No Excuses

UniteTheRight White Nationalist Demonstrations in Charlottesville

Recommended Posts

^people are making a big deal about that on Twitter. I read the tweet as sarcasm given the picture is of protestors not militia, the issue is it seriously missed the mark on humor with the gravity of the situation. The picture being small (can’t really tell who is pictured) doesn’t help. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

 

 

why?  What the republicans are doing is legal...  would you have the same furor if it were democrats leaving to protect abortion rights? Nah.  

 

 

This is democracy at work. 

 

 

Obviously the militants should be rounded up and arrested, but that’s a different discussion.

 

Its part of the Republicans game plan, straight from Mitch McConnel himself.  When backed into a corner, simply refuse to govern.  It’s despicable.

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Cooked Crack said:

 

 

There is no "heavily armed militia".  

 

The Democrats were off for the weekend.  

 

And the Republicans were hiding in undisclosed locations because they're afraid to actually show up for work.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Larry said:

 

There is no "heavily armed militia".  

 

Republicans lying? I'm surprised.

 

Still thinking it's a good thing for militias to lay siege to your workplace shows how ****ed up you are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure those photos are of the same groups.  Sure looks like the same location, but not sure it's the same people.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Cooked Crack said:

Republicans lying? I'm surprised.

 

Still thinking it's a good thing for militias to lay siege to your workplace shows how ****ed up you are.

 

Remember the "Brooks Brothers Riot", during the 2000 election?  I always thought that story really needed more attention. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Springfield said:

 

Its part of the Republicans game plan, straight from Mitch McConnel himself.  When backed into a corner, simply refuse to govern.  It’s despicable.

 

Blocking a vote your constituents don’t want to occur is governing....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

same group... look down near the statue,, man in red shirt and kid in orange/ kid in green to his right key it. He's centered in the second photo.

 

 

~Bang

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

 

Blocking a vote your constituents don’t want to occur is governing....

 

Yeah, I think I'm mentally considering this (running and hiding) to simply be a different form of filibuster. 

 

(Now, threats from "militias"?  That's terrorism. It should be treated as such, and so should the people applauding it.)

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

 

 

why?  What the republicans are doing is legal...  would you have the same furor if it were democrats leaving to protect abortion rights? Nah.  

 

 

This is democracy at work. 

 

 

Obviously the militants should be rounded up and arrested, but that’s a different discussion.

The Oregon GOP seems to be encouraging, and promoting the militias actions and mocking Democrats for being afraid of them...so not really a different discussion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, visionary said:

The Oregon GOP seems to be encouraging, and promoting the militias actions and mocking Democrats for being afraid of them...so not really a different discussion.

 

Well, I don’t think we should be celebrating armed militias. My quote was directed and someone who claimed opting to walkout on a vote (so it couldn’t take place) wasn’t governing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

 

Blocking a vote your constituents don’t want to occur is governing....

 

The democrats apparently hold a supermajority in the state.  I think the constituents want to pass this cap and trade bill.  Elections have consequences, unless you’re a republican in which case you just do whatever the **** you want because you don’t actually care about governing bodies and the legislative process.

 

 

4 hours ago, Larry said:

 

Yeah, I think I'm mentally considering this (running and hiding) to simply be a different form of filibuster. 

 

I could be wrong, and I’ve tried to search quickly to confirm, but I think that a filibuster is only a mechanism of the US Senate.

 

I am wrong.  HOWEVER, it does not appear that Oregon has any sort of filibuster.

Edited by Springfield

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Springfield said:

 

The democrats apparently hold a supermajority in the state.  I think the constituents want to pass this cap and trade bill.  Elections have consequences, unless you’re a republican in which case you just do whatever the **** you want because you don’t actually care about governing bodies and the legislative process.

 

 

 

I could be wrong, and I’ve tried to search quickly to confirm, but I think that a filibuster is only a mechanism of the US Senate.

 

I am wrong.  HOWEVER, it does not appear that Oregon has any sort of filibuster.

 

Did you miss the phrase "a different form of"?  

 

Please explain to us the difference(s) between denial of a quorum and a filibuster.  I'll mention one (maybe more) similarities:  

 

Both are techniques which a legislative minority may employ, to prevent the majority from passing a piece of legislation, if:

 

1)  The minority unanimously (or nearly) opposes the measure,

2)  And they oppose it strongly enough that they're willing to employ such a drastic tactic.  

3)  And are willing to take the political consequences (if any) for their action.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Larry said:

 

Did you miss the phrase "a different form of"?  

 

Please explain to us the difference(s) between denial of a quorum and a filibuster.  I'll mention one (maybe more) similarities:  

 

Both are techniques which a legislative minority may employ, to prevent the majority from passing a piece of legislation, if:

 

1)  The minority unanimously (or nearly) opposes the measure,

2)  And they oppose it strongly enough that they're willing to employ such a drastic tactic.  

3)  And are willing to take the political consequences (if any) for their action.  

 

Well by the looks of it, there is repercussions for denying a quorum and that is a $500 per day fine.  As response to that, it seems that the republicans who refuse to show up are encouraging hostility between the differing parties.

 

I will add that from what I’ve read on the subject, Democrats have made concessions about this bill so that it won’t hurt low income citizens and other at risk parties.  The contention is that they did now allow republicans to delay the implementation of the law or install any poison pills in it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Cooked Crack said:
Local Dems cave. News at 11.

 

Increasingly a party of spineless turds.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Cooked Crack said:

Local Dems cave. News at 11

I don't know the processes but couldn't they "table it" until the GOP side comes back to work then bring it right back up?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Cooked Crack said:

Local Dems cave. News at 11.

 

Yeah. Couldn't possibly be a case of them deciding that this one bill wasn't the only thing they needed to get done. Or that they're simply more adult than the GOP. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t like the idea of fleeing the state to avoid a vote. 

 

And if theres a fine for doing it, I take issue with the idea that it’s technically allowed. 500$/day fine doesn’t sound like “allowed” to me. 

 

I don’t like this notion that if you can’t get your way you can halt everything. It feels petty and childish. 

 

 

On 6/23/2019 at 4:45 PM, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

 

Blocking a vote your constituents don’t want to occur is governing....

 

For example, I don’t view this as “blocking a vote”

 

this comes across to me as “preventing the state legislature from doing its job”

 

i dont know maybe I’m twisting myself into a pretzel here. I feel like blocking a vote by being in the chambers and using allowed tactics in the chambers is way different than fleeing the state and not showing up so the rest of the legislature cannot do their job. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, No Excuses said:

 

Increasingly a party of spineless turds.

 

Theres that Bernie Bros/Maga Klan crossover happening again.  It’s as consistent as the tides, really.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, TryTheBeal! said:

 

Theres that Bernie Bros/Maga Klan crossover happening again.  It’s as consistent as the tides, really.

 

Want to know who actually crosses over with the Maga Klan group? People who feel the need to incessantly and brainlessly defend the party at all costs . :)

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, tshile said:

I don’t like the idea of fleeing the state to avoid a vote. 

 

And if theres a fine for doing it, I take issue with the idea that it’s technically allowed. 500$/day fine doesn’t sound like “allowed” to me. 

 

I don’t like this notion that if you can’t get your way you can halt everything. It feels petty and childish. 

 

 

 

For example, I don’t view this as “blocking a vote”

 

this comes across to me as “preventing the state legislature from doing its job”

 

i dont know maybe I’m twisting myself into a pretzel here. I feel like blocking a vote by being in the chambers and using allowed tactics in the chambers is way different than fleeing the state and not showing up so the rest of the legislature cannot do their job. 

 

I did a quick check expecting to find this was either rare or a normal GOP tactic.  Apparently Dems have done it a decent bit also.  Not saying that makes it right but doesn't seem like a one party tactic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

 

I did a quick check expecting to find this was either rare or a normal GOP tactic.  Apparently Dems have done it a decent bit also.  Not saying that makes it right but doesn't seem like a one party tactic.

It’s not. I remember it being an issue with the dems in another state in the northern mid-west. 

 

I dont really care who does it how much. As an adult, it doesn’t really seem like how an adult should behave. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.