford, Northwestern, Rice and Vandy for hanging in with their conferences and getting through the lean years while big time college football and TV football grew.

Tulane quit the SEC in 1966. Geniuses they are. Vandy doesn't even have an athletic department (I believe), and now they all occasionally to often put out decent to great teams.

 

[timschochet]

Vanderbilt is truly amazing IMO. The fact that they have hung in there in the absolute toughest conference in all of football and have actually had winning seasons is astounding to me.

 

[Zegras11]

I want to rant a little bit about that story in Idaho. I realize that's a state with a serious gun culture, but it disturbs me that women are carrying loaded pistols in their purses ready to fire. Why do they do this? Not to hunt. Because the NRA tells them they'll be safer with a gun for self protection. I don't know the statistics offhand but I have read before that one is much more likely to suffer an accident due to having a loaded weapon than to ever have to use it in self defense. And here of course is an example of that.

No I am not suggesting it should be illegal for this woman to have a loaded gun in her purse. I'm just saying its stupid, and I am angry at the NRA and gun manufacturers for peddling this nonsense that you have to have a loaded gun to defend yourself.

It's Idaho

Idaho is the 7th best state in least amount of violent crimes

http://lawstreetmedia.com/blogs/crime/safest-and-most-dangerous-states-2014/

What happened today was just plain stupidity.

 

[timschochet]

Section. 3.

The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, chosen by the Legislature thereof, for six Years; and each Senator shall have one Vote.

Immediately after they shall be assembled in Consequence of the first Election, they shall be divided as equally as may be into three Classes. The Seats of the Senators of the first Class shall be vacated at the Expiration of the second Year, of the second Class at the Expiration of the fourth Year, and of the third Class at the Expiration of the sixth Year, so that one third may be chosen every second Year; and if Vacancies happen by Resignation, or otherwise, during the Recess of the Legislature of any State, the Executive thereof may make temporary Appointments until the next Meeting of the Legislature, which shall then fill such Vacancies.

No Person shall be a Senator who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty Years, and been nine Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State for which he shall be chosen.

The Vice President of the United States shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no Vote, unless they be equally divided.

The Senate shall chuse their other Officers, and also a President pro tempore, in the Absence of the Vice President, or when he shall exercise the Office of President of the United States.

The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.

Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.

I have several questions about this section, but no time to ask them now. If anyone wants to make a general comment, please do so!

Bump. Questions and comments to follow.

 

[timschochet]

1. Obviously the 17th Amendment changed the clause in which Senators were selected by state legislators. Without getting into a debate- yet- as to which is better, what was the original thought process behind having the state legislatures do it?

2. Why did they give the Vice President the deciding vote? (Why not, for instance, give that to the President, or the Speaker of the House, etc.)?

3. Why set the age minimum at 30 years?

4. They do spend a lot of time on impeachment, don't they? It's almost like they assumed there were going to be a whole lot of corruption going on.

 

[jon_mx]

1. Obviously the 17th Amendment changed the clause in which Senators were selected by state legislators. Without getting into a debate- yet- as to which is better, what was the original thought process behind having the state legislatures do it?

2. Why did they give the Vice President the deciding vote? (Why not, for instance, give that to the President, or the Speaker of the House, etc.)?

3. Why set the age minimum at 30 years?

4. They do spend a lot of time on impeachment, don't they? It's almost like they assumed there were going to be a whole lot of corruption going on.

States needed a voice in the process of making laws so their power and rights were represented in the process of making laws.

Pleases, the vice president has not much else to do, give the guy a bone. Besides the president already has a veto power in the process. It is not fair to give one person multiple votes.

The founders were distrustful of government and wanted powerful checks and balances c

 

[jon_mx]

I want to rant a little bit about that story in Idaho. I realize that's a state with a serious gun culture, but it disturbs me that women are carrying loaded pistols in their purses ready to fire. Why do they do this? Not to hunt. Because the NRA tells them they'll be safer with a gun for self protection. I don't know the statistics offhand but I have read before that one is much more likely to suffer an accident due to having a loaded weapon than to ever have to use it in self defense. And here of course is an example of that.

No I am not suggesting it should be illegal for this woman to have a loaded gun in her purse. I'm just saying its stupid, and I am angry at the NRA and gun manufacturers for peddling this nonsense that you have to have a loaded gun to defend yourself.

It's Idaho

it could be any state at this point. The NRA has spread their pervasive poison everywhere.

It is a group which protects rights for people. Why does only right wing rhetoric bother you? You seem very sensitive to people on the right voicing opinions. It is free speech. I never get why you consistantly point the finger at the right, but yet deny your political leaning. It is a constant theme. Similarly when you get upset about partisan politics your examples are Republicans.

 

[otello]

1. d4 Nf6

2. Nf3 g6

3. Nbd2 Bg7

4. e4 d6

5. Bd3 O-O

6. O-O Nc6

7. c3 e5

8. h3 Nh5

9. d5 Ne7

10. Re1 Nf4

11. Nf1 f5

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

1. Obviously the 17th Amendment changed the clause in which Senators were selected by state legislators. Without getting into a debate- yet- as to which is better, what was the original thought process behind having the state legislatures do it?

2. Why did they give the Vice President the deciding vote? (Why not, for instance, give that to the President, or the Speaker of the House, etc.)?

3. Why set the age minimum at 30 years?

4. They do spend a lot of time on impeachment, don't they? It's almost like they assumed there were going to be a whole lot of corruption going on.

1. It was a ratification process. You have to remember the federal government exists because and at the behest of first The People but secondly the States. The federal government should do nothing that the States do not approve of or which would be bad for the States. That's the idea.

And that's the idea almost every time you see the Senate involved - the States have to give their assent to almost every action of the federal government. Those Senators used to represent the will of State legislatures and governors, that very important piece has bee lost. People wonder why our government is at such cross-purposes today, this is one major reason why.

2. The VP was originally supposed to be the no. 2 vote getter for President. It's all about balances. The VP was to be the President of the Senate. If you gave the vote to anyone else it would give a double dip of power, which would not be right, and that's essentially what we have today because the VP is now nothing more than the hand maiden of the President and will just vote like the President wants, which is not the way it's supposed to work. Again they screwed up the system.

3. Nice round figure, simply pick an age where you will feel people should be very mature and experienced in things. Thirty was pretty old back then when most people died before they were 55 I'm guessing. That was halfway through life back then.

4. It's pretty important, a big deal, replacing a head of state. It's the kind of thing can lead to instability and insurgencies if done too easily, it can tear a country apart if done wrongly. I think it's pretty hard to remove a president, for good reason. I don't think they expected a lot of corruption, I think they thought they would be idiots if they left this provision vague. Heck look at FF leagues that don't provide for what happens when teams tie in championships.