Capitol Hill Blue
Posted By: jgw Watching the Supreme Court - 04/26/24 05:11 PM
I wonder if anybody has ever charged the Supreme Court for not doing its job? I have been watching all this stuff and virtually everybody expert in the Supremes has either said, or suggested, that they are not doing their job! This being the case I just wonder if one could charge them for not doing their job. Seems fair to me. I know, its unlikely but, what if somebody actually does such a thing - then what happens?

It seems only fair that the Supremes can be charged just like virtually every everybody, everything thing, in the United States can, apparently be charged so why not the Supreme Court.

Perhaps the question should be something like. can the Congress of the United States charge the Supreme Court of the United States?

Fair question, I think..........
Posted By: perotista Re: Watching the Supreme Court - 04/26/24 11:20 PM
Coequal branches of government. The separation of powers between the branches of government. The president nor congress can tell the SCOTUS what to do. What congress can do is basically limited to impeachment of any of the SCOTUS justices. Which only one has been impeached, he was acquitted in the senate. Samuel Chase in 1805.
Posted By: jgw Re: Watching the Supreme Court - 04/29/24 07:34 PM
Interesting. What we seem to have is a majority of Trump admirer's determined to make sure that he stays out of trouble. One of them is, obviously, bought and payed for by the monied, married to a wife who also publicly kinda likes Trump as well. All that being said they stay publicly working for Trump as a result (which, in theory, is not supposed to happen) Now we can add in the Congressional house who are also under the kindness of Trump as well as an entire congress incapable of doing a damned thing.

It is, however, pretty interesting. We also know where our military are standing in all of this. Wonder what would happen if they decided that an action on their part to try and fix the mess that they have actually already spoken of. The theory being that they MUST do what is right!

On the other hand, if the Supremes have said that a president can do whatever he wants there is always Biden who could just declare he is president for life and all Supremes, he might not care for, to be shot at Sundown and start with a new group that he might like better.

Our TV is reporting all with vigor and America, apparently cannot do a thing to stop it. Yep, I guess the plan is to get Biden to start ending them that don't make him happy.

Gotta say good luck the everybody. It seems as EVERYBODY is blued, screwed, and tattooed!
Posted By: Jeffery J. Haas Re: Watching the Supreme Court - 04/30/24 04:25 PM
Slouching toward Moscow...
Yeah sure, co-equal...
Posted By: jgw Re: Watching the Supreme Court - 04/30/24 08:58 PM
Oh, one last whine. We also have a President, one that will probably in time go down as one of the good ones, who is, currently, as far as I can tell, working as hard as he can to make sure that Trump beats the crap out of him in the next election. One can only wonder.

It all is, it seems to me, a Demcratic Party thing. I remember when my wife was working for them when Hillary was running. She noticed that there were no signs up around town and asked if she could have a couple to put in the front yard. They said, "sure, 25.00 each - buy all you want". She walked out, never looked back, continues to vote Democratic but is not what one can call a happy Democrat, with reason. Oh, she went through the University working for the Democratic party to pay for her education.

I am, I guess, not a real happy Democratic camper and I know she isn't. If Trump wins we are trying to decide whether we move to Mexico or Canada. We live in Washington state. My wife says I am wrong but, so far, I have seen no tv ads, only requests for money in my mail, etc. no signs, no nuthin. One can only to continue to wonder.
Posted By: perotista Re: Watching the Supreme Court - 05/01/24 02:43 AM
Jgw, I’ve been wondering for a long time also, beginning with the selection of Biden to face off against Trump. Charging for yard signs and bumper stickers is the fad these days. I remember when they used to be free. My in box has been full of Biden asking for money also. The difference, you’re not a happy democrat, I’m not a happy swing voter.

I haven’t seen any political ads either. Another difference, I live in Georgia, a swing state/tossup/battleground state whatever one wants to call it which narrowly went to Biden in 2020. By the famous 11,779 votes. Hence Trump demanding our secretary of state to find 11,780 votes. But which Trump leads in the polls here in Georgia today.

https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/president/general/2024/georgia/trump-vs-biden
Posted By: jgw Re: Watching the Supreme Court - 05/02/24 08:20 PM
I am not a dedicated Democrat. I pick the one I think is best. This Trump thing is, obvious to me a REALLY bad decision. I have a dentist that is a Trumpite. He started talking to me about Trump one day and I fear I kinda went off. I pointed out that a Washington, dc paper was keeping track of Trump lies and they kinda stopped at over 3000 lies. I wasn't trying to prove anything. This was a simple statement of fact easily proven (the paper actually offered a list of the lies and when they happened). There are lots of things wrong with Trump but that one seals the deal for me. I really don't trust anybody that lies and, when they do it 3000 times publicly I walk. I think that if Biden wins he will die in the job. He is simply too old, even if he is fine now he won't be in time. That I why I think that if he actually wins it means we will have the first female president which I am not against.

I am 89 so I have kindofa reason to think that the job will kill him. There is a reason when every president we have had in my time ended up with white hair when they were done. Its a REALLY tough job! The responsibilities alone are enough to do the job. I think that he has been, so far, a really good president but, now, I can't help wondering.

I also think one of our serious problems is our voters. I can't even vaguely understand why somebody would vote for a public liar. Just don't get it! I am becoming more and more convinced that we are raising generations of voters that are actually thinking less and less. I have heard this also from others. We have a congressional house, for instance, that has passed less legislation that any other congressional house yet folks keep on voting damned fools into office. I probably won't see what happens (hopefully) when it either stops or keeps on getting dumber and dumber.

Interesting times.............. (I continue to wish everybody good luck, we are all going to need it!)
Posted By: perotista Re: Watching the Supreme Court - 05/02/24 09:20 PM
Jgw, you’re not the only one who thinks Biden will die in office. That is one of the biggest fears out there among the masses. Even those who are ardent anti-Trump fear for Biden’s survivability. His age and the worry about his mental fitness to last another 4 years are one of two reasons he’s in a basic tie with Trump. 55% of all Americans have doubts about Biden’s mental fitness to do the job for another term, 66% think Biden is showing he’s too old to do the job.

https://harvardharrispoll.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/HHP_Apr2024_KeyResults.pdf

Even so, those who think that aren’t rushing to Trump. Some have, a lot more haven’t. You have approximately 30% of all Americans still looking for someone other than Biden and Trump. Some are voicing their preference to voting third party, others saying they won’t vote, some still undecided.

Harris, there are a lot of folks out there who think a vote for Biden is in reality a vote for Harris to become president because Biden won’t be able to survive another full term. To this question - A vote for Joe Biden is really a vote for Kamala Harris because he will likely not serve a full second term. 41% of all Americans strongly agreed with that statement, another 32% somewhat agreed. Whatever somewhat agreeing means.

https://harvardharrispoll.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/HHP_Jan24_KeyResults.pdf

I’m not worried about that, but a majority of Americans are. The age issues are just one of two major problems for Biden, the other is his very low overall job approval along with being in the pits on his approval on most of the issues. Both huge liabilities. But I have faith that the biggest liability is with Trump and all his legal problems. That once crush time comes, when the reality of the situation hits people in the face that the choice is between Biden and Trump, Biden will prevail. That reality I don’t think has set in yet. At least I hope not.

https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/approval/joe-biden/approval-rating

https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/approval/joe-biden/issues
Posted By: jgw Re: Watching the Supreme Court - 05/02/24 11:23 PM
I am not sure that there shouldn't be some kind of test for people who come to vote. Little things like "can they read and understand the ballot" or even "can they read". I do not understand, for instance, how people can vote for Trump who is a known liar. I have heard some claim that is not true. I wonder how many voters ask somebody what they do to vote for Trump without any idea of how to vote. If you listen to ANY of what he says there will be a lie in there some place. The man just cannot tell the truth all the time. I suspect you are waaay ahead of what we have to deal with when it comes to voters. I think you are assuming that voters are smart enough to know what they are doing - that's a lot more faith than I have.

I get stuff from Trump all the time. I have no idea why. A couple of days ago he wrote to say that he would pay for my plane ticket and a place to stay if I wanted to go down there to visit with him. It was VERY strange. I think he wanted money.

I just don't understand the political party thing. The Democrats kinda have a view I can grasp but the Republicans - not so much. The Republicans are like a group of folks who have joined up in some kinda of social club that has no real reason for existence except for the social thing and the fact that they can claim to be a member. I am not convinced that most have even a clue when it comes to "member of what".

I was not aware that so many had even thought that Biden couldn't survive another time and the Harris thing. I kinda like her because she was competent in her past job and seems to be handling her current one with dexterity. I imagine the female thing might make a difference but that doesn't bother me at all and might be a good thing.

Everything considered I sincerely hope that Biden wins the election. If he doesn't the United States will turn into some kind of zoo. He, and those who will work for him, are REALLY figuring out what they are going to do and its scary. Its also a mess with a virtual wish list of insanity. The only good thing is that every little plan has another plan which they can fight over. Its as if the current congressional house will become the national administration. I can see nothing but disaster, starting with Russia 'helping' run America and goes down from there. I know, and am hopefully wrong............
Posted By: perotista Re: Watching the Supreme Court - 05/03/24 12:39 AM
I grew up when Eisenhower was president, cast my first vote in 1968 when one had to be 21 years old. Maybe we ought to go back to that age? One of the main reasons for the 26th amendment was Vietnam. The thought was if you were old enough to go fight and die for your country, then you should be old enough to vote. Many states which had a drinking age of 21 also lowered it to 18 back then.

I remember when the democratic party was known as the big tent party, the party of the working man vs. the Republican party, known as the country club party, the party of business. Of course, back then, both major parties had their liberal and conservative wings. The Democratic party, their solid conservative south, the GOP, their old Rockefeller liberal republicans of the northeast. Then both major parties discarded their unwanted wings to start moving to where we’re at today. There was also the change from the old party selection process to today’s modern primary system in 1976. Trump would have been laughed out of the room pre-1976 or under the old party selection process. I say selection process as there were only 12-15 primaries back in the pre-1976 modern primary system and some of those were non-binding. Trump wouldn’t have never happened.

Like you, I don’t understand the fascination with Trump. Liar isn’t what I consider the worst with him, all his legal problems, his childish antics acting like a spoiled 4-year-old brat with his name calling along with his 3rd grade schoolyard bullying tactics. His thirst for revenge along with an ego that doesn’t quit with much more. But unlike most here on this site, I do understand the reluctance to support Biden which I’ve touched on in the past. You don’t know how much I wish the democrats went with someone else. He was the ideal, safe candidate to defeat Trump in 2020, not so in 2024 for many reasons. But Biden is still the only adult in the room this year as he was in 2020. As for political parties, they never interested me be that back growing up in the 1950’s, in 1968 when I cast my first vote or today. I’d like the major parties to return to where the republican party was the party of Eisenhower, the democratic party, that of John F. Kennedy. But way too much has changed. I don’t think for the better.
Posted By: Kaine Re: Watching the Supreme Court - 05/03/24 07:48 PM
Quote
I do not understand, for instance, how people can vote for Trump who is a known liar.
I asked my daughter-in-law that question. This was during the runup to the 2016 election. Also, although she has several semi-serious health issues, why she would vote for someone who was running on doing away with the pre-existing conditions clause in health insurance.

Her answer, and I kid you not, was, "Because my mom is voting for him."

It was a simple as that for her. Nothing else mattered, except that her mom was voting for him. I was absolutely dumbfounded!
Posted By: jgw Re: Watching the Supreme Court - 05/03/24 10:27 PM
perotista - I too can remember when they changed it and, when they did, I agreed. The problem is that now there is no draft, our military is getting fewer and fewer members but we have yet to goto the draft. I have problems with that one on several levels. The simple fact is that they should have given the early votes to members, or ex-members of the military and left the rest to grow up on their own before they vote (for, again, lots of reasons and one of them is that they seem, for the most part, to be damned fools and pretty clueless).

As time goes on I become more and more convinced that the voting American Public is a bit shy when it comes to common sense. I have no doubt that many would say I was wrong but I am unlikely to change my view. Its like the so-called homeless. We do have a LOT of homeless but we also have a LOT of bums that we call homeless but are not. The other day a woman asked me if I would give her 5 dollars. I told her to get a job as there are a LOT of jobs out there! She said nothing, just went to ask somebody else for 5 dollars. Its even worse than that. In Seattle they took over an entire hotel and put the "homeless in three". The Seattle police will not go into that building without 6 to 12 fellow police for their own safety. I realize that this is a problem and that there really are homeless but, I think, just as many bums (I will skip the drug thing). My wife just came back from a trip to Germany and Poland. She said they have no homeless and she asked about it. There are some but not many. Government are almost trying to do something about the homeless with stuff like "little houses" which is no real solution but very cute.

One can go on and on about this kind of stuff. I am not even sure there is a solution to the 'homeless' but they are spending piles of money to 'fix' the problem and most solutions are simply not working and there is yet something else and there are thousands and they vote! I sometimes talk to them and ask about their politics. You would be amazed at the number who are going to vote for Trump! As I say, I have no real solution but the whole mess, I think, is an example of a voting public which, for a large group, I do not believe is competent and everybody is getting to experience the result.

If I was in charge I would institute the draft tomorrow unless the person who was draft age was in school and taking a course which would put him/her into a job needed by the nation, like, for instance, doctors (which, I think, government should underwrite - to become a doctor, in the United States, costs hundreds of thousands of dollars!). I know at least 4 doctors who have been unable to pay their debt to government due to the way the debts are configured which are impossible to keep up with. Canada, for instance, put their doctors through school, basically for free if they give gov x years when they graduate.

We have, basically, a government which, for many, makes absolutely no sense (I am one of them). When I write to my politicians they used to address whatever I had to say. Now they reply with a request for money and little else.

I have come to the conclusion that the United States is run by, basically, pure greed. This is one of the reasons that Trump exists. He makes no bones about his own greed and, unfortunately, a LOT of people admire him for that. More lunacy I guess.....

One last thing. I believe in our military bu there are problems there. Once is the simple fact that several years ago the Congress of the United States asked the military to have a serious investigation as to where their money goes and who gets what (there is a word for that but I have dementia (and had to look that up)). Anyway, every once in a while somebody in congress will wonder it what they wanted will ever be done. The fact is that it won't. This is simply one of the problems we are living with. There are a LOT of them. Our problems are not just the Presidency, one can go on and on about what we need and many think Trump will fix it but there is little he claims he wants to do which fixes a damned thing. All he really wants to do is to get the folks he think have hurt him and little else. What we REALLY need is a new, REAL, Hoover Commission (was responsible for no fewer than 7 major government fixes). That actually worked. They, amongst other things, asked everybody working in government what their job was, etc. They saved an incredible amount of money and cleaned up the mess. Now we depend on those working for got to run gov. We gotta a little problem.........

Apologies, I got off the track and carried away...............
Posted By: perotista Re: Watching the Supreme Court - 05/03/24 11:59 PM
I was drafted in 1966. That was the best thing that happened to me. I went on to make the army a career, 21 years. Then went back to work for the army as a civilian for another 26. The change from 21 to 18 didn’t affect me, I really didn’t give it much thought. But I do think waiting those 3 extra years would give those a chance to grow up more. Even at 21, many are still stuck to momma’s apron strings.
There probably isn’t a solution to homelessness, much like joblessness, a person must want a job or a home. We’re a rich nation, but for quite a lot of our problems the solution has always been to throw money at it. If that money doesn’t work to solve the problem, it’s only because we haven’t thrown enough money at it. Your woman wanting five dollars, she wanted a hand out, not a hand up.

The draft, our military is way too small to handle the draft. The army has a bit more than 450,000 troops, The Air Force around 320,000, Navy 340,000 and around 175,000 marines. A lot of the bases that used to house the military when there was over a million-man army have been closed. No place to put all the manpower a draft would bring in. Also, the military is more technology driven than with manpower. There are certain professions the military will pay for their college, doctors and nurses are a prime example.

When I write my congressman, I get back a form letter. No request for money, but just a form letter which usually has nothing to do with what I wrote my congressman about.

No doubt quite a lot of money the military spends is totally wasted. But a lot of that falls on congress. There’s been many times the JCS, the military will tell congress they don’t need this or that. Can’t use it. But congress appropriates the money and by law forces the military to buy this stuff. The goal is to keep the civilian jobs back home or to add more. You should go to a DRMO sales where the military sells stuff back to the civilians. I bought 3 brand new laptops a few years back for 20 dollars a piece. Still in their original box, unopened. The only problem was they had windows 7 on them. Nothing wrong with windows 7, I’m still using them. But the army bought a bunch for 500 or so dollars each, then sold them off 5 years later, unused for 20.

Just keep in mind, when it comes to politics, there is no common sense in politics. Especially since the arrival of Trump.
Posted By: Jeffery J. Haas Re: Watching the Supreme Court - 05/04/24 03:51 PM
I wasn't supportive of the idea of the draft the way it was run in my youth however I learned to appreciate the reason for it later in life when I began to study in earnest what my father went through. If it were within my power I would change some basic elements of selective service but I now realize how important it is. I would have benefitted, no question about it.

No democratic society can afford to have "a warrior class" all-volunteer military, it separates us too much, it creates unwanted barriers to communications between the different strata of our people. A selective service obligation forces our society to understand the concept of universally shared sacrifice and we all end up with skin in the game.

Not everyone is built to be a soldier but every able bodied person, and even some who aren't 100 percent able bodied, have something to offer.
Maybe they're not all made of military "stuff" but almost everyone has "the right stuff" inside them. A draft, especially a peacetime draft, brings us together.

We better damn well build new bases and accommodate a much larger military because the last time we arrived at a point like this, two large regional powers became rather hostile and decided that they had gauged our weakness accurately...and they were almost right.
The civilization and society I grew up in almost got wiped out before I was even born.

In my humble opinion we are at such an intersection right now.


PS: You'd better wipe out your Win7 OS. There's plenty wrong with Windows 7, it's not safe and it's not secure anymore.
Give the likely lower performance specs on your lappies I'd suggest you install Linux and restrict what those machines are allowed to do.
Posted By: Jeffery J. Haas Re: Watching the Supreme Court - 05/04/24 04:09 PM
Originally Posted by perotista
No doubt quite a lot of money the military spends is totally wasted. But a lot of that falls on congress. There’s been many times the JCS, the military will tell congress they don’t need this or that. Can’t use it. But congress appropriates the money and by law forces the military to buy this stuff. The goal is to keep the civilian jobs back home or to add more.

When Newt Gingrich came to Washington one of the first things he did after hitting his peak was to completely upend what Congress thinks is discretionary spending versus non-discretionary.
Non-dis funding is sacred, Congress is not allowed to randomly cut non-dis funding.
Where the VA is concerned you'd think doctors, nurses, lab techs, medical software writers, pharma, prosthetics makers and the like would fall under that category but surprise, they do not.

Know what IS non-discretionary at the VA? Construction programs, that's what.
Our VA in Long Beach is currently lacking an on-staff neurologist for the Spinal Cord Injury Unit (SCI) so SCI patients have to get in line and wait to see the regular staff neuro docs instead.
It's the funding.

But like almost every other VA in the country we are AWASH in construction projects, most of which consist of new walkways, gardens, atriums, decoration. Vets have to make way for hundreds of construction workers as they march through the halls, and sometimes it almost feels like the VA is now here to serve them instead.
It's a JOBS program and pesky details like having enough doctors gets in the way of where THE REAL MONEY is trying to get spent.

We have more grand pianos, paintings and flower gardens than we know what to do with but we don't have enough nurses.

That is the legacy left to us by the Agents of Newt, and we're still stuck with it today.
Posted By: perotista Re: Watching the Supreme Court - 05/04/24 05:48 PM
Understand. But when congress directs, puts it in the law, budget that funds will be spent on whatever, construction in your case, the agency, VA here has no choice but to spend those funds as directed by congress. It isn’t the fault of the VA or even the military that funds are spent on things that they don’t need or can’t even use. Congress directed them to spend those funds on what congress ordered they spend them on. What it all boils down to is keeping civilian jobs or creating new civilian jobs in their districts or state so come reelection time, those congressmen and senators can tell the voters they kept their jobs safe and created new ones to boot.

When it comes to the military budget, there are times I think congress doesn’t give a coyote’s howl about national security, just keeping their job. Perhaps as much as a 100 or maybe even 200 billion a year could be cut from the defense budget if congress just gave the military what it needs to protect and defend this country. Not bloating the defense budget with things, the military doesn’t need and worse yet, can’t ever use.
Posted By: jgw Re: Watching the Supreme Court - 05/04/24 07:01 PM
Some thoughts. First your computers. I switched from Microsoft to Linux (ubuntu) several years ago. Its free, updates itself regularly, good forum for help, etc. Never looked back. If you have a computer you can mess with I would suggest just installing Ubuntu. You can google - install ubuntu on a microsoft computer and get a lot of help. What it amounts to is downloading ubuntu onto a memory stick and then booting with it and its a done deal! then all you have to do is load it up with software and you are on your way. And, again, ITS ALL FREE! Ubuntu has a good forum for help. You will never look back.

I wonder, how you getting along with the VA? The girl who is taking care of me decided that I was getting too old to be too weak so she sent me to another girl to get me fixed. Damn well killed me and my wife was right in there agreeing with all they have done to me so far. When I started I swear they were trying to get me to suicide with some of the stuff I had to do but, now, I can actually getup easier amongst other stuff. My problem is memory. I always ask if they have "the pill" and they always say no with "but millions are working on it". The other day I asked and was told that there are a lot of pills that may, or may not, work but most have problems and then they listed the problems. I do not want any that 'may' work - too dangerous! (I am a bit cowardly). But, all in all, the VA actually takes care of me pretty good. My only real problem is that they have me eating a LOT of pills for this and that.

I could easily whine about the government forever and never duplicate myself. Its why I am so enthused about the commission thing. The trick is to go in and ask every person working for gov to explain what their job is and how they do it. I suspect that they could get rid of half the people working there with that alone (when they did it in the 40's they cut costs by something like almost 50%). Its like people that are programmers. The VA, for instance, used to have one place to log in. Now they have three ways to log in. Waste of time and effort but they had nothing better to do. Same thing locally. Port Angeles (where I live) is replacing a large parking lot. When its done it will be 'modernized' but will be, basically, the same thing they spent over a million dollars "fixing" although they are going to have places to load up EV's which they don't have yet. I see stuff happening all the time simply because they have money they must spend. Our state highway department is constantly doing something to highways that is a waste of time and money. Drives me nuts.

I think I mentioned the simple fact that the military has been ordered to do a study of where and why their money goes. Its now been several years and there is yet no information available (and, I suspect, never will be). Every now and then somebody in congress ask how its going and, as far as I can tell, they don't even get that!

The Military, incidentally, especially the Navy have created messes that they don't talk about, don't admit to and its pretty bad. There is an ammunition dump that has really serious problems. i have often wondered what would happen if something went bang but I know it wouldn't be pretty.

I do know that there is a lot of talk about what happens to the military if Trump gets in. Actually there is a lot of talk about a lot of things if he gets in. As far as I am concerned Biden is working very hard to make sure he doesn't win. If he does it will be a miracle. I will vote for him but the whole thing scares the crap out of me. I suspect the best thing would be if he wins and dies a year or two later and we have a female president and, hopefully, she does well she will have been in training for several years which may help.

Later!
Posted By: jgw Re: Watching the Supreme Court - 05/04/24 07:12 PM
Gingrich did one thing that began what we have today. He got the Republican party to not work with the Democrats. That was the start of what we have today. Its strange. One would think that there are people there who understand that when both sides put something down its more likely to work. The last thing that they did together, to fix the thing on our borders everybody who worked on it were proud to have done the job. Then Trump told the Republicans that they couldn't do that because he needed to have something to rip the Dems for. They bent to their Lord and Master and so it lays there and does nothing. Hopefully they might finish it but I doubt it.

The rules for the Republicans are simple. They are NEVER to do anything with the Democrats. Over the years I suspect that the Democrats started doing the same thing and now we have what we have and its a disgrace.

Gingrich was a jerk............ (and REALLY screwed it all up and none elected these days have the gumption to do anything about it)
Posted By: jgw Re: Watching the Supreme Court - 05/04/24 07:23 PM
We do need nurses, and a number of other things as well. Our solution is to loan money to those who want to be a nurse, a doctor, etc. and then keep them in debt for, literally, years! There is a solution to the whole thing. To be a nurse with a degree costs around 100,000.00 plus interest. Its the same with most other folk that we need. It would be really great if we had a system wherein gov paid for the education and the educated could pay back by doing work for gov for x number of years before going off on their own. There used to be such stuff. I had a friend who wanted to be a dentist but simply didn't have the money. What he did was to have the Navy put him through school and then he was a dentist for the navy for several years. This means that our government used to have such going on and it worked. I do not think such exists anymore. Now the plan is to 'loan' money to a student, add a tasty interest for banks and then keep the loanee in debt for the rest of their life.

We should be proud. We have a government that is as greedy as the very rich!!! There are, actually, people who signed up who have been paying on their debt for over 20 years! We should all be proud!!
Posted By: perotista Re: Watching the Supreme Court - 05/04/24 07:50 PM
That still exists. My son in law who was an ems medic went into the air force which paid for his college, medical training to become a nurse. That I think was for a 4-year obligation to the air force. It worked out one year for every year of college. Stuff like that still exists as far as the military. After college, he became an automatic 2LT.

As for Gingrich, he gets blamed for a lot that Dennis Hastert did. It was the Hastert rule that started all of this. I doubt very few even remember Hastert as Speaker. Gingrich was overthrown much like McCarthy was by the republicans.
Posted By: jgw Re: Watching the Supreme Court - 05/04/24 09:11 PM
How strange, I always thought it was Gingrich. Guess I was wrong. Do not remember Hasturt but then, its a miracle that I still remember my own name. I asked my girl at the VA if there was a memory pill yet and she said there was not. There are, however (she said) some that may help. She said the problem with them is that there may be connected problems and then she not only told me the list of those that are out there but what else might happen if you take one of them. Both lists were very long. You do not want to try any of them!
Posted By: perotista Re: Watching the Supreme Court - 05/05/24 12:21 AM
Here in my opinion was the beginning – “The Hastert rule, also known as the "majority of the majority" rule, is an informal governing principle used in the United States by Republican Speakers of the House of Representatives since the mid-1990s to maintain their speakerships[1] and limit the power of the minority party to bring bills up for a vote on the floor of the House.[2] Under the doctrine, the speaker will not allow a floor vote on a bill unless a majority of the majority party supports the bill.[3]

Under House rules, the speaker schedules floor votes on pending legislation. The Hastert rule says that the speaker will not schedule a floor vote on any bill that does not have majority support within their party—even if the majority of the members of the House would vote to pass it. The rule keeps the minority party from passing bills with the assistance of a minority of majority party members. In the House, 218 votes are needed to pass a bill; if 200 Democrats are the minority and 235 Republicans are the majority, the Hastert rule would not allow 200 Democrats and 100 Republicans together to pass a bill, because 100 Republican votes is short of a majority of the majority party, so the speaker would not allow a vote to take place.[4]

The Hastert rule is an informal rule and the speaker is not bound by it; they may break it at their discretion. Speakers have at times broken the Hastert rule and allowed votes to be scheduled on legislation that lacked majority support within the Speaker's own party. Dennis Hastert alleged the rule was "kind of a misnomer" in that it "never really existed" as a rule.”

Gingrich does get blamed for a lot of stuff Hastert did. But certainly, Gingrich was by no means a saint. Gingrich was one of those politicians democrats love to hate. There was plenty of good reasons for that. Perhaps the biggest reason was the “Contract with American,” Gingrich came up with that ended 40 straight years of house rule by the democrats. The republicans gained 54 seats in the 1994 midterms. Gingrich while speaker also push for Bill Clinton’s impeachment over Monica Lewinski. It was, however, Hastert who went through with the impeachment of Bill Clinton after he took over as speaker.
Posted By: jgw Re: Watching the Supreme Court - 05/05/24 06:14 PM
I can remember when the two parties actually created legislation to deal with the southern border. BOTH sides had to sit down and create this bill. As far as I can tell this was the first time, in a long time, that both parties had actually sit down and work something like this to fruition. Then cam Trump and told them to not pass it on as he needed to be able to attack the Dems for not taking care of the southern border. The house Republicans duly shut the whole thing down. The newsies cleverly showed the Republican house member who did the legislation and he was a bit upset about it all but the Republicans duly did their job as per Trump's desires. I remember, at the time, that I thought that, perhaps, both parties had displayed a capacity to actually do their job. I was wrong, Trump fixed that one.

Since then I have continued to watch the news and I don't think I heard anything about the above more than 2 times and one never hears about it anymore. Biden - nope, never mentions it. Same things with all the newsies - not a word. Trump gets to nail Biden and nobody mentions the fact of what Trump did. Since I do not spend all day, every day, listening I may be wrong but, basically, Trump has is way blaming Biden for the southern border all the time and nobody calls Trump on what he did.

Just thought I would mention that one as, now, amongst other things, Trump is getting a free ride. Oh, and the Republicans are regularly calling Trump an ex President of the United states which was one of the greatest presidents of all time. When he left office, incidentally, he was given the title of worst president in the history of the country. That too seems to be forgotten now.

Interesting times?
Posted By: perotista Re: Watching the Supreme Court - 05/05/24 09:37 PM
Jgw, most Americans have very short memories. For an event to have an impact on an election, it must happen within 2-3 months of the election date. Many Americans are looking back on the Trump presidency thinking they were better off under Trump than Biden. They’ve forgotten the reasons they voted against Trump in 2020.
Posted By: jgw Re: Watching the Supreme Court - 05/06/24 09:11 PM
Yep and short memories is just the start. This is particularly true of the voting public. I have, pretty much, whined enough on that stuff. After you told me about your adventures in buying surplus stuff I thought I would take a look. What I found were, literally, hundreds (if not thousands), of places to buy surplus. The entire surplus thing is also interesting. States, for instance, have stores to buy their surplus as does the fed as well. This is also true of universities. Dawns on me, its actually an industry! Amazing!

There seems to be not only government but entire companies dedicated to the sale of surplus. Pretty amazing but I gave up. I spend quite a bit of time spending very little buying stuff I don't need because I have a lot of time on my hands these days. When I buy on the net I usually just goto ebay as they, pretty much, sell everything. Much of what I buy on ebay comes from amazon. That one has always amused me. I have a friend who sells a lot on ebay and he explained why that is but I never figured it out.
© ReaderRant