romeotuma wrote: 

Matt Taibbi is more than one of the best journalists in our solar system— he is practically a prophet...  I gotta feeling this will come to a head when Elizabeth Warren gets on the pulpit come July 14...

Frank Rich Blasts Obama For Letting Wall Street Off the Hook
by Matt Taibbi
Rolling Stone

A lot of people are talking about Frank Rich's explosive new article in New York magazine. I think it is a remarkable thing, the latest and maybe the most comprehensive in an increasingly lengthy series of articles and investigations into the Obama administration's failure to properly investigate the causes of the financial crisis.

By now this is not quite a mainstream media drumbeat, but it's coming close: between the reporting of Louise Story and Gretchen Morgenson at the New York Times to the recent not-terribly-laudatory piece on New York Southern District U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara by the New Yorker's George Packer, to Eliot Spitzer's bitter commentary on the subject on CNN, to my own bleatings, and now this Rich broadside, it seems quite clear that the Obama administration's failure to clean up Wall Street is becoming a matter of some fascination with the few investigative journalists who are not covering the Casey Anthony case.

 Rod wrote: 
Go away you noisy speed demon.

 Umberdog wrote: 
FYT

I vote for social collapse. We could all partake in a moment of human history!

Old guy talking to young guys:
Yeah, I was around during the social collapse of 2011... we figured the Mayans had it square in their calender and it would all be over by 2012. Aw well, those was good times!

 kurtster wrote: 
that's your story and you're stickin' to it!

 oldslabsides wrote: 

I'm not getting ready for a societal collapse, I'm just cheap.

 kurtster wrote: 
I hadn't realized it (or forgot...)  Apparently 19 states have closed primaries where only declared party members can vote.

 kurtster wrote: 
I'm a registered independent. I don't get to vote in the primaries. I don't particularly care who each of the two big political clubs decide to support. I don't even care how they choose who to support - they could meet in a smoke-filled room and pick names from a hat or sell the nomination to the highest bidder. It makes no difference to me.

There's no law that says you have to vote D or R. You don't even have to vote for the candidates on the ballot. If there's someone you like better, vote for them. 

 rosedraws wrote: 
In Ohio, the voter does have the right to switch parties before voting at sign in.  But the right to challenge their switching parties exists as well.  If the vote is challenged, it then becomes a provisional vote subject to consideration usually only if a vote is close enough for a recount.  Independents will get issue only ballots during primaries.  They can vote on levies and laws, but not candidates. 

I've got no problem with photo ID, but then again, I keep that stuff in order.  I am required to show proof of residence at the address I am claiming.  A bank statement or utility bill is sufficient.  My DL does have a different address, but that is for reasons of having a CDL and a state medical license.

 rosedraws wrote: 
Oklahoma is like Ohio. They do their level best to ensure a two party ONLY system.

 kurtster wrote: 
Really?

NH is something like 1/3 "Undeclared".  When you go to the Primary, you have to choose a side, and you are given that ticket.  Then, on your way out, you just go up to the desk and make yourself "undeclared" again.  It's a great system.

Our current absolutely loony state congress is doing everything possible to limit access to voting... not allowing students to vote, requiring picture ID... maybe they'll try to switch to the Ohio Primary system next...

 kurtster wrote: 
You're right... I can't vote in the primaries... which is really pretty stupid.

I would like to see a weighted ballot, where you can vote for more than one candidate, assigning first and second choice. But seeing as they can barely count the votes as it is, that would probably end up a nightmare. We would need less "Partying" and more parties for it to work. I think Australia does something like this, but they have lots of parties, not just two.

Parties were supposed to supply a degree of "checks and balances" to the erection process, but it's just turned into a boxing match of us against them.

I'm okay with vasectomies if you are.

 Umberdog wrote: 
Our President, a typical democrat, gave Brazil the dough.  I guess that you didn't hear about that deal ?

I don't know how it is in Oregon, but in Ohio, unless you pick a ' D ' or an ' R ' for your voter registration card, you cannot vote in Primaries, only the General Elections.  By claiming ' I ' you have disenfranchised yourself from participating in shaping the general election. 

I have never seen this aspect of being an ' I ' discussed here.  Saying ' I ' limits your voice.  Its something that is wrong with our system, that we must chose sides in order to vote in certain elections, although it is for national outcomes.  It does help perpetuate the two party system, which needs to be scrapped IMO.

But here we are.

Condoms break, get a vasectomy.

 kurtster wrote: 
You had $12 billion!!! O.O?

I must not be a typical Democrat.
*checks voter registration*
Ah, that's right, I'm an independent. One of those "swing-voters" that are supposed to change the political tide at erection time.

I'm against coal and nuclear power too.

Time to turn out some lights and put on some condoms.

 Umberdog wrote: 
And a typical Democrat says go ahead and drill for oil in the deep ocean off your shores (Brazil), and here is $12 Billion of our taxpayer's my money to help and we will be your biggest customer and pay full retail.

Why don't greedy ingrates care about anything beyond themselves? It's like all of creation has been set aside for them and no one or nothing else. They have even warped their religion to this end. All they want is more, more, MORE!

Typical Republican:
Who cares about the health of the Earth... let our kids worry about that... I want another oil rig and I want it NOW! I don't care if there is a place RESERVED for wildlife... change the fu..ing law so I can have my OIL RIG! NOW!!! Thank you Jeez-US!

 Beaker wrote: 

Its like Senator Obama was against raising the debt ceiling and now President Obama is for raising it.

 Rod wrote: 

Agreed.  Given the current obese state of most of the population of this continent I'm thinking slow and stupid clumsy is what we're in for.

 JrzyTmata wrote: 

Only if they're the slow, clumsy zombies. The fast zombies kick major ass.

 oldslabsides wrote:
 
True. Just the sheer numbers. You can't possibly kill 'em all. Having a private island would help, but still, look at the masses of people who come here on boats.