Jump to content

Lord Liquiir (Ogilvie)

SSMB Moderator
  • Content count

    11156
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Lord Liquiir (Ogilvie) last won the day on January 29

Lord Liquiir (Ogilvie) had the most liked content!

About Lord Liquiir (Ogilvie)

  • Rank
    God of Destruction

Profile Information

  • Interests
    Sonic, RTS, Crash Bandicoot, Klonoa, Ratchet&Clank, Furry Fandom, Ty the Tasmanian Tiger, Sly Cooper, Writing, Drawing

    I also take a great interest in collecting merchandise of the above! Unfortunately Sonic dominates...
  • Gender
    Male
  • Country
    United States
  • Location
    Casino Night Zone (Las Vegas)

Contact Methods

  • Skype
    oggyigel
  • YouTube
    http://www.youtube.com/user/OggyIgel
  • Twitter
    https://twitter.com/OggyIgel
  • Website URL
    dreamerch.biz

Recent Profile Visitors

188230 profile views
  1. The General 'Murican Politics Thread

    And yet, that's how the Senate works. Despite being a political body, there's generally a lot of consensus and decorum that is followed outside of actual votes. Murkowski let DeVos get a vote on the Senate floor despite her personal reservations against her. She could have easily blocked De Vos' consideration entirely. McCain did the same thing here. There's cries to just shut stuff down from the start, but that's how you get primaried. Politicians need to balance party loyalty, state loyalty, and their own personal values. Sure, Murkowski can vote down people in committee, McCain can block procedure from the start, but this is how you risk being thrown out in the primaries by Republicans who will never break from the party line at all. McCain signaled a willingness to work on healthcare changes, but not full repeal. In McCain's case, he's dying. I guess he just wants to try and bring back what made the Senate great, before Reid and McConnell just got in a cagematch with each other and ruined everything. Honestly, I can't fault him for that. We agree to let Republicans run for office, even though it would be more convenient for a liberal agenda to just ban them from running altogether. Same principle here. There's a free exchange of ideas, good and bad. Contrary to what many of us on the left would think, not every Republican politician eats babies. A lot of them are sane, reasonable people who maintain that great balance of party loyalty with state loyalty and national well-being. McCain has changed the debate with his votes, as well. He voted yes on discussing the BCRA, but no on both flat repeals. The message is clear: replacing and improving upon Obamacare is acceptable, just tearing it down is not. The floor has yielded to Democrats to try and provide alternatives.
  2. The General 'Murican Politics Thread

    Everyone who was spitting venom at McCain a few nights ago sure is eating their hat now, huh? The man opened the debate, but he also just settled it for the time being. It's parliamentary decorum at its finest. Screw McConnell saying Democrats wanted no part of this process. He's the one who made 52 people try to come up with a plan over 100. Hopefully Democrats push several public option proposals next. The odds are against them because people don't turn out, usually. If Democrats turned out more reliably, plenty of seats would be swept by them. There are far more Democrats than Republicans in this country. Democrats are ultimately just reeling from a two-term Presidency that gave the GOP lots of opportunities to expand its power at the state level. The one perk to Trump's term is it provides an opportunity to regain much of what was lost. We just need to make a point to turn out every single election year, whether in person or absentee, and also keep tabs on whether we've been purged from the voter rolls.
  3. Senate to vote on healthcare repeal shortly. The tension is real.

    1. Strickerx5

      Strickerx5

      I swear they've done this like 3 times already this week alone...

    2. Lord Liquiir (Ogilvie)

      Lord Liquiir (Ogilvie)

      @Strickerx5 Yep. They just keep changing the details.

    3. SenEDDtor Missile

      SenEDDtor Missile

      So much of this shit would be more manageable if every politician and those in the administration was forced to have the same healthcare/conditions as the people they shove these things onto. They'd be singing a very different tune if they had to have their own shit shoved in their faces.

    4. Dark Qiviut

      Dark Qiviut

      Watching on C-SPAN2. Not a very tense-free environment in the Senate now.

      Is the Senate mics muted? I can't hear anything.

    5. Lord Liquiir (Ogilvie)

      Lord Liquiir (Ogilvie)

      @Dark Qiviut Yeah, they only put sound through when someone's speaking or when votes are taken, from what I've seen.

    6. Dark Qiviut

      Dark Qiviut

      I echo Sanders: If the Senate Don T. Care passes, expect Congressional approval to drop significantly.

      And approval's already at 12%.

      Mic went on.

    7. TCB
    8. Lord Liquiir (Ogilvie)

      Lord Liquiir (Ogilvie)

      McCain, Collins, Murkowski all no. This bill is dead unless a Dem switches sides.

    9. Blacklightning

      Blacklightning

      Yeah sure, let's repeal the main healthcare bill and either replace it with nothing, or a phantom bill they don't even want to talk about, that sounds like fun =V

    10. Strickerx5

      Strickerx5

      Republicans lost the health care vote, again. How many years did they have to plan this out again?

      And they're trying to blame the dems on this one too?! Lol GG red team XD

  4. The General 'Murican Politics Thread

    It wouldn't be so bad if we had compulsory suffrage. Unfortunately, we don't. We have suffrage that allows the "angry customer" principle to reign. Your enemies will turn out much more reliably than your supporters. It's why we're locked in this constant cycle of back and forth GOP and Democrat rule as opposed to parties being forced to do serious policy changes to stay in power.
  5. The General 'Murican Politics Thread

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/the-time-for-single-payer-is-now_us_597a7869e4b06b305561cf3b Opinion pieces like this highlight everything wrong with progressives. There's a lot of seething anger that the Democrats didn't vote yes in large numbers on the single payer amendment. While it is strange that the safest of seats (say, Feinstein's in California) wouldn't say yes to spite the GOP, we need to remember some cold, hard realities on passing single payer. Under Senate rules, you need 60 votes to pass most legislation. While nuking it sounds fantastic, consider that a majority can always turn against you, rendering you helpless. This is why McConnell and his friends aren't nuking it, even though they will likely keep the Senate until 2021. Democrats have 48 seats. Still with me? Here's the Senate map for 2018. Democrats must defend 23 seats. Now while they have the benefits of incumbency and a midterm year (which tends to go against the President), that's still concerning, because it means a lot of money needs to be raised and spent. A lot of these seats are in states Trump won, and others that are consistently Republican; you'll notice the "no" Democrats are from reliably red states and have their seats up for grabs next year: ND, MT, WV, and IN. They're playing defense to avoid possibly being declared socialists or whatever. Sure, taking a stand sounds great, but people "taking a stand" is what gave us Trump in the first place. Forget that. In first past the post politics, you win or you lose. To Hell with "stands." Assume they all took a stand. It's quite possible a lot more seats would be lost next year, all for the "moral victory" of a stand on single payer. Bravo. Now, with a cautious approach on single payer, let's assume Democrats keep all 23 seats. They are likely to flip Nevada, and can possibly pick up 1 or 2 seats in Arizona, depending on what happens with McCain's seat before November 2018. So, best case scenario, the Democrats come out of 2018 with 51 seats. They won't nuke the filibuster for the reasons given; the next election is 2020, and if Trump ends up winning again, Republicans are likely to win via his coattails and retake the majority. So here's 2020's map. Let's assume for a moment that the Democrat wins the Presidential race, crushing Trump in a way similar to Obama and McCain, and he or she has long coattails. Democrats pick up Colorado, Iowa, West Virginia, Maine, possibly even Georgia. An amazing victory! ...except Democrats only have 56 seats. With 60 Democrats in 2009, Obama had trouble pushing the public option. Single payer probably isn't happening. What's more, this is the 2022 map. Midterms go against the President's Party, meaning Republicans are likely to keep the Senate. The Democrat who took McCain's seat will now be on the defensive, too. The GOP have reliable turnout in midterm years, so it's not crazy they might end up taking some Democratic seats and knock the majority down. Single payer stays dead in the water. Now let's revisit the earlier scenario. Let's assume Trump - or another Republican - wins 2020. As all 2020 Democratic seats are in blue states, the Dems are unlikely to lose anything (only the Michigan seat is at risk, and I presume Dems would defend it heavily); they're more likely to pick up Colorado, perhaps Maine. 53 seats. Come 2022, the Democrats are in a strong position to oppose the GOP and gain a supermajority. They can keep their seat in Arizona, while also picking up Florida, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Iowa, and perhaps recreate earlier victories in North Carolina, North Dakota and Missouri to reach 60 seats at last. Georgia will most certainly be in play by this point, as well. Maybe even Kansas, based on how swingy it is for Governor races. So what's all this thought experimentation for? Well, to illustrate how much of a headache passing single payer will be, unless you take the extremely risky move to nuke the legislative filibuster. Let's not forget the heavily-gerrymandered House, and how hard it will be for Democrats to not only take it, but keep it without a GOP President to provide a midterm edge to the Democrats. All told, we are probably not getting single payer until 2023 at the earliest, and that's assuming Democrats have all the stars aligned to give them both the House and a 60-seat supermajority in the Senate... and them agreeing to pass such a broad proposal. In short, it's better to push for the public option. The public option allows for the expansion of government insurance without the unpopular specter of raised taxes. Letting people buy plans off Medicaid or Medicare lets more people realize that government insurance does not equate to the USA becoming the Soviet Union. While all this is going on, Democrats can expand Medicaid and Medicare eligibility slowly, bringing us closer to single payer without doing a single, massive, risky reform. If Democrats can get a public option passed at some point in the next decade, they will soon be in a position to push for full single payer, as it becomes apparent the private insurance industry simply cannot keep up with Obamacare's requirements, nor does government insurance equate to autocracy.
  6. The General 'Murican Politics Thread

    http://www.businessinsider.com/senate-health-care-single-payer-vote-daines-amendment-2017-7 Single payer amendment overwhelmingly failed, with 57 votes against, and 43 voting "present." No one voted yes. This is okay, because it always was a Republican trap. I think Democrats understand the most they can aim for right now is some kind of public option. Bernie Sanders himself applauded the result, given it was a sham to begin with. http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/no-guarantees-house-to-meet-with-senate-on-skinny-obamacare-repeal/article/2629907 Meanwhile, the Freedom Caucus is rearing its head again. They're saying they will not approve a skinny repeal bill. Given a skinny repeal bill is all the Senate is likely to pass, healthcare reform is likely to die as a result of the GOP's internal splits. Democrats honestly should consider trying to initiate their own reform with the moderate Republicans behind it. It's not as crazy as it sounds. Moderate Republicans are constantly spurning Ryan and McConnell, and that means a moderate plan from the Democrats is possible. For those Democrats who voted no, they're all from red-leaning states: Joe Donnelly (Indiana), Heidi Heitkamp (North Dakota), Joe Manchin (West Virginia) and Jon Tester (Montana) while Angus King is technically an Independent from Maine. https://thenevadaindependent.com/article/cortez-masto-most-senate-democrats-refuse-to-take-sides-in-vote-on-single-payer To run home how much of a troll amendment it was, the GOP Senator who introduced it said that single payer represents the heart and soul of the Democratic Party and what Obamacare ultimately strives for, so of course Democrats should vote yes for it.
  7. The General 'Murican Politics Thread

    http://www.politico.com/story/2017/07/26/trump-transgender-military-ban-behind-the-scenes-240990 Turns out Trump's transgender ban was motivated to try and save House bills providing funding for things like his wall. Republicans were split on the issue of denying transition care to transgender soldiers, and that threatened to sink all the various proposals that were close to fruition. In the end, the conservative House members went to Secretary of Defense James Mattis, asking him to end transition care so as to take the issue off the table, but Mattis refused to so quickly change military policy. Cue those same conservatives going straight to Trump, and he was happy to issue the ban for the sake of his policies going forward. Turns out a lot of the conservatives who asked him about it were surprised; they didn't want a full-on ban of transgender soldiers, just an end to transition care. https://mic.com/articles/182967/despite-trumps-tweets-military-leaders-say-there-will-be-no-changes-to-transgender-policy?utm_medium=web&utm_source=micPush#.DGyf6NZ2D Joint Chiefs of Staff have snubbed Trump on the transgender ban. They say there will be no policy changes until Secretary of Defense Mattis reviews the proposal and issues implementation guidance. As mentioned, Mattis is not comfortable with a sudden ban on transgender soldiers. He's going to want formal review processes. This ignoring that prior Defense Department studies last year show no real benefit from banning transgender soldiers, nor any costs to keeping them in. Given Mattis was confirmed 98-1, he has the ever unifying support for soldiers behind him. If Mattis refuses to comply and Trump fires him for it, it would be a PR disaster. He would literally be fired for doing his job. It is most likely meant as an attack ad to encourage people to come out and vote Republican next year. Of course... it might just backfire, because people might be encouraged to give the Democrats more power seeing what they want on healthcare. I'd hope so, because we know the GOP won't be honest in its ads. They will paint single payer as a massive totalitarian takeover of healthcare, just as the Affordable Care Act was in its infancy. I'm hoping the Democrats will put forward public options as the debate goes on. Medicaid and Medicare buy-ins, for example. Obama overcomplicated the process. He wanted a brand new government agency to sell insurance. Just use the ones that are already there. That will help win over fiscal conservatives, as well, given Medicare and Medicaid have a good deal of popularity. It might be for the best, as well. A lot of LGBT victories have been delivered by the Supreme Court, and to keep that Court from sliding far to the right, there need to victories at the state and local levels where pro-LGBT judges and legislators are elected, so they can get into federal legislative and judicial offices. If the national Democrats don't focus quite as strongly on the issue, it incentivizes the lower parties to build up their base. Which is really needed. The reason the Democrats got, well, owned in 2010 is because they've been neglecting smaller races. While voter suppression is one issue affecting Democratic victories, I think it's disingenuous to think it's the only issue. There's a general lack of motivation to participate in primaries, state races, etc. There's a notorious gap between Presidential and non-Presidential year turnout for Democrats. We're just not as politically involved as a whole, and that needs to change. Let's consider: the reason Bernie Sanders got so far to begin with was because of highly motivated voters swamping caucuses and giving him extra delegates. He'd have been crushed in a straight, nationwide primary. I should clarify. The President can still veto something with broad supermajorities. It just gets sent back to Congress for reconsideration. Congress then calls a veto-override vote. Assuming few people change their vote, it will meet the two-thirds required in both houses, and go into law anyway.
  8. Dragon Ball (Warning: Untagged Spoilers)

    As we've seen though, that's still a useful combat strategy if you use it in the right way. I wouldn't be surprised if he makes a return to take out one of the weaker U7 members.
  9. The General 'Murican Politics Thread

    We already know why, too. As Nepenthe noted, Trump is basically trying to set the Democrats up to have to die on the hill of social justice, in the hopes it will keep conservative but economically populist people in the Rust Belt and swing states from supporting the Democrats next year. It's really just a desperate attempt to score some victory as it becomes rapidly apparent he's probably not getting any real victories. His only "victory" is appointment of Gorsuch, and that's because McConnell did all the work for him. Plus, it's a desperate strategy. Only the strongest ideologues are going to make LGBT rights the front and center of their platform. Democrats are focusing on jobs and the economy, to say nothing of healthcare. As for minority rights, it's a given Democrats are better for those than the Republicans. When it comes to a lesser evil vote, anyone interested in minorities will pick the "not doing anything new, but not trying to repeal anything either" Democrats over the "ruin everything Obama accomplished" Republicans.
  10. The General 'Murican Politics Thread

    http://www.washingtonblade.com/2017/07/26/doj-anti-gay-discrimination-perfectly-ok-federal-law/ Department of Justice has submitted a brief arguing sexual orientation discrimination is perfectly legal as it doesn't qualify as sex discrimination. Hoping cases like this get taken up with the SCOTUS. Between Kennedy's swing vote and Roberts' increasingly pro-LGBT voting record, I think Trump and co. are in for a smackdown. I think he knows what he's doing. He's just pulling the usual contrived excuse of "expenses" to avoid looking like a bigot. Fortunately it's not working. We already have Defense Department studies showing that in the end, the impact on finances and morale by open service by transgender people is negligible. There's really no reason to single them out.
  11. >sees Sounds of Sonic concert

    I take it Jun and Johnny no longer have that informal agreement to not perform the vocal songs without each other?

    1. The Tenth Doctor

      The Tenth Doctor

      Jun's had different people singing with him for years, plenty of Summer of Sonic's for sure.

    2. Lord Liquiir (Ogilvie)

      Lord Liquiir (Ogilvie)

      @The Tenth Doctor Even the Crush 40 songs? I thought they had some sort of informal deal to not do it. Guess not.

    3. bmn

      bmn

      Those weren't Crush 40 songs though afaik (apart from AAUK's impromptu number at SoS 2011).

  12. The General 'Murican Politics Thread

    Double post in light of good news: https://www.usnews.com/news/national-news/articles/2017-07-26/senate-begins-vote-o-rama-on-obamacare-repeal-efforts?int=news-rec It sounds like the BRCA, "Repeal and Replace," Trumpcare... whatever you call it, is officially dead (again). It failed 43-57, with 9 Republicans defecting to side with the Democrats. The Senate will now proceed to a vote on the full repeal plan with no replacement, which is expected to fail. After that, it's vote-o-rama time, with hundreds of amendments being passed or failing. It's expected McConnell will end up rendering the whole process moot by proposing a "slim repeal" at the end which rolls back the mandates and changes some taxes. http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/senate-set-vote-straight-repeal-obamacare-n786691 Full repeal has failed 45-55. 7 defectors as opposed to 9. For all the hate directed towards McCain for his vote yesterday, he was one of the Nays. What's humorous is that when it hit 49 against, the room stopped for a bit... nobody wanted to be the final no vote. The honor fell to Feinstein of California. Once one more vote came in that made it 51 against, a lot of Republicans suddenly lodged Yea votes, presumably because now it wouldn't make a difference. With that, both the replacement and repeal bills are dead in the water. Senators will now move to vote on amendment after amendment. Whatever survives the process will be cobbled together in a final bill that can likely pass with 50 votes and be negotiated further with the House. Hopefully Democrats use this as an opportunity to try and push alternate reforms: single payer, a Medicaid buy-in, etc. GOP Senator Collins recognizes the importance of mandates to the insurance industry's stability, so she has called for an opt out provision; everyone would automatically be enrolled in insurance unless they agreed to opt out. She just might end up pushing us closer to single payer unintentionally with such a provision.
  13. The General 'Murican Politics Thread

    I'm going to laugh my ass off if the Supreme Court just ends up going "...nope!" on the issue. Or even Congress, for that matter. The fact a House majority sunk a bill to strip transgender soldiers of transition care (once again, argued on "oh noes, expensive!!") indicates that even some House Republicans think it's a load of BS. I'm questioning the whole strategy, though. I don't think many Democrats will make the transgender ban, as unfortunate as it is, the center of their campaign. It's generally a bad idea to be a single issue candidate in general. And it runs contrary to the newly-revealed 2018 strategy. The Democrats are likely to continue fighting for social justice while at work, but on the campaign trail, they are putting economics at the forefront. And once elected, while they may not enact a hugely progressive social agenda, at the very least they're probably not going to be so viciously attacking minority rights like the GOP is doing. Democrats don't even need to make this about social justice. There's already Republicans coming out against it - even Senate President Pro Tempore Orrin Hatch, from deeply red Utah. There's a frequent bipartisan reverence for the military and service therein, and Trump's order is seen as a completely unnecessary act of discrimination. Democrats can just as easily turn this against him, saying he's arbitrarily deciding who can and can't serve their country. Even John McCain, the guy people were crucifying yesterday for voting yes on healthcare debate, is coming out against this. The GOP's trying a desperate move that I'm not sure will really work out in their favor.
  14. Dragon Ball (Warning: Untagged Spoilers)

    Currently ambiguous whether or not he got knocked out since he went into the "generic background cloud," but given his usage of Instant Transmission, I presume he'll make a surprise comeback at some point. We never saw his picture blanked out, so don't know for sure. It would be odd for him to be pointed out right before the Tournament starts only to not give him at least one episode where he's the primary enemy.
  15. The General 'Murican Politics Thread

    I have to say. This is legitimately the shittiest wakeup surprise push notification I have ever gotten. Fuck this guy. Hopefully it can be challenged in court.
×