*posted @ Thursday, November 15, 2012 - 16:57
Thanks for your votes everyone, we'll get 'em next time.posted @ Sunday, November 11, 2012 - 21:33
*posted @ Thursday, November 8, 2012 - 23:52
Stop harassing me or I will report you to the Cyber Police again.posted @ Thursday, November 8, 2012 - 15:23
*posted @ Wednesday, November 7, 2012 - 23:19
[quote][b]RightWingExtremist[/b] - God help you if I find out who you are.
Please remove this threatening post.posted @ Wednesday, November 7, 2012 - 21:45
Deletedposted @ Wednesday, November 7, 2012 - 09:26
[quote][b]curiouscat[/b] - What photo ID is required for absentee ballots?
Absentee ballots require no ID. They are easy to alter and have almost zero accountability once they are mailed. The very few cases of voter fraud are primarily taking place with absentee ballots.
The analysis found that there is more alleged fraud in absentee ballots and voter registration than in any of the other categories. The analysis shows 491 cases of alleged absentee ballot fraud and 400 cases involving registration fraud. Requiring voters to show identification at the polls — the crux of most of the new legislation — would not have prevented those cases.[/quote]
Out of 2068 cases of voter fraud, an independent reporting group found only 10 cases of in-person fraud since 2000.posted @ Monday, November 5, 2012 - 13:30
I'm not saying the filmmakers are to blame, but this situation is different than your example. A rape victim doesn't provoke their attacker to prove how horrible that man is. But that's what these people did. They made an inflammatory film to provoke militant Islamists. Which is a pretty easy thing to do anyway.
From the AP interview with the director and his consultant this morning:
[quote] "We went into this knowing this was probably going to happen," Klein said. [/quote]
There were many people who had a hand in this tragedy. The criminals who stormed the embassy, the dissident in Egypt who spread the video and sensationalized it, and the filmmakers who knew it would happen.
My heart goes out to the families of the victims.
Shoot blues Vile Ratposted @ Wednesday, September 12, 2012 - 09:42
I've sold monorails to Brockway, Ogdenville, and North Haverbrook, and by gum it put them on the map!posted @ Wednesday, April 11, 2012 - 19:44
Haha, I came back to check on AthensTalk and the first thing I see is this! So it only took you 6 months to realize that more than 1 person is capable of hating you?
At least Papa Bear has moved on. RWE is doing the same song and dance of acting like a spoiled child then making some BS apology thread. Then right back to being a child.
EJ really hit the nail on the head:
No, I think it is a psychological syndrome. He pushes the envelope of rudeness and libel to get reactions then makes a dramatic apology for forgiveness and gets reactions of consiliation. This leaves him feeling alternately powerful and loved. Kind of pitiful, actually.
ur buddy snoopyposted @ Tuesday, March 6, 2012 - 13:08
It's a joke. Hope your stomach feels better.posted @ Monday, November 7, 2011 - 22:22
I was curious at the time why a brand new poster would know RWE's and his grandmother's name.
I'm not a new poster. I've read the ABH online for years and have only ever had one name. Many, many people lurk on this site, chiming in only occasionally or not at all. AthensTalk has fans from all across America. I have referred dozens of people to this site after showing them some of the more ridiculous internet personalities we have here. The father/son/mama grizzly love triangle was pretty compelling. But my personal favorite is the poster who claims to be an office full of Bob Jones University grads. These people are far more popular than they realize. Not everyone uses the pointless +/- system or replies.
I'm not being specific about usernames or real names because I want this to be seen by the parties involved. Although, as the moderators have admitted, the use of 'personal attacks' is evaluated in a case-by-case basis. Insulting someone continually for something you have no evidence for, that's fine. But retort with something that the person has admitted to before (for example being unemployed, over the age of 40, or where they live) causes it to become a personal attack.
Anyway, the point of this discussion is personal information. @meandawg: and @keepitsimple: have already given you perfect examples. You and your relatives have revealed way too much personal information for you to act surprised when it gets thrown back in your face. A crazy internet person such as myself could easily find your name, call you on the phone, or even walk up to your house on Halloween in a mask and ask for candy.
So before you publish your name or pictures of your house, remember that quite a few insane individuals read what you write. And they remember it.posted @ Friday, November 4, 2011 - 13:35
[quote] [b]Associated Press[/b] - The 50-50 vote came in relation to a motion to simply take up the bill and fell well short of the 60 needed to break a filibuster. [/quote]
There are 57 Dems, 41 Reps, and 2 Independents in the Senate. In order to invoke cloture to break a filibuster and release a bill onto the floor for a vote, there must be a supermajority of 60 votes. No party has 60 members, so no party has control. The cloture rule is not a part of the Constitution but is a Senate procedural rule.
Filibuster?? Cloture?? That's just the liberal media trying to smear Republicans.
Trying to explain how the US Senate works is commendable but futile. The people on this website would rather believe there's a media bias when a Republican filibuster is mentioned than attempt to understand what filibuster and cloture actually mean.
@RightWingExtremist: @nancy30683:posted @ Friday, October 21, 2011 - 14:44
Swag.posted @ Wednesday, October 19, 2011 - 08:38
The make-up team from The Walking Dead worked on the finale episode of Breaking Bad. It was amazing and totally unexpected.
The episode was called 'Face Off' for more than one reason...posted @ Sunday, October 16, 2011 - 14:18
I'll try to explain this to you one last time, see if you can follow:
When the headlines say "Jobs bill fails to get 60 votes," it means they voted on it and indeed killed it. If the headline says, "Republican filibuster kills Jobs bill," then I would be more inclined to believe you.
That's where you're wrong. 60 votes aren't needed to pass a bill. 51 votes are. That's basic knowledge of US democracy.
Yes. They voted. On cloture. You know what does need 60 votes? Cloture. You know what cloture does? Ends a filibuster.
Here is a link, from Senate.gov, of the record of the actual vote. The vote that we are talking about.
Question: On the Cloture Motion (Motion to Invoke Cloture on the Motion to Proceed to S. 1660 )
Vote Date: October 11, 2011, 06:34 PM
Vote Result: Cloture Motion Rejected
Measure Number: S. 1660 (American Jobs Act of 2011 )
Game. Set. Match. Are you deluded enough to tell me they weren't voting for cloture to end the filibuster after reading the official record of the vote?
Again, I know it's hard to understand. Maybe you didn't study enough Senate rules and proceedings. Maybe it's the mild autism you claim to have.
Know this, I hate both parties. They are full of self-centered greedy jerks. I'm not defending Harry Reid. I can handle people making fun of and insulting politicians. They deserve it.
What I can't handle is people like you, who try to delegitimize actual news sources just because it doesn't agree with your worldview. Sorry, the filibuster happened, whether you want to admit it or not.posted @ Wednesday, October 12, 2011 - 22:57
[quote] U mad bro? [/quote]
Ahahaha. Ok, you lost all credibility there. Using a 'I know you are but what am I' meme from 2004 really helps show your maturity.
I notice you haven't refuted the point that Republicans filibustered the bill to death, which is a fact.
So your 'superior argument' is moving to another topic, about how Reid wussied out? Yes, he did. It's all political posturing. As I have said, multiple times.
My argument that the AP correctly identified the GOP as killing the bill hasn't been shown to be false. Did you even glance at the BBC article?
"Forty-six Republican senators joined with two Democrats to filibuster the $447bn package."
So I guess I win. But everyone loses when they try and talk sense to you, anway.
And which 'query' of yours did I respond with an insult to? You asked me to prove something which had already been made clear in a link that you posted... So I don't see where you were going with that. And then you got bent out of shape when I mentioned that I work for a living. I can understand how someone who has been willfully unemployed for the last 4 years might take offense to somebody having a job. Sorry about that.
I don't think you can lower the bar any further than 'U MAD BRO?' Wow, and you said I was backed into a corner. I'm sure you will consider this another glorious victory in your online crusade though. Make sure to add it to your resume.posted @ Wednesday, October 12, 2011 - 20:45
[quote] Listen to yourself. The Republicans COULD NOT filibuster the bill. Harry Reid enforced the nuclear option to make sure that they couldnt. No matter of how many senate rules you state to me, the act still remains.
Why did it need 60 votes to pass?
I know exactly what Reid did. He manipulated the Senate rules to fit his agenda. I'm under no delusions, the Democrats and the Republicans use dirty tricks to try and smear one another.
My point is, and always has been, that the Republican's filibuster killed the bill. And the AP accurately wrote an article about it and you said that the Republicans were victims of the left-wing media.
Here's another article for you, is the BBC far left as well?
I'm stating Senate rules to you because you don't seem to understand them. It took me a while, too. They are very complicated.
As for constantly calling me a child, go for it. Your internet insults don't hurt me. I've seen you use this tactic in almost every one of your arguments. You phrase a passive-aggressive response to someone's comment, then when they snap back, you say 'Ha! Your ad hominem attack shows you are wrong! I win again!' Yawn.
You can dish it out, but you can't take it.posted @ Wednesday, October 12, 2011 - 18:02
Actually, they voted on it. There wasnt any filibusters. Get your head out of the sand.
So your own link isn't good enough for you? As I said before your knee-jerk reaction, anything that you don't agree with is automatically "far-left." The daily newspaper of Las Vegas? Oh, I forgot, Harry Reid represents that state, so it must be biased towards him. I see that you failed to Google anything on your own. Except for an article from the Wall Street Journal that reaffirms what I was saying: It's all political stunts.
Yes, they voted. But not on the bill. You see, the Senate has 100 members. A bill needs a majority vote to pass. That's 51 votes. But in the article, it says they need 60 votes. That's because they weren't voting on the bill, they were voting on whether or not to enact 'cloture', which would end the filibuster. They were trying to end the filibuster, not vote on the bill.
From Senate.gov (far-left website):
"The only procedure by which the Senate can vote to place a time limit on consideration of a bill or other matter, and thereby overcome a filibuster. Under the cloture rule (Rule XXII), the Senate may limit consideration of a pending matter to 30 additional hours, but only by vote of three-fifths of the full Senate, normally 60 votes."
"Quiet you!" "Run along and play now" And you say I act like a child? You're projecting. You talk like you think adults do, but you clearly aren't there yet.posted @ Wednesday, October 12, 2011 - 08:29
Prove it? Uh, okay. How about you read the link that you posted. Or you could Google any of it. Do you want me to do that?
There are plenty of other sources, but I expect that you'll say that they are all from the liberal, lamestream media, thus false. Even if it is just a play-by-play of what happened in the Senate.
Let me see if I can preempt your other argument: "It's just political brinkmanship!" Yes, of course it is. That's all that ever happens in Washington. McConnell tried a dirty trick, and Reid returned the favor. They are both playing games, and it's not helping the American people one bit. But I'm pointing out that it's the Republicans who filibustered the bill to death, as reported in the article we are commenting on. It's not some "blatant attempt to smear Republicans."
Now I am going to sleep, because I actually work for a living. Feel free to reply to my comment 5 times in a row as you badger people over the internet until 3AM.posted @ Tuesday, October 11, 2011 - 21:58
Did you read the article you linked? Mitch McConnell attempted a mischievous political ploy by trying to suspend the rules and force a sudden vote on Obama's Jobs Bill when they were voting on Chinese currency. Reid countered his trick by using one of his own, initiating a vote on whether or not McConnell's motion was in order. The Senate voted that it was not in order, to the dismay of McConnell. That tactic has not been used in decades, but it did not eliminate filibusters.posted @ Tuesday, October 11, 2011 - 21:08
What do you mean 'get in the way of proceedings'? The Republicans did kill the bill by filibustering debate over it. Like they have done for almost every piece of legislation for the past two years.
Forget a majority, 60 votes is the new normal for the Republican Senate.posted @ Tuesday, October 11, 2011 - 20:42
Jim Thompson just did an editorial about this subject last week.
Take him up on his offer. Show how the ABH only prints liberal viewpoints.posted @ Sunday, October 9, 2011 - 09:13
You're right, it is petty. You're sinking to the same level as the people who called you racist just for 'disagreeing' with Obama. Take the high road, show people that conservatives have more class.posted @ Sunday, October 9, 2011 - 08:56
Want your business here? Contact Leslie Turner for more information.
Kolton Houston took his story nationally last weekend. read more
Georgia athletic director Greg McGarity expects the 2014 football schedule to be released later this month at the Southeastern Conference spring meeting in Destin, Fla. The remaining SEC West opponent for Georgia is the big reveal. McGarity said he saw ?models? of the ?14 schedule in a meeting of conference athletic directors last week in Jacksonville, but that it?s still under review. He?s not worried about Georgia?s strength of schedule for the coming four-team playoff. read more