WTF Since when was a 40% vote enough for a motion to pass or stall

Atan Nolme

Flaccid Member
Oct 14, 2004
6,388
12
0
Karningul,Eriador, Endor
No, no, no, no, NO.

It was the Church as an institution having a stake/control/finger in the pie (Like the Church of England) over the government that the framers wanted to avoid, not necessarily religion(s) since that's what gave people a moral base.

Freedom of religion, yes, but since some form of religion formed most people's central belief systems, I don't think it's possible to have asked for it to not come into play at all at that time.


That "The Church" as an institution (Might as well call it a private company), is quite different from "religion".

They knew you can't seperate religion from people in office, and thus from government itself, it's the same subconcious issue that some folks have with Obama (Because they think he's Muslim)/JFK because he was Catholic/Romney because he's Mormon/Smilin' Joe because he's Jewish....and so on.

We have the same issue today with large corporations running things in much the same way that The Church did when they all got ticked off and left the olde country.

Exactly.

The Founding Fathers did not care if a state adopted an official religion because of the freedom of movement.
 

Atan Nolme

Flaccid Member
Oct 14, 2004
6,388
12
0
Karningul,Eriador, Endor
Well yes, that's true. But at least they did SOMETHING. The amount of bills the House as passed but have stalled because of delay tactics in the Senate is astonishing.

So you're happy they just did something no matter if it made the country worse?

:case:

Damn we agree on something. If I had my way Congress would be a part time legislature with term limits.

The only reason this full tax cut went through was because Obama is a terrible negotiator, giving the other side EVERYTHING they ask for with nothing in return. If the Repubs couldn't filibuster EVERYTHING, he wouldn't have had to make such a poor sacrifice and would have signed in the tax bill that had passed the House already that would have saved the $835M. So yes, better than nothing.

I blame Obama for that snafu, however.

Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder because from my point of view the repuke leadership caved into Obama demands. Adding almost another 1 trillion dollars to the federal deficit, increasing the death tax, was not worth a temporary bill that will keep the tax rates the same.

I'd have rather nothing happened in this instance. This whole philosophy of spending money to spur the economy is wrong. Germany does the exact opposite and look at their economy.

Damn we agree on something for the second time.

I'm sorry, did you say DEM's and Spending spree?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/14/AR2010121407208.html

Look to your own house, first.

The Cons voted in a new party thinking change was coming, and instead bought into it hook, line, and sinker.

The day the conservative voters of America realize they are getting as f*cked by their own republican leadership as they are by democratic politicians and stop blindly following the conservative rhetoric, we might actually be able to get an informed and free thinking populace out there making votes that will actually result in something happening.

Which if I had my way McCain, Snowe, Collins, Luger, McConnell, et al would be gone from the senate.
 

my little brony

Keep Being A Little Bitch
Oct 15, 2004
34,952
18,763
823
passed the senate with 63 votes. apparently all they needed was to make sure paris hilton got her tax break


potus signs it next week, adm mullen and secdef certify that it's not going to be a problem, 60 day waiting period to write new rules
 

fly

Osharts 11
Oct 1, 2004
71,757
23,480
1,073
Steam
mattressfish
attachment.php
 

dbzeag

Wants to kiss you where it stinks
Jun 9, 2006
16,993
452
298
42
So will we get to see a certain UF member's bf in a couple months when the repeal has taken effect?