I like your metaphor, Emily. It takes less than a minute to read, and I was trying to read at the speed I would rad it aloud.
Sorry about the working, tommyrot. You shouldn't have to actually do work when you're about to be on vacation.
Wait. People? She eats people? 'To Serve Man.' It's 'To Serve Man' all over again.
Gunn ,'Power Play'
What Happens in Natter 35 Stays in Natter 35
Off-topic discussion. Wanna talk about corsets, duct tape, or physics? This is the place. Detailed discussion of any current-season TV must be whitefonted.
-t - May 18, 2005 9:54:43 am PDT #5285 of 10001
I am a woman of various inclinations and only some of the time are they to burn everything down in frustration
Allyson - May 18, 2005 9:55:33 am PDT #5286 of 10001
Wait, is this real-world child support, where the money goes to buy food for the kids, or MRA fantasyland child support where the women just buy Ferraris and cocaine? -Jessica
Can someone explain this filibuster/nuclear option business to me in a way that I can understand? Because everytime I try to read about it my eyes glaze over and I find that my head feels unusually heavy and then I wake up with my face stuck to my keyboard.
Emily - May 18, 2005 9:56:01 am PDT #5287 of 10001
"In the equation E = mc⬧, c⬧ is a pretty big honking number." - Scola
Yay! Honestly, I wonder what she was thinking when she told us to give one-minute presentations. One minute is about enough time to recite your thesis statement.
tommyrot - May 18, 2005 9:56:20 am PDT #5288 of 10001
Sir, it's not an offence to let your cat eat your bacon. Okay? And we don't arrest cats, I'm very sorry.
You shouldn't have to actually do work when you're about to be on vacation.
True. Except if it's a crisis, it makes the remaining time go by faster. Maybe I can pretend it's a crisis, while at the same time avoiding the anxiety a real crisis would produce... hmm, that's gonna be tricky....
Gudanov - May 18, 2005 9:58:28 am PDT #5289 of 10001
Coding and Sleeping
The Republicans (well most of them) are threatening to change the rules of the Senate such that Judicial nominations cannot be filibustered. Therefore instead of needing 60 votes to end debate and allow a vote on the nominee, then the nominee can go right to a vote and pass with 51 votes.
Laura - May 18, 2005 9:59:00 am PDT #5290 of 10001
Our wings are not tired.
Can someone explain this filibuster/nuclear option business to me in a way that I can understand?
If we lose the filibuster option then the party with 51 votes gets their way on every damn thing. It takes 60 votes to stop a filibuster, which gives a minority party a chance.
Allyson - May 18, 2005 10:00:58 am PDT #5291 of 10001
Wait, is this real-world child support, where the money goes to buy food for the kids, or MRA fantasyland child support where the women just buy Ferraris and cocaine? -Jessica
So their assumption is that they'll have the majority 4evah?
That's just silly.
tommyrot - May 18, 2005 10:01:43 am PDT #5292 of 10001
Sir, it's not an offence to let your cat eat your bacon. Okay? And we don't arrest cats, I'm very sorry.
If we lose the filibuster option then the party with 51 votes gets their way on every damn thing.
But the change will be limited to the confirmation of judges.
Supposedly.
At least, that's what they say. But it could be a slippery sloap to eliminating the filibuster for everything.
Gudanov - May 18, 2005 10:01:57 am PDT #5293 of 10001
Coding and Sleeping
What it comes down to is that there are 10 judical nominees that the Democrats are threatening to fillibuster (out of like 205), if the rules are changed these nominees will be approved.
However, this is oftened considered to be more about a future Supreme Court nominee than the current nominees.
Emily - May 18, 2005 10:02:57 am PDT #5294 of 10001
"In the equation E = mc⬧, c⬧ is a pretty big honking number." - Scola
Allyson, are you making up your own steps, in the defiance of all authority figures who say the Bogo Pogo's the only way to go? Sigh. Don't you know there are no new steps?