2014 Election Megathread

[Jacob]

Basically every time you mention women or gender, it comes across as whore-hate given your past record.

Seriously?  Wow.  You may be the most hypersensitive person on the board, then.

See what I mean?

I post something intended to be a mild joke and even include a self-deprecating comment, and you take it at face value 

[derspiess]

No, I don't see what you mean.

[Jacob]

No, I don't see what you mean.

I see. Okay then

[The Minsky Moment]

No, I don't see what you mean.

. Okay then

Don't be so hyper-sensitive.

[derspiess]

Still not sure I buy Jake's post being a "mild joke". 

[Maximus]

Still not sure I buy Jake's post being a "mild joke".

Seriously?  Wow.  You may be the most hypersensitive person on the board, then.

[Admiral Yi]

It's hypersensitive mutual assured destruction!

[Maximus]

BTW, my post was totally a mild joke.

[CountDeMoney]

We will now have a "cleaner" separation of powers with a GOP controlled Senate and House, which is why I think there will be more things with this arrangement than there had been.  If Obama can be convinced to play ball (his speech yesterday does not seem to have been a good start), shit may actually get done.

Yes, it's the dawn of a new era of GOP strategy, one that will usher in a new age of OH WAIT

John Boehner, Mitch McConnell vow to kill Obamacare
By JONATHAN TOPAZ | 11/6/14 7:29 AM EST Updated: 11/6/14 8:59 AM EST
POLITICO

House Speaker John Boehner and incoming Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, outlining their legislative vision for the last two years of Barack Obama's presidency, are vowing to try to repeal the Affordable Care Act.

In a Wall Street Journal op-ed published Wednesday evening fresh off the Republican Senate takeover and major GOP House gains, the leaders largely maintain their commitment to reaching legislative compromise and cutting through Washington paralysis.

But the Republican House speaker from Ohio and incoming Senate majority leader from Kentucky noted that a commitment to creating jobs "means renewing our commitment to repeal Obamacare, which is hurting the job market along with Americans' health care." The ACA remains a politically divisive issue, and further attempts at repeal would surely be met with significant Democratic opposition and a White House veto.

The GOP leaders also said they would approach governing differently than Democrats did in 2008, when Obama entered the White House with major House and Senate advantages and passed the stimulus bill, financial regulation and health care reform. "[W]e won't repeat the mistakes made when a different majority ran Congress in the first years of Barack Obama's presidency, attempting to reshape large chunks of the nation's economy with massive bills that few Americans have read and fewer understand," Boehner and McConnell wrote.

At a Wednesday press conference to discuss the GOP victory, McConnell appeared to downplay a potential repeal attempt, noting that Republicans would not have 60 votes to override a presidential veto. Still, the senator said that Republicans remain strongly opposed to the law. "If I had the ability, I'd get rid of it," he said.

The op-ed served as a sign of the congressional leaders' legislative wish list as Republicans enter 2015 with strong majorities in both chambers. Other commitments highlighted in the column included authorizing the Keystone XL pipeline and reforming the Tax Code.

A spokesman for current Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid slammed the pledge to repeal the ACA, saying that it showed Republicans aren't willing to compromise and are ceding authority to Texas Sen. Ted Cruz.

"One day after the election Senator McConnell is already letting Senator Cruz set the agenda," Reid communications director Adam Jentleson said in a statement on Thursday. Cruz, a tea party favorite, has remained steadfast in his commitment to trying to repeal Obamacare.

"Conspicuously absent from Senator McConnell's vision for the next Congress: the word 'compromise,'" Jentleson added.

[The Minsky Moment]

If there is going to be a requirement that ordinary Americans read and understand any bill that is passed, then I guess there won't be trade deals after all.  Or tax legislation, or financial institutions legislation, or pretty much anything . .

[Jacob]

Don't be so hyper-sensitive.

Seriously?  Wow.  You may be the most hypersensitive person on the board, then.

It's hypersensitive mutual assured destruction!

BTW, my post was totally a mild joke.

[LaCroix]

does this mean we will have fracking forever?

[Eddie Teach]

does this mean we will have fracking forever?

At least until we get fusion power.

[Hansmeister]

That is fucking priceless.

I know, I know-- too optimistic.  I'm expecting the President to act better than a petulant child.

Well, at least the President wants to meet with Mitch McConnell now, which will only be the third time in six years. It is funny how the Democrats keep pushing the meme that Republicans won't wo with Obama when Obama has refused to meet with GOP leaders for virtually his entire presidency.

[Hansmeister]

I think Joni Ernst is the one who oughtta be at the top of your watch list, Seedy.  She's a woman who doesn't support the things you think she ought to.

You mean Michele Bachmann of the Midwest?  She still thinks WMDs were actually in Iraq.  Then again, so does Hansy, so there ya go.

From the NYtimes last month:

"From 2004 to 2011, American and American-trained Iraqi troops repeatedly encountered, and on at least six occasions were wounded by, chemical weapons remaining from years earlier in Saddam Hussein's rule.

In all, American troops secretly reported finding roughly 5,000 chemicaFrom 2004 to 2011, American and American-trained Iraqi troops repeatedly encountered, and on at least six occasions were wounded by, chemical weapons remaining from years earlier in Saddam Hussein's rule.

In all, American troops secretly reported finding roughly 5,000 chemical warheads, shells or aviation bombs, according to interviews with dozens of participants, Iraqi and American officials, and heavily redacted intelligence documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act.

The United States had gone to war declaring it must destroy an active weapons of mass destruction program. Instead, American troops gradually found and ultimately suffered from the remnants of long-abandoned programs, built in close collaboration with the West.

The New York Times found 17 American service members and seven Iraqi police officers who were exposed to nerve or mustard agents after 2003. American officials said that the actual tally of exposed troops was slightly higher, but that the government's official count was classified.

The secrecy fit a pattern. Since the outset of the war, the scale of the United States' encounters with chemical weapons in Iraq was neither publicly shared nor widely circulated within the military. These encounters carry worrisome implications now that the Islamic State, a Qaeda splinter group, controls much of the territory where the weapons were found.

The American government withheld word about its discoveries even from troops it sent into harm's way and from military doctors. The government's secrecy, victims and participants said, prevented troops in some of the war's most dangerous jobs from receiving proper medical care and official recognition of their wounds. warheads, shells or aviation bombs, according to interviews with dozens of participants, Iraqi and American officials, and heavily redacted intelligence documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act.

The United States had gone to war declaring it must destroy an active weapons of mass destruction program. Instead, American troops gradually found and ultimately suffered from the remnants of long-abandoned programs, built in close collaboration with the West.

The New York Times found 17 American service members and seven Iraqi police officers who were exposed to nerve or mustard agents after 2003. American officials said that the actual tally of exposed troops was slightly higher, but that the government's official count was classified.

The secrecy fit a pattern. Since the outset of the war, the scale of the United States' encounters with chemical weapons in Iraq was neither publicly shared nor widely circulated within the military. These encounters carry worrisome implications now that the Islamic State, a Qaeda splinter group, controls much of the territory where the weapons were found.

The American government withheld word about its discoveries even from troops it sent into harm's way and from military doctors. The government's secrecy, victims and participants said, prevented troops in some of the war's most dangerous jobs from receiving proper medical care and official recognition of their wounds.."

Read and weep.