Many said the ACA was supposed to be a stepping stone to SP. I never believed that because it has subsidies for insurance corporations baked-in to the recipe. You can't prop-up something by law and with taxpayer money and then credibly claim to later end that thing. Add to that the failures in executions that have dogged the law since its enactment means the government lacks the public's trust with even bigger projects.

Now we have the internecine warfare of the Democratic primaries. Everything being said to trash SP is now fodder for every conservative political ad, commentary and editorial.

"It'll take away your health insurance away."

"It'll lead to massive tax hikes on the middle class."

And every time we will attempt to counter those claims we will be told it was a Democratic presidential candidate that said it.

I'll readily admit my political involvement is less than a decade long but I never would have imagined I would see such an absolute gutting of long-term policy goals in the name of short-term, self-serving -- and self-destructive -- political expediency.

However, with the presumptive nominee of the Democratic party making overtures to Australian style gun confiscation the state that recalled 2 state senators and forced a third to resign over an ill-advised gun bill will rally to ward off a further intrusion against their rights but those same voters will drown out supporters of SP.

Of the two policy initiatives only SP has any realistic opportunity to actually save lives. Yet, both will suffer an ignominious defeat because fear mongering has down-ticket consequences.

who continually laud "Melt them down" threads and/or cite Australian/UK gun control models as the way forward for American gun control laws.

In other words, they want guns taken away but then semi-triumphantly claim that no one has taken guns away.

Considering the President's recent EA actually liberalizes access to weapons regulated by the NFA I would be inclined to think those offering the taunt would be upset with the President rather than using his actions as a basis for a taunt.

Can anyone offer an explanation for this seeming inconsistency?

making blanket accusations.

It takes a breathtaking level of unmitigated hypocrisy to claim xenophobia is the motivation for people opposing a rape culture that inspires mass sexual assaults.

It just seems like politics brings out the worst in some people and it's so prevalent.

Sometimes I just don't want to "play" anymore.

I believe he must.

If he doesn't -- especially after Libya -- the WPA would effectively be dead. A law passed to rein-in the like of Richard Nixon will have been obviated through non-compliance by a Democratic president and non-enforcement by a GOP-led congress that never liked the law. At the end of the day we're saying a US president can commit troops and Congress won't have a say in it except for the politically volatile mechanism of defunding troops already in harm's way.

This is what we have been reduced to. I pray honor and a safe, speedy return to those who obey the orders from the CinC but I'm done with these political types. We're the only ones expected to obey their laws. They're all hypocrites, deceivers and criminals.

Text of the ballot question --

https://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/elections/Initiatives/titleBoard/filings/2015-2016/20Final.pdf


There's a lot of back and forth on this. The state's ACA exchange just dumped 80,000 policy holders and is looking like it will not survive much longer. The ballot initiative calls for a 10% payroll tax on all beneficiaries but the governing board can raise that without going through the legislature.

I'm a brunette but I'm thinking about bleaching my hair to go as Margot Robbie's portrayal of Harley Quinn --




(Okay, I would need some boobs, too.)

Worth it?

I really like the character.

It seems the militia clause speaks to quality of government rather than a particular government. The 2A doesn't indicate the militia is beholden to "the state(s)" but only to an ideal. It is not one of the many policy enforcements arms of the government -- such as the police or military -- but rather a means for people to organize for their common defense.

At the time of the authoring of the 2nd Amendment what were the federal regulations governing the militias?