Page 4 of 17 FirstFirst ...
2
3
4
5
6
14
... LastLast
  1. #61
    Quote Originally Posted by Kathandira View Post
    I know of a small hand full of things said that are literally against the law, such as death threats. But so long as I cannot be jailed for things beyond that, I feel we have as close to freedom of speech as we can get.
    Freedom of speech just means the Government can't punish you for speaking, it doesn't mean anyone can say what ever they want when ever they want. You can't go into an elementary class and start talking about porn and you can't tell your boss to go fuck himself and not get fired because your freedom of speech is protected. It means that you can say, "Obama sucks!' and Obama can't have you arrested.

    Mind you Trump wants to pass laws so that media are punished for saying things he doesn't like, or 'lies'. Trump is very revenge oriented and even skipped a debate because Fox News, a pro-republican media establishment, was 'being mean to him.' because they wouldn't only say nice things about him.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Bloodscore View Post
    This is not an Executive Order so the House and Senate had to pass it to get to the White House. Learn how the Government works.

    Edit: If you are unhappy contact your Senate and House reps.
    "But... But... Rinos! And SJW! (Add ignornant babbling here), PC!!! Blargh!!" (vomits acid on floor and jumps in hole to disapear to survive to attack later)

  2. #62
    Banned Orlong's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Class 1,000,000 Clean Room
    Posts
    13,127
    Quote Originally Posted by Morrigenn View Post
    In the US, when both Houses of Congress pass a bill (and please note that there were NO opposing votes), the President has three choices. He can sign it, or he can refuse to sign it (called a "pocket veto"), or he can outright veto it. If Congress then overrides his veto (and since this was passed unanimously--a veto override would be totally expected) it still becomes law.
    He could have vetoed it to show integrity and that he values not wasting tax payer money on something that would correct itself in the years ahead as the documents are eventually replaced with newly written ones. In fact he couldve held a speech about it saying yeah we know there are a few descriptors in current documentation that people may feel shouldnt be used anymore, but Im not going to spend billions of your hard earned money to just change a few words. What I will do is ask for a law that will disallow these terms from being used on all future documentation.

    I wouldve have been happy with a law like that

  3. #63
    Quote Originally Posted by Orlong View Post
    He could have vetoed it to show integrity and that he values not wasting tax payer money on something that would correct itself in the years ahead as the documents are eventually replaced with newly written ones. In fact he couldve held a speech about it saying yeah we know there are a few descriptors in current documentation that people may feel shouldnt be used anymore, but Im not going to spend billions of your hard earned money to just change a few words. What I will do is ask for a law that will disallow these terms from being used on all future documentation.

    I wouldve have been happy with a law like that
    So couldn't every republican in any of the other branches of government. You are just embarassing yourself now.

  4. #64
    Banned Orlong's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Class 1,000,000 Clean Room
    Posts
    13,127
    Quote Originally Posted by Morrigenn View Post

    Legitimate criticism of the US political system is fine. Scapegoating the Executive branch because you don't like who's sitting there is bullshit.
    The president is the last and most important signature on a law. HE has the final say if it passes or not unless his veto is overidden in which case he can say he tried

  5. #65
    Brewmaster -Nurot's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Posts
    1,435
    Quote Originally Posted by Orlong View Post
    He could have vetoed it to show integrity and that he values not wasting tax payer money on something that would correct itself in the years ahead as the documents are eventually replaced with newly written ones. In fact he couldve held a speech about it saying yeah we know there are a few descriptors in current documentation that people may feel shouldnt be used anymore, but Im not going to spend billions of your hard earned money to just change a few words. What I will do is ask for a law that will disallow these terms from being used on all future documentation.

    I wouldve have been happy with a law like that
    There is no saving or wasting money here. It would have taken just as much time and energy for him to waste the ink on the veto as it will to replace less than 20 words in the 2 Acts.

  6. #66
    The Undying Breccia's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    NY, USA
    Posts
    39,911
    Quote Originally Posted by Orlong View Post
    Doesnt Obama have anything better to spend his time on?
    Like what? Congress is a deadlock of damn near Brazilian (the movie, not the country) magnitude. He can't sign a law that doesn't reach his desk. I mean, what's he going to do, nominate Supreme Court Justices? We both know how that's going to end.

  7. #67
    The Undying Kalis's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Στην Κυπρο
    Posts
    32,390
    Quote Originally Posted by Orlong View Post
    He could have vetoed it to show integrity and that he values not wasting tax payer money on something that would correct itself in the years ahead as the documents are eventually replaced with newly written ones. In fact he couldve held a speech about it saying yeah we know there are a few descriptors in current documentation that people may feel shouldnt be used anymore, but Im not going to spend billions of your hard earned money to just change a few words. What I will do is ask for a law that will disallow these terms from being used on all future documentation.

    I wouldve have been happy with a law like that
    Billions? Are they going to be using Weimar Republic deutschmarks?

  8. #68
    Its getting harder and harder to tell apart the left wing and the right wing outrage police.
    "And all those exclamation marks, you notice? Five?
    A sure sign of someone who wears his underpants on his head."

  9. #69
    Quote Originally Posted by Gilrak View Post
    Oh Orlong, you silly goose, nobody will vote for your Trumpy over this.
    I'm voting for Trump over this. Sick and tired of gov't wasting tax dollars and not doing their job. Corruption is running rampant and it has to stop.

  10. #70
    Quote Originally Posted by Orlong View Post
    He could have vetoed it to show integrity and that he values not wasting tax payer money on something that would correct itself in the years ahead as the documents are eventually replaced with newly written ones. In fact he couldve held a speech about it saying yeah we know there are a few descriptors in current documentation that people may feel shouldnt be used anymore, but Im not going to spend billions of your hard earned money to just change a few words. What I will do is ask for a law that will disallow these terms from being used on all future documentation.

    I wouldve have been happy with a law like that
    If you are worried about a president showing integrity, then why on earth would you think Trump is any different than any other politician? He's literally been proven to have fucked over thousands of people with trump U and the employees of the companies that he has essentially bullied into accepting less money than what was originally agreed upon. And those are just a drop in the bucket.

  11. #71
    Banned Orlong's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Class 1,000,000 Clean Room
    Posts
    13,127
    Quote Originally Posted by DeadmanWalking View Post
    "But... But... Rinos! And SJW! (Add ignornant babbling here), PC!!! Blargh!!" (vomits acid on floor and jumps in hole to disapear to survive to attack later)
    But it WAS written by an Asian SJW (Rep Grace Meng, Democrat NY). This is the same woman who has tried to get this passed multiple times, and previously railed about it for years when she was a State Rep in NY eventually getting Oriental removed from New York documentation. She also regularly gives racially charged speeches in favor of Asians. She is basically the Asian equivalent to a BLM member. Funny though how she had and still has no problem with NYC having a part of the city called China Town set aside for the Asians. Why shouldnt she ask that it be renamed Asian American town
    Last edited by Orlong; 2016-07-29 at 01:33 PM.

  12. #72
    Brewmaster -Nurot's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Posts
    1,435
    Quote Originally Posted by Schlup View Post
    I'm voting for Trump over this. Sick and tired of gov't wasting tax dollars and not doing their job. Corruption is running rampant and it has to stop.
    You're calling the replacing of a handful of words in 2 Acts, to modernize the language, corruption and a waste of tax payer money?

    I'm not even sure it's 2 minutes worth of work.

  13. #73
    The Insane Underverse's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    The Underverse
    Posts
    16,333
    I'm generally against political correctness and the social justice movement, but this seems fine. No one calls the respective minorities orientals or negroes except as a slightly racist joke.

  14. #74
    The Unstoppable Force Orange Joe's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    001100010010011110100001101101110011
    Posts
    22,950
    Quote Originally Posted by Orlong View Post
    First of all, no, it wouldnt bother me. Its just a word and words dont hurt, nor am I weak minded/have a thin skin. Secondly Honky was never an official designation by the government for Caucasian people. Also Im not saying that the words Negro or Oriental are words that we should encourage people to use, Im just saying people should just accept that they were used in a time when it WAS appropriate, and to simply wait until the time comes that the government forms are rewritten for some reason and at that time, use more modern words in place of them, rather than scour every current government document just to remove and replace them at the cost of a lot of time, labor, and money.

    Yet here you are offended that Obama dare do something...... Your skin isn't as thick as you seem to think it is.

  15. #75
    Quote Originally Posted by Orlong View Post
    He could have vetoed it to show integrity and that he values not wasting tax payer money on something that would correct itself in the years ahead as the documents are eventually replaced with newly written ones. In fact he couldve held a speech about it saying yeah we know there are a few descriptors in current documentation that people may feel shouldnt be used anymore, but Im not going to spend billions of your hard earned money to just change a few words. What I will do is ask for a law that will disallow these terms from being used on all future documentation.

    I wouldve have been happy with a law like that
    Sure you would have been happy.... because veto-ing a bill that passed unanimously and helped in making laws/regulations consistent (and thus easier to ensure compliance with) would require both houses of Congress to re-consider the bill in an additional session(s) and send it back through the process... thus WASTING TAXPAYER DOLLARS--something you decried in your response above. And you really need to define "integrity" here since the way you used it... since I don't think it means what you think it does in this context.

    Just admit that you're looking for any damn reason to blame Obama for something. It'll be faster and a helluva lot more honest.

  16. #76
    Quote Originally Posted by Orlong View Post
    He could have vetoed it to show integrity and that he values not wasting tax payer money on something that would correct itself in the years ahead as the documents are eventually replaced with newly written ones. In fact he couldve held a speech about it saying yeah we know there are a few descriptors in current documentation that people may feel shouldnt be used anymore, but Im not going to spend billions of your hard earned money to just change a few words. What I will do is ask for a law that will disallow these terms from being used on all future documentation.

    I wouldve have been happy with a law like that
    Only PC culture that exist is the crap coming out of right wingers that attack anybody that don't agree with their world view. The biggest group of people that get offended by anything is the same group that complains about PC. Bill Maheris a good example (who's only left wing idea's he has are related to drugs and sex), he will complain about PC but when you call him out on his BS he will get more offended then anybody else.



    Obama is a president, he doesn't write those or vote on those laws. He as president can push for something (like healthcare reform) and it will have a huge impact because party members usually want to work with the president. Normally presidents if they are anything decent won't or shouldn't bloody veto everything unless he has major issues with the laws (like when republicans want to push anti abortion agenda into budget bills).

  17. #77
    The Unstoppable Force Orange Joe's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    001100010010011110100001101101110011
    Posts
    22,950
    Quote Originally Posted by Orlong View Post
    The president is the last and most important signature on a law. HE has the final say if it passes or not unless his veto is overidden in which case he can say he tried

    Who has the final say again?

  18. #78
    Banned Orlong's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Class 1,000,000 Clean Room
    Posts
    13,127
    Quote Originally Posted by -Nurot View Post
    There is no saving or wasting money here. It would have taken just as much time and energy for him to waste the ink on the veto as it will to replace less than 20 words in the 2 Acts.
    How much floor time in the Senate and House was wasted that couldve been used to discuss bills that are actually important to the survival of our country

  19. #79
    So far there's 4 pages of posters that completely disagree with Orlong's outrage. And he still trying to argue

  20. #80
    The Undying Wildtree's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Iowa - Franconia
    Posts
    31,500
    Quote Originally Posted by Orlong View Post
    He could have vetoed it to show integrity and that he values not wasting tax payer money on something that would correct itself in the years ahead as the documents are eventually replaced with newly written ones.
    Federal law text cleans up exactly the way as you said in the quote.
    How do you propose a clean up happens, when you ask the President from vetoing the clean up?

    Did it occur to you that you are currently in the midst of "the years ahead"?
    The start of those years was the Civil Rights Act.
    We're in the progress of cleaning the law text where needed.
    If we don't do that, the text won't ever change by itself.
    Then you end up with nonsense laws like:

    A motorist with criminal intentions must stop at the city limits and telephone the chief of police as he is entering the town - Washington DC

    If you are found stealing soap, you must wash yourself until the bar of soap has been completely used up - Arizona State Law

    It’s against the law for a woman to drive a car in Main Street unless her husband is walking in front of the car waving a red flag - Waynesboro, Virginia

    Those are all laws, implemented at a time where they had some sense. Never removed, they're still there to date for some chuckle.
    "The pen is mightier than the sword.. and considerably easier to write with."

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •