33
   

The Case For Biden

 
 
revelette3
 
  3  
Fri 18 Dec, 2020 11:07 am
@farmerman,
I wouldn't know about all of that (obviously)but I agreed with the First Lady elect that the tone the author of the Wall Street Journal article was very condescending and sexist. I mean, "kiddo." Really?

Also, in general as we are finding out if we didn't know it before teachers and academics in all areas are under appreciated and under paid.
InfraBlue
 
  3  
Fri 18 Dec, 2020 04:50 pm
@revelette3,
Would this guy have told Henry Kissinger to not use the title, as well?
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  1  
Fri 18 Dec, 2020 04:52 pm
@farmerman,
******* spell check.
0 Replies
 
glitterbag
 
  4  
Sat 19 Dec, 2020 12:35 am
My brother-in-law, Dr. Glitterbag had a Phd and was an English Professor at Tulane University in Louisiana. He was a Milton scholar and published several books on Milton. He was Dr. Glitterbag and that's how he was listed by the English Dept. and how his students addressed him. The scholarship started after his death also referred to him as Dr. Glitterbag. Epstein is a cranky asshole.
Walter Hinteler
 
  2  
Sat 19 Dec, 2020 12:48 am
@glitterbag,
Since "doctor" is Latin for teacher, only teachers/professors in medieval times were called "doctors". (Thomas Aquinas for instance got the academic title of Doctor angelicus [=universalis].)
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  3  
Sat 19 Dec, 2020 01:29 am
@revelette3,
my main point was that using a title or abbreviation of Dr, (before your name in a letter is unethical in many professions that DONT have to do with medicine. In most of the sciences the term of Dr is correctly used when being introduced in a colloquium or conference, but its unethical to sign your nme with Dr Blah Blah Blah (PG or PE). We use Blah Blah Blah PhD (PG or PE).
Lawyers all know this and like to trip up "expert witnesses" in the engineering fields who sign their reports Dr. Thus they get the expert all shaken up just in voire dire.

At the time when "Il Dottore" was used to announce someone, the term"cientist" didnt even exist, and professional ethics was a nascent thing
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  4  
Sat 19 Dec, 2020 05:09 am
@izzythepush,
izzythepush wrote:

You need friends.


Doesn’t everybody?
0 Replies
 
revelette3
 
  2  
Sun 20 Dec, 2020 11:56 am
Biden Cabinet Leans Centrist, Leaving Some Liberals Frustrated

Quote:
WASHINGTON — His economic and environment teams are a little left of center. His foreign policy picks fall squarely in the Democratic Party’s mainstream. His top White House aides are Washington veterans.

Taken together, the picture that emerges from President-elect Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s initial wave of personnel choices is a familiar, pragmatic and largely centrist one.

That fits with the implicit deal that the former vice president and longtime senator offered Democrats during the 2020 primaries — that he was neither as progressive as Senators Bernie Sanders of Vermont and Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, nor a product of Wall Street like Michael Bloomberg, the Republican-turned-Democrat who failed in his last-minute attempt to offer a moderate alternative to Mr. Biden.


NYT
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -4  
Sun 20 Dec, 2020 07:28 pm
@MontereyJack,
MontereyJack wrote:
CJoint says it just takes one senator. Wrongo wrong.

You misunderstand what he was saying. It only take one congressman and one senator to launch a challenge. They already have the congressman. So now they are looking for a senator.


MontereyJack wrote:
As I understand it, it would have to voted on and passed by BOTH houses of congress. And there is NO none zero nada chance of that happening. It's never happened before, for good reason. You can fantasize about it all you want, it won't happen.

I'm not sure if it is still possible to swap a Trump slate for a Biden slate in Wisconsin. They may have needed to send the Trump electors to vote along with all the other electors.

But it would have been possible had they acted in time.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -4  
Sun 20 Dec, 2020 07:29 pm
@farmerman,
farmerman wrote:
actually you got it backwards.

No I don't.


farmerman wrote:
Werent you even litening to the texass case on Thurs PM??

Indeed I was not.

But that's no problem, as the court case is unrelated to the subject under discussion.


farmerman wrote:
The process you think you understand is only invokable with deadlock on the horizon

Wrong again. All it requires is one congressman and one senator.
neptuneblue
 
  4  
Sun 20 Dec, 2020 08:08 pm
@oralloy,
Only partially correct:

"Objecting to the Counting of One or More

Electoral Votes

Section 15 establishes a procedure for making and acting on objections to the counting of one or more of the electoral votes from a state or the District of Columbia. When the certificate or equivalent paper from each state or the District of Columbia is read, “the President of the Senate shall call for objections, if any.” Any such objection must be presented in writing and must be signed by at least one Senator and one Representative. The objection “shall state clearly and concisely, and without argument, the ground thereof.” During the joint session of January 6, 2001, the presiding officer intervened on several occasions to halt attempts to make speeches under the guise of offering an objection. When an objection, properly made in writing and endorsed by at least one Senator and one Representative, is received, each house is to meet and consider it separately. The statute states,
“No votes or papers from any other State shall be acted upon until the objections previously made to the votes or papers from any State shall have been finally disposed of.” However, in 1873, before enactment of the law now in force, the joint session agreed, without objection and for reasons of convenience, to entertain objections with regard to two or more states before the houses met separately on any of them.

Disposing of Objections

The joint session does not act on any objections that are made. Instead, the joint session is suspended, the Senate withdraws from the House chamber, and each house meets separately to debate the objection and vote whether, based on the objection, to count the vote or votes in question. Both houses must vote separately to agree to the objection by simple majority. Otherwise, the objection fails and the vote or votes are counted. (3 U.S.C. §15 provides that “the two Houses concurrently may reject the vote or votes.”)

https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL32717.pdf?fbclid=IwAR1p-PMSNkwR3F9-zoSvlbYl3Ml3FcwfLQsLeTbSIB1MkMXMDJDB8POalS4

Since the House will not object, the objection is defeated.

The End.
revelette3
 
  3  
Mon 21 Dec, 2020 09:12 am
@neptuneblue,
Quote:
Disposing of Objections

The joint session does not act on any objections that are made. Instead, the joint session is suspended, the Senate withdraws from the House chamber, and each house meets separately to debate the objection and vote whether, based on the objection, to count the vote or votes in question. Both houses must vote separately to agree to the objection by simple majority. Otherwise, the objection fails and the vote or votes are counted. (3 U.S.C. §15 provides that “the two Houses concurrently may reject the vote or votes.”)


I wonder how oralloy will attempt to talk his way out of that one?
hightor
 
  5  
Mon 21 Dec, 2020 09:28 am
@revelette3,
Quote:

I wonder how oralloy will attempt to talk his way out of that one?


He'll probably insist that no one has proved him wrong, that pistol grips are a 2nd Amendment right, and that the Democratic Party should be outlawed. He's very clever, you know.
revelette3
 
  3  
Mon 21 Dec, 2020 01:49 pm
Quote:
President-elect Joe Biden on Monday tapped Bharat Ramamurti, a former adviser to Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), as a new member of his economic team.

Ramamurti, who sits on the congressional commission overseeing COVID-19 relief funding, will serve as deputy director for financial reform and consumer protection on the National Economic Council.

David Kamin, an economic and budget adviser in the Obama White House who's now a law professor at New York University, will serve as deputy director for the council, which will be led by Brian Deese, deputy director of the Office of Management and Budget during the Obama administration.

The Biden transition team also announced Joelle Gamble, a board member at the progressive Roosevelt Institute, as a special assistant to the president for economic policy.

"Today's appointees have broad viewpoints on how to build a stronger and more inclusive middle class," Biden said in a statement Monday. "With their robust experience and qualifications, they will provide the needed voices to guide my administration in overcoming our nation's unprecedented economic challenges."

All three appointments - none of which require Senate confirmation - garnered praise from progressive groups, who have previously expressed disappointment in many of Biden's centrist and moderate picks for Cabinet and advisory positions.

"The appointments of David Kamin, Bharat Ramamurti, and Joelle Gamble are a major win for progressives and all Americans who want the next administration to use every single tool at their disposal to end structural inequality in our economy," said Alexandra Rojas, executive director of Justice Democrats, and Varshini Prakash, founder of the Sunrise Movement, in a joint statement. "We will not always always agree, but it will take social movements, legislators in Congress, and likeminded allies in the executive branch to hold the President-elect accountable to delivering results for working families across America."


https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/biden-taps-former-warren-aide-for-economic-team/ar-BB1c70tL?ocid=msedgdhp

0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -4  
Tue 22 Dec, 2020 11:08 am
@revelette3,
revelette3 wrote:
I wonder how oralloy will attempt to talk his way out of that one?

?

I am not aware of anything that I need to talk my way out of.
oralloy
 
  -3  
Tue 22 Dec, 2020 11:09 am
@hightor,
hightor wrote:
He'll probably insist that no one has proved him wrong, that pistol grips are a 2nd Amendment right, and that the Democratic Party should be outlawed. He's very clever, you know.

It doesn't bother me that I'm smarter than you are. Why does it bother you?
0 Replies
 
revelette3
 
  3  
Tue 22 Dec, 2020 11:26 am
@oralloy,
I am not surprised you are unaware of how you were proved to be wrong. You often are and you often don't realize it.

You said all it takes is one senator and one representative to overturn the election. (words to that affect.) You are wrong. That is how the process starts. It ends when there is not a simple majority in both houses to agree to the objection raised. There is no way there is going to be a simple majority in either house. For sure not in the house of representatives. So the result is known so the whole thing is a waste of time to begin with.
oralloy
 
  -3  
Tue 22 Dec, 2020 11:31 am
@revelette3,
revelette3 wrote:
I am not surprised you are unaware of how you were proved to be wrong.

I wasn't proved wrong.


revelette3 wrote:
You often are and you often don't realize it.

No I'm not.


revelette3 wrote:
You said all it takes is one senator and one representative to overturn the election. (words to that affect.)

No I didn't.


revelette3 wrote:
You are wrong.

Sorry, but no. I am not responsible for things that I've never said.


revelette3 wrote:
That is how the process starts.

Which is what I did say.


revelette3 wrote:
It ends when there is not a simple majority in both houses to agree to the objection raised. There is no way there is going to be a simple majority in either house. For sure not in the house of representatives. So it is over basically before it even starts and everyone knows it.

It would have been worth a try. But I think they may have needed to have already submitted the rival slate of electors for it to work. Although I'm not sure about that.
farmerman
 
  3  
Tue 22 Dec, 2020 11:46 am
@oralloy,
your first brush with truth and reality

Quote:
I'm not sure about that
revelette3
 
  3  
Tue 22 Dec, 2020 12:02 pm
@farmerman,
I have admit that now I am completely confused. I just want to know basically what you mean by:

Quote:
The process you think you understand is only invokable with deadlock on the horizon


Firstly I looked up what meaning of invokable is which led to callable, which means capable of being called. (right?)

Anyway, in what way is the objection to calling of the electoral votes not invokable. I know the objections would not be passed by either house, but how is it not possible to be called?

I honestly want to know, not trying to debate or anything.

 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » The Case For Biden
  3. » Page 108
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.1 seconds on 04/28/2024 at 01:27:02