Presidential Debate

[beercop]

http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/ ... en/1420805

[DRiccio21]

you have the choice -- corruption thru big gov't or corruption thru capitalism. you can choose. but to think that any democrat isn't as corrupt is ridiculously stupid and naive.

the most wild thing about politics to me is that somehow we've been hoodwinked into thinking that democrat = for the people and republican = for the corporations. its so ass backwards that i can't comprehend how anyone willing to think about it logically can think that way.

Voting for a politician is basically just voting for which group you want to get fucked more violently than yourself. It took me a while to realize there is not government anymore without corruption and hidden agendas.

The only people the politicians care about are themselves, and the people who got them there (and I sure as hell don't mean the voters).

exactly, which is why you should vote for the group less likely to change the founding principles our country was built on

both of these guys blow, both parties blow, both are going to steal your money and keep it for them and their buddies. but one of them won't change the concepts of capitalism and free enterprise (yes they will steal your money and give it to big corporations that benefit them). one of them won't give more power to the gov't. thats why i vote the way i vote. i'd much rather have 1 guy with more money who may or may not hire in the US with that money than i would give the gov't the money who has proven time and time again has absolutely no clue how to generate revenues and run anything with competence.

i'm not voting thinking that these guys are going to be any better than anyone else. as i said in an earlier post, i think presidents for the most part are useless and demographics and where we are in cycles are far more important.

[Cnasty]

How can you vote nowadays?

Can you go online yet and do it?

[Crowes]

which is why you should vote for the group less likely to change the founding principles our country was built on

but one of them won't change the concepts of capitalism and free enterprise (yes they will steal your money and give it to big corporations that benefit them). one of them won't give more power to the gov't. thats why i vote the way i vote.

How are they gonna change the concepts of capitalism and free enterprise that are so radically different than what already exist?

[Crowes]

Wait was this topic already locked or did I do it by mistake?

[OracleHCR]

I'm pretty sure you locked it

[shel311]

I'm pretty sure you locked it

Best use of his commish powers to date

[autiger730]

[autiger730]

one of them won't give more power to the gov't.

That's rich.

[DRiccio21]

one of them won't give more power to the gov't.

That's rich.

i don't get the joke.

[cdub21]

How can you vote nowadays?

Can you go online yet and do it?

think if anonymous can shut down psn for a month, what they or any hackers could do to online votes lol. penis or some random person that 4chan decided to pick will win

Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson is the man too by the way.

[autiger730]

one of them won't give more power to the gov't.

That's rich.

i don't get the joke.

You honestly believe the republicans won't give more power to the government?

[DRiccio21]

one of them won't give more power to the gov't.

That's rich.

i don't get the joke.

You honestly believe the republicans won't give more power to the government?

i can't tell if you're joking.

do you understand how this republican/democrat thing works?

[autiger730]

one of them won't give more power to the gov't.

That's rich.

i don't get the joke.

You honestly believe the republicans won't give more power to the government?

i can't tell if you're joking.

do you understand how this republican/democrat thing works?

Yeah. I know exactly how it works. To say either of them is less power hungry than the other is naive at best. You read the Patriot Act lately? The NDAA? Both of them agree on both items. They also agree on this little jewel: http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-off ... eparedness .......Doesn't require that there be an actual emergency, just the "need" to promote national defense, which could be basically anytime they choose. Gives them the "right" to take over agriculture, food production, all materials, water, energy, production, basically any and everything.

[DRiccio21]

i'm an idiot and don't know anything, sorry

[GeorgesGoons]

They also agree on this little jewel: http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-off ... eparedness .......Doesn't require that there be an actual emergency, just the "need" to promote national defense, which could be basically anytime they choose. Gives them the "right" to take over agriculture, food production, all materials, water, energy, production, basically any and everything.

That isn't how I read that. I read that if an emergency was to arise that the appropriate secretaries would allocate resources to further production in a time of need. Kinda like they did during WWII. Maybe I am not reading it correctly. But the word "Shall" is in there quite a bit, meaning it's not binding. If it had said "Will" then there is a little more weight behind it.

If I am reading it incorrectly please point me to the point where I am missing this.

The Secretary of each agency delegated authority under subsection (a) of this section (resource departments) shall plan for and issue regulations to prioritize and allocate resources and establish standards and procedures by which the authority shall be used to promote the national defense, under both emergency and non-emergency conditions. Each Secretary shall authorize the heads of other agencies, as appropriate, to place priority ratings on contracts and orders for materials, services, and facilities needed in support of programs approved under section 202 of this order.

All of those items that you say they have the "right" to take over all falls under a Secretary of ........ right? I read it as that they are putting priorities of where to allocate government funds.

[autiger730]

I fail to see how "shall" makes it not binding. Also, it doesn't have anything in it that says there needs to be an emergency for this to go into effect. It talks about allocating resources, funds would be included but is it limited to that?

Important part:

"Sec. 201. Priorities and Allocations Authorities. (a) The authority of the President conferred by section 101 of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2071, to require acceptance and priority performance of contracts or orders (other than contracts of employment) to promote the national defense over performance of any other contracts or orders, and to allocate materials, services, and facilities as deemed necessary or appropriate to promote the national defense, is delegated to the following agency heads:"

Basically, if they decide they need it, it is theirs to control.

And there is this part:


(2) perform industry analyses to assess capabilities of the industrial base to support the national defense, and develop policy recommendations to improve the international competitiveness of specific domestic industries and their abilities to meet national defense program needs.



What exactly are defense program needs? If it needs money, what is to stop them from using this to get their hands on something and then selling it themselves? Yeah, obviously that is a big, big stretch, but it isn't prohibited here or anywhere. The point isnt that they wont ever use this, and it is just a plan "just in case", it is that they can use it at any time and there is nothing in place to stop it from happening. And it is all under the usual guise of "national defense".

[Cnasty]

Round 2 tonight!!

Romney better keep the hair momentum going

[GeorgesGoons]

Legal definition of shall.....

all v. 1) an imperative command as in "you shall not kill." 2) in some statutes, "shall" is a direction but does not mean mandatory, depending on the context

[Crowes]

one of them won't give more power to the gov't.

That's rich.

i don't get the joke.

You honestly believe the republicans won't give more power to the government?

i can't tell if you're joking.

do you understand how this republican/democrat thing works?

Why don't you explain it for us? You just agreed with a previous post that they both will fuck us over in the end.