National Defense Authorization Act

[MLA]

[RageBeoulve]

What drives me crazy is that people were calling it "must-pass" legislation.  If legislation "must pass" and there's no restriction on piling random shit on a single bill, then they can do any damned thing.

Yes. This is just completely insane, and in my opinion everyone should be extremely concerned by it.

If I were president, I would veto anything anyone sent me that said "must pass."  And when they asked me why, I would say only,

Well that's -supposed- to be his job, but I guess it isn't anymore.

[conlang returns]

What drives me crazy is that people were calling it "must-pass" legislation.  If legislation "must pass" and there's no restriction on piling random shit on a single bill, then they can do any damned thing.

Yes. This is just completely insane, and in my opinion everyone should be extremely concerned by it.

If I were president, I would veto anything anyone sent me that said "must pass."  And when they asked me why, I would say only,

Well that's -supposed- to be his job, but I guess it isn't anymore.

On a slight tangent, when I began reading the Tennessee constitution I didn't expect to be impressed, raging leftist that I am, but there is a clause I really like, which says that all bills before the legislature must deal with a single topic and have a descriptive title.  Apparently that is, or was, at one point, an issue really big with conservatives.  I find it quite sensible to do it that way. 

[RageBeoulve]

What drives me crazy is that people were calling it "must-pass" legislation.  If legislation "must pass" and there's no restriction on piling random shit on a single bill, then they can do any damned thing.

Yes. This is just completely insane, and in my opinion everyone should be extremely concerned by it.

If I were president, I would veto anything anyone sent me that said "must pass."  And when they asked me why, I would say only,

Well that's -supposed- to be his job, but I guess it isn't anymore.

On a slight tangent, when I began reading the Tennessee constitution I didn't expect to be impressed, raging leftist that I am, but there is a clause I really like, which says that all bills before the legislature must deal with a single topic and have a descriptive title.  Apparently that is, or was, at one point, an issue really big with conservatives.  I find it quite sensible to do it that way.

I'm a raging non-partisan, and I agree. When you look into these historic legislations, they really are quite in depth and efficient. And they speak worlds to a free and balanced system. I think many have just not actually researched any of the things they are trying to dismantle, maybe.

I get in arguments with people a lot over the constitution alone, only to learn that when I challenge them as to whats in it, they can't answer me. It really makes me both sad and angry to see such thinking in the year 2013.

[conlang returns]

What drives me crazy is that people were calling it "must-pass" legislation.  If legislation "must pass" and there's no restriction on piling random shit on a single bill, then they can do any damned thing.

Yes. This is just completely insane, and in my opinion everyone should be extremely concerned by it.

If I were president, I would veto anything anyone sent me that said "must pass."  And when they asked me why, I would say only,

Well that's -supposed- to be his job, but I guess it isn't anymore.

On a slight tangent, when I began reading the Tennessee constitution I didn't expect to be impressed, raging leftist that I am, but there is a clause I really like, which says that all bills before the legislature must deal with a single topic and have a descriptive title.  Apparently that is, or was, at one point, an issue really big with conservatives.  I find it quite sensible to do it that way.

I'm a raging non-partisan, and I agree. When you look into these historic legislations, they really are quite in depth and efficient. And they speak worlds to a free and balanced system. I think many have just not actually researched any of the things they are trying to dismantle, maybe.

I get in arguments with people a lot over the constitution alone, only to learn that when I challenge them as to whats in it, they can't answer me. It really makes me both sad and angry to see such thinking in the year 2013.

I can't believe that people over the age of ten would talk about what's constitutional without having read it 

Keep in mind, constitutional law is a pretty broad topic.  If you don't know so much as the original document, none of the caselaw will make any sense.

[RageBeoulve]

What drives me crazy is that people were calling it "must-pass" legislation.  If legislation "must pass" and there's no restriction on piling random shit on a single bill, then they can do any damned thing.

Yes. This is just completely insane, and in my opinion everyone should be extremely concerned by it.

If I were president, I would veto anything anyone sent me that said "must pass."  And when they asked me why, I would say only,

Well that's -supposed- to be his job, but I guess it isn't anymore.

On a slight tangent, when I began reading the Tennessee constitution I didn't expect to be impressed, raging leftist that I am, but there is a clause I really like, which says that all bills before the legislature must deal with a single topic and have a descriptive title.  Apparently that is, or was, at one point, an issue really big with conservatives.  I find it quite sensible to do it that way.

I'm a raging non-partisan, and I agree. When you look into these historic legislations, they really are quite in depth and efficient. And they speak worlds to a free and balanced system. I think many have just not actually researched any of the things they are trying to dismantle, maybe.

I get in arguments with people a lot over the constitution alone, only to learn that when I challenge them as to whats in it, they can't answer me. It really makes me both sad and angry to see such thinking in the year 2013.

I can't believe that people over the age of ten would talk about what's constitutional without having read it 

Keep in mind, constitutional law is a pretty broad topic.  If you don't know so much as the original document, none of the caselaw will make any sense.

Very true. Something even more shameful is that more often than not, people from the UK know more about it than American leftists when I challenge them. Americans. Not knowing their own laws and history.

Makes me mad quick.

[conlang returns]

It's because we're building a culture of letting people off the hook.  Until of course they say something we disagree with.  Liberals and conservatives love to blame each other for this, but the fact is they're both at fault. 

[RageBeoulve]

It's because we're building a culture of letting people off the hook.  Until of course they say something we disagree with.  Liberals and conservatives love to blame each other for this, but the fact is they're both at fault.

Yeah I was just arguing about that, actually. There was an article about some douchefart sending a hateful messge to a family about their autistic son. Basically they suggested they kill the kid, and "donate the non-retarded organs" to people that need them.

I lolled, of course. But there was a huge stink about it, people calling it a hate crime, saying charges should be pressed and that the person should be put in jail.

So I come in saying WHOAH WHOAH. Whoever it was just said something, and that's all. Now I understand it was a pretty nasty and off color thing to say, but if we start arresting people for SAYING THINGS....

I'm sure you follow that line of reasoning there. Unfortunately in a free society, it actually is "free".

[conlang returns]

It's because we're building a culture of letting people off the hook.  Until of course they say something we disagree with.  Liberals and conservatives love to blame each other for this, but the fact is they're both at fault.

Yeah I was just arguing about that, actually. There was an article about some douchefart sending a hateful messge to a family about their autistic son. Basically they suggested they kill the kid, and "donate the non-retarded organs" to people that need them.

I lolled, of course. But there was a huge stink about it, people calling it a hate crime, saying charges should be pressed and that the person should be put in jail.

So I come in saying WHOAH WHOAH. Whoever it was just said something, and that's all. Now I understand it was a pretty nasty and off color thing to say, but if we start arresting people for SAYING THINGS....

I'm sure you follow that line of reasoning there. Unfortunately in a free society, it actually is "free".

Absolutely, Rage.  Not every screwed up thing that people do is, or even should be, a crime. 

[RageBeoulve]

It's because we're building a culture of letting people off the hook.  Until of course they say something we disagree with.  Liberals and conservatives love to blame each other for this, but the fact is they're both at fault.

Yeah I was just arguing about that, actually. There was an article about some douchefart sending a hateful messge to a family about their autistic son. Basically they suggested they kill the kid, and "donate the non-retarded organs" to people that need them.

I lolled, of course. But there was a huge stink about it, people calling it a hate crime, saying charges should be pressed and that the person should be put in jail.

So I come in saying WHOAH WHOAH. Whoever it was just said something, and that's all. Now I understand it was a pretty nasty and off color thing to say, but if we start arresting people for SAYING THINGS....

I'm sure you follow that line of reasoning there. Unfortunately in a free society, it actually is "free".

Absolutely, Rage.  Not every screwed up thing that people do is, or even should be, a crime.

Its become pretty popular to make it that way, though.

[conlang returns]

It's because we're building a culture of letting people off the hook.  Until of course they say something we disagree with.  Liberals and conservatives love to blame each other for this, but the fact is they're both at fault.

Yeah I was just arguing about that, actually. There was an article about some douchefart sending a hateful messge to a family about their autistic son. Basically they suggested they kill the kid, and "donate the non-retarded organs" to people that need them.

I lolled, of course. But there was a huge stink about it, people calling it a hate crime, saying charges should be pressed and that the person should be put in jail.

So I come in saying WHOAH WHOAH. Whoever it was just said something, and that's all. Now I understand it was a pretty nasty and off color thing to say, but if we start arresting people for SAYING THINGS....

I'm sure you follow that line of reasoning there. Unfortunately in a free society, it actually is "free".

Absolutely, Rage.  Not every screwed up thing that people do is, or even should be, a crime.

Its become pretty popular to make it that way, though.

That's because every alternative we're presented with involves turning to some system of hierarchy.  Like, how should we deal with the safety of hikers that are too stupid not to jump off a cliff?  If it's not the government, it's private business, or even worse: religion.  We need to ban hiking and climbing, or sell them helmets, or pray for their safety.  How about just fucking off and letting us enjoy the wilderness? 

[RageBeoulve]

It's because we're building a culture of letting people off the hook.  Until of course they say something we disagree with.  Liberals and conservatives love to blame each other for this, but the fact is they're both at fault.

Yeah I was just arguing about that, actually. There was an article about some douchefart sending a hateful messge to a family about their autistic son. Basically they suggested they kill the kid, and "donate the non-retarded organs" to people that need them.

I lolled, of course. But there was a huge stink about it, people calling it a hate crime, saying charges should be pressed and that the person should be put in jail.

So I come in saying WHOAH WHOAH. Whoever it was just said something, and that's all. Now I understand it was a pretty nasty and off color thing to say, but if we start arresting people for SAYING THINGS....

I'm sure you follow that line of reasoning there. Unfortunately in a free society, it actually is "free".

Absolutely, Rage.  Not every screwed up thing that people do is, or even should be, a crime.

Its become pretty popular to make it that way, though.

That's because every alternative we're presented with involves turning to some system of hierarchy.  Like, how should we deal with the safety of hikers that are too stupid not to jump off a cliff?  If it's not the government, it's private business, or even worse: religion.  We need to ban hiking and climbing, or sell them helmets, or pray for their safety.  How about just fucking off and letting us enjoy the wilderness?

Quite. And when most of these people look into the problem they are proposing their "solutions" to and they actually did a bit of research like an adult, they would find that 99% of the time, solutions already exist. Someone already passed some sort of legislation at some point that doesn't imply that said person is the center of the universe.

[Yuri Bezmenov]

One more act of treason against the American people...

[Arya Quinn]

One more act of treason against the American people...

One more act of necrobumping against I2 

[MLA]

One more act of treason against the American people...

One more act of necrobumping against I2 

Necrobumping and posting pictures.  That's all he is going to do for a while.  He's my bitch now, and that means staying out of active threads.