Liberal Forum

Is this where I sign up for an Obama phone? Ask one of the *** that's taking turns on your sister (It's okay - that's Latin).

MistyBlue, on 24 Jan 2013 - 19:51, said:What's the difference if it's 11 inches or 12 inches as long as it fills you up?And there's one for the archives,,,,teacher, on 24 Jan 2013 - 10:58, said:Is this where I sign up for an Obama phone?Ask one of the *** that's taking turns on your sister (It's okay - that's Latin).ROFLDon't make me get the wooden spoon!

TheyDid The Math: How The GOP Will Gerrymander Its Way Back To The White HouseStill reeling from their second straight presidential loss to Barack Obama, Republicans are working to make drastic changes to how electoral college votes are allocated in key swing states.Republicans in states like Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Virginia have all proposed scrapping the winner take all electoral vote system in favor of plans that would reward the GOPs recent gerrymandering. The six states considering the varied plans are all swing states that have gone for Barack Obama twice now, and others have been hard fought but ultimately gone blue for even longer.The plans vary. In Pennsylvania, lawmakers want to siphon off a handful of electoral votes for the runner-up candidatewhich has been the Republican since 1992. In other states, the proposal calls for the overall winner of the popular vote to get two votes, while the rest of the votes are distributed by congressional district. That plan is already in place in Maine and Nebraska.What does that look like when implemented in these swing states? Heres how it wouldve played out in the 2012 election in a handful of states controlled by Republicans.In Florida, where Romney lost by only 1%, Obama would have lost even bigger: Romney would have picked up more than half the states electoral votes.In Ohio, where Obama eked out a 2% lead, Romney would have won two-thirds of the states votes.In Wisconsin, Romney would have won half the states votes, despite losing the overall vote by 7%.And Romney would no longer have lost his home state of Michigan, even though he lost the popular vote there by 9%. Instead, hed have picked up nine electoral votes.Pennsylvanias plan, which allocates votes based on the overall percentage, gives Romney his smallest advantage, with only eight extra electoral votes. Thats still a nice bonus for a guy who lost the state by 5% and therefore lost all 20 electoral votes.The plan advanced this week by a Virginia Senate subcommittee is even more lopsided, allocating the two extra votes not to the popular vote winner, but to the winner of the most congressional districts. The result? Romney picks up 9 of the states electoral votes, despite losing the states popular vote by 3%.If the plans currently on the table were implemented in these six states alone, Romney picks up another 60 electoral votes, bringing his total to 266 nationwide, making the race much closer but not ultimately taking the victory away from Barack Obama.An analysis by Alan Abramowitz for the University of Virginias Center for Politics found that if a Maine or Nebraska style system had been in place nationwide for the 2012 election, Mitt Romney would have defeated Barack Obama, 276 electoral votes to 262 electoral votes, despite losing the popular vote by 4%. If the plan being pushed in Virginia became the law of the land nationwide, that difference would be even more stark.This new plan reflects the fact that in all these states, Republicans are in control of the state house and have been since 2010. The successful pro-Republican gerrymandering that took place that year didnt just protect the Republican control of the House of Representatives, but also laid the groundwork for taking back the presidency. If these plans, which are by most accounts legal (although they could be challenged in court), were to become law, it would be difficult for Democrats to win the presidency in 2016, even if they win by millions of votes.http://tv.msnbc.com/...he-white-house/Republicans don't believe in democracy. The will of the people means nothing to them.To the extent that we need to fear our own government, these are the people who we should be afraid of.They are willing to rig the system to steal power and make sure they hold on to it.

Yesterday Harry Reid got down on all fours and once again let Mitch McConnell teabag him.Rachel Maddow takes on Harry Reid for the comments he made in the past about the specific changes needed for filibuster reform, contrasted with Thursday's deal.VIDEO

Not sure why you want filibuster reform, Misty--especially if the Republicans are going to gerrymander their way to electoral victory.

what's difference if its 11 or 12 what's the difference if its 16 trillion or 22 trillion? depends what you meaning of or is

John Boehner: Ending Abortion Is 'One Of Our Most Fundamental Goals This Year'As hundreds of thousands of people braved sub-freezing temperatures in Washington, D.C., on Friday to join the anti-abortion protest March for Life, House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) took the opportunity to reiterate his commitment to banning abortion in America for good.Addressing the crowd at the National Mall via video broadcast, Boehner said it's time for anti-abortion activisits to "commit ourselves to doing everything we can to protect the sanctity of life." Step one, he said, is making permanent the Hyde Amendment, which prevents federal dollars from being used to pay for abortions except in cases of rape or incest."For the new Congress, that means bringing together a bipartisan pro-life majority and getting to work," Boehner said. "In accordance with the will of the people, we will again work to pass the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act, formally codifying the Hyde Amendment."Boehner said he will make it a national priority to "help make abortion a relic of the past.""Let that be one of our most fundamental goals this year," he said.Read MoreJohn Boehner is delusional if he thinks he can 'make abortion a relic of the past'.Women will always get abortions, legal or not.History of AbortionThe prohibition of legal abortion from the 1880s until 1973 came under the same anti-obscenity or Comstock laws that prohibited the dissemination of birth control information and services.Criminalization of abortion did not reduce the numbers of women who sought abortions. In the years before Roe v. Wade, the estimates of illegal abortions ranged as high as 1.2 million per year. Although accurate records could not be kept, it is known that between the 1880s and 1973, many thousands of women were harmed as a result of illegal abortion.Many women died or suffered serious medical problems after attempting to self-induce their abortions or going to untrained practitioners who performed abortions with primitive methods or in unsanitary conditions. During this time, hospital emergency room staff treated thousands of women who either died or were suffering terrible effects of abortions provided without adequate skill and care.Some women were able to obtain relatively safer, although still illegal, abortions from private doctors.If John Boehner and other Republicans really wanted to cut down on the number of abortions, they would make sure that1. women were educated about contraception and 2. they had plenty of access to birth control.But they do just the opposite, because that makes too much sense.

Not sure why you want filibuster reform, Misty--especially if the Republicans are going to gerrymander their way to electoral victory.I didn't necessarily want to change the 60 vote thing, but I feel like if you're going to block a bill, you should be made to stand on the floor of the Senate and tell people why.This crap, where they just have to say 'I object' and even do it by e-mail is ridiculous.

Republicans don't believe in democracy. The will of the people means nothing to them.To the extent that we need to fear our own government, these are the people who we should be afraid of.They are willing to rig the system to steal power and make sure they hold on to it.Ain't gonna happen.Now, you know how I often tell you "but it's okay when the other side does it?" You know, when you bring your weak $h!t to me?Well, I'm gonna do the same to you that which you have so often done to me. I ain't claiming it, I'm just doing, well, turn abouts fair play.Following the 2000 election, I believe it was that Algore won the popular vote, but Bush won the electoral college. Then it was all the liberal rage that this should all be changed.Pick a way, girlie. Stand by it.When you don't, when you change your ways cause of the political wind you just look like, well, you.The Horse Thread is long. Please to show me where I have ever been inconsistant.

It is my understanding that many states already divide their electoral votes like this. Giving some votes to one candidate and some votes to the other. Technically it is a more accurate way to implement the electoral college to insure the college works as it was originaly intended. Because right now, the electoral college isn't exactly working as intended. I mean if you look at a map of the districts Obama won vs the districts Romney won, there are very small blotches of blue and about 90% of America is red. The blotches are the big cities though, which was exactly what the electoral college was supposed to prevent. I can see though, support the college when it works in your favor, trash it when it doesn't. Flip flopping, though wasn't started by Kerry, sure did catch on quick with the left.

Following the 2000 election, I believe it was that Algore won the popular vote, but Bush won the electoral college. Then it was all the liberal rage that this should all be changed.Pick a way, girlie. Stand by it.When you don't, when you change your ways cause of the political wind you just look like, well, you.I didn't want it to be changed, then or now, so I am consistent.Anyway using the 2000 election as an example is ludicrous.So much crap went down in Florida.....If not for bad felons lists, butterfly ballots, etc. Gore would have taken the state easily.I understand that there may be times when a candidate might win the popular vote and not the electoral vote.That's the way it goes.But what the Republicans are trying to do is rig the system in their favor, and they really aren't even trying to hide that fact.

It is my understanding that many states already divide their electoral votes like this. Giving some votes to one candidate and some votes to the other.Two states do, Maine and Nebraska.Technically it is a more accurate way to implement the electoral college to insure the college works as it was originaly intended. Because right now, the electoral college isn't exactly working as intended. I mean if you look at a map of the districts Obama won vs the districts Romney won, there are very small blotches of blue and about 90% of America is red.But most of the people live in those blue areas.The blotches are the big cities though, which was exactly what the electoral college was supposed to prevent.The electors are elected by popular vote. That means the population chooses it's electors.I can see though, support the college when it works in your favor, trash it when it doesn't. Flip flopping, though wasn't started by Kerry, sure did catch on quick with the left.I am not flip flopping.Read my last post.The Republicans are the ones trashing the EC because it is not working in their favor.Most of the people live in urban areas, and they tend to vote Democratic.They want districts with lesser populations to have more say than those with larger populations.

Apropos of nothing in this thread, but just because it's the sweetest thing I've seen in a very long time, and it makes me feel good.....

What's the difference if it's 11 inches or12 inches as long as it fills you up? That's what she said.

That's what she said. You have an excellent eye for sexual innuendo.

You have an excellent eye for sexual innuendo. She said that as well.

MistyBlue, on 24 Jan 2013 - 19:51, said:What's the difference if it's 11 inches or 12 inches as long as it fills you up?That's what she said.I don't know what your dirty mind is thinking but I was talking about a sandwich.BTW I had a foot long last night.Actually, half of it is still in the fridge.I couldn't take eat the whole thing.

I don't know what your dirty mind is thinking but I was talking about a sandwich. BTW I had a foot long last night. Actually, half of it is still in the fridge. I couldn't take eat the whole thing. Lol. A lot of commercial bread contains human hair, I hope you got the whole wheat! Once you go wheat you never go back. http://foodaries.com...-duck-feathers/

Lol. A lot of commercial bread contains human hair, I hope you got the whole wheat! Once you go wheat you never go back.Human hair and duck feathers....Yum Yum.I always get the whole wheat. LOL