WWII is different from WWI in that WWI didn't take place in Germany. WWI is like when the US goes to war for US citizens: you don't have the war at home. Now, when Germany lost the war and smart people capitulated (because the enemy had tanks and Germans didn't) before the war would come to Germany, the public opinion was: "What the hell? Why the hell did we capitulate, we're still standing in freaking France and Russia, miles away from the German border?!?" So, the legend was born that Germany was awesome and totally rocking on a military level, yet stupid politicians stabbed the soldiers in the back. People didn't realize that they were just lucky. Completely different story in WWII, because then, the Nazis led the war, and stupid Nazis don't know when to quit, meaning Germany lay in ruins.
Also, in WWI, many war-traditions from the olden days were still alive. Pilots in a dogfight would wave their wings when they ran out of ammo and the other pilot would stop shooting, because, well, you don't shoot someone without ammo. Chivalry was still not quite dead, yet the weapons were modern already. WWII - none of that was left. When the Germans retreated from Russia, they had the order to leave nothing but scorched earth, so they destroyed absolutely everything they came across. Systematically.
It's a Civ II Partisan. They show up when you take over an enemy city by force and you know the Guerrilla Warfare advance. I can't remember if they show up or not if you use a Diplomat to buy a city.
It's a Civ II Partisan. They show up when you take over an enemy city by force and you know the Guerrilla Warfare advance. I can't remember if they show up or not if you use a Diplomat to buy a city.
I believe the Supreme Court does not actually have to have a case taken before them to strike down a law as unconstitutional.
I believe this is correct, but since the idiot-king of America appointed as many loyalists to the justice department and made some awful choices for the supreme court early on, they are less likely to actually strike down laws related to his his assholeish agenda.
I believe the Supreme Court does not actually have to have a case taken before them to strike down a law as unconstitutional.
Wrong.
since the idiot-king of America appointed as many loyalists to the justice department and made some awful choices for the supreme court early on, they are less likely to actually strike down laws related to his his assholeish agenda.
And are you going to complain in the same manner when a Democratic president appoints justices who share liberal viewpoints? I love how some people hate our constitutional processes when they don't get what they want. Last time I checked, that's what a democracy is all about. The president appoints justices that are in line with his ideology. Republicans to it. Democrats do it. Get over it.
Why can't the liberals spend less time whining and more time actually doing something? Even during the Clinton years, the Republicans got their stuff together. I just don't see the Democrats doing the same. (And for the record, I'm a moderate.)
The Democrats are going to win the next election because Bush is such a bonehead, not because they have anything great to offer.
The Democrats are going to win the next election because Bush is such a bonehead, not because they have anything great to offer.
That was the election mantra last time around but Bush is not running in '08 so no one can run on the "I'm not Bush" platform. The only reason "I'm not Clinton" worked in 2000 is because Al gore was Clinton's VP.
That was the election mantra last time around but Bush is not running in '08 so no one can run on the "I'm not Bush" platform. The only reason "I'm not Clinton" worked in 2000 is because Al gore was Clinton's VP.Unfortunately, I think at this point "I'm not a Republican" is going to be an effective platform, and since people think there are only two parties, that leaves only one choice. Of course, if Hillary was to win the Democratic primary, I think the Republican candidate might have a chance of winning. You know what's kind of spooky: from 1981 to current day, there has been either a Bush or a Clinton occupying a position in the White House.
And are you going to complain in the same manner when a Democratic president appoints justices who share liberal viewpoints? I love how some people hate our constitutional processes when they don't get what they want. Last time I checked, that's what a democracy is all about. The president appoints justices that are in line with his ideology. Republicans to it. Democrats do it. Get over it.
How come no one remembers that FDR, the deity of the modern Democratic party, tried to pack the Supreme Court so he could pretty much force his New Deal through?
How come no one remembers that FDR, the deity of the modern Democratic party, tried to pack the Supreme Court so he could pretty much force his New Deal through?
Because most people alive now where not alive at the time. If they were, odds are they were young and not paying attention to the government. The only people who "remember" are old people like Joe and those of us who paid attention in school. There are more old people than people who pay attention in school.
How come no one remembers that FDR, the deity of the modern Democratic party, tried to pack the Supreme Court so he could pretty much force his New Deal through?
Because most people alive now where not alive at the time. If they were, odds are they were young and not paying attention to the government. The only people who "remember" are old people like Joe and those of us who paid attention in school. There are more old people than people who pay attention in school.
Okay, now I want to know the inside joke. Why does 'everyone' say Joe is ooooooooooooooold, really, really, old? And if he truly is, which age group is he in?
Oh, btw - Today I was unofficially offered a job with the District of Columbia Attorney General's Office. I'm gonna be an Assistant Attorney General. Huzzah!
My new boss said that I'll get the offer letter next week to make it official. Unless something goes wrong, Heaven Forfend, I'll start work in a fortnight.
I felt very, VERY old yesterday when I saw a TV commercial for Luv's baby diapers that had the Beatle's All You Need Is Love playing in the background and altered to say "All you need is Luv's".
I felt very, VERY old yesterday when I saw a TV commercial for Luv's baby diapers that had the Beatle'sAll You Need Is Loveplaying in the background and altered to say "All you need is Luv's"
I'll point out that that commercial makes me feel old and angry, and I'm only 22.
Oh, btw - Today I was unofficially offered a job with the District of Columbia Attorney General's Office. I'm gonna be an Assistant Attorney General. Huzzah!
My new boss said that I'll get the offer letter next week to make it official. Unless something goes wrong, Heaven Forfend, I'll start work in a fortnight.
Oh, btw - Today I was unofficially offered a job with the District of Columbia Attorney General's Office. I'm gonna be an Assistant Attorney General. Huzzah!
Oh, btw - Today I was unofficially offered a job with the District of Columbia Attorney General's Office. I'm gonna be an Assistant Attorney General. Huzzah!
My new boss said that I'll get the offer letter next week to make it official. Unless something goes wrong, Heaven Forfend, I'll start work in a fortnight.
CONGRATULATIONS! I felt very bad for you when you described the document review work you were doing. That is enough to make a person insane. Also, I'm not sure which of us is older, but it's important for graybeards to show solidarity!
There is nothing wrong with what bushy is doing, but people still bitch about it.
There is nothing wrong with doing that, if the system allows it. It doesn't mean the two are bad persons, it just means that your system doesn't make the Supreme Court powerful enough, because they're not completely independent. It's like with gamedesign: people using a certain weapon don't ruin the game, if the weapon breaks the game, it just means the game sucked from the start. Also, people can complain about their governments all they want, but if you're living in a democracy, you have to realize that the public is responsible for their government. I can be pissed off about Schäuble all I like, but I know the problem lies in the population, because people are unaware of what things mean.
There is nothing wrong with doing that, if the system allows it. It doesn't mean the two are bad persons, it just means that your system doesn't make the Supreme Court powerful enough, because they're not completely independent.
No, thats the whole point. The American Government is set up so there is no branch that is completely independent from the others. There is a system of Checks and Balances to help make sure one branch does not become too powerful.
No, thats the whole point. The American Government is set up so there is no branch that is completely independent from the others. There is a system of Checks and Balances to help make sure one branch does not become too powerful.
That's true, and it's the same with the German system. But no one president should be able to put a significant number of supreme judges into office. So let's say: not independent enough. Also, your president holds a lot of power, in my opinion more than should be concentrated to one single person in a democracy. Well, I'm not really in a position to criticize your system of government, since I don't know all that much about it. It's just the impression I get.
The President holds very little real power. He has no power to make laws and his ability to appoint judges is kept in check by the Senates ability to vote down his judges.
The President holds very little real power. He has no power to make laws and his ability to appoint judges is kept in check by the Senates ability to vote down his judges.
Remember that he may not have the power to make laws, but he has the power to decide whether to enforce them or not.
That's true, and it's the same with the German system. But no one president should be able to put a significant number of supreme judges into office. So let's say: not independent enough. Also, your president holds a lot of power, in my opinion more than should be concentrated to one single person in a democracy. Well, I'm not really in a position to criticize your system of government, since I don't know all that much about it. It's just the impression I get.
It's not as simple as you make it out to be. While it indeed seems that the President holds a significant amount of power, the true reason is because Congress has not exercised any of their true checks against him in a long time. Because for the last decade or so the Republicans have controlled both houses of Congress, they were very sympathetic to the Bush's Republican ideals. There are many factors, but the main reason he has been able to do so much is that his party controlled both the Legislature and the Executive Branch. This is why recently the Democrats won control of both houses. Voters hoped that they would bring change to the unmitigated control the Republicans have enjoyed. However, many of the promises that the Democrats promised during their campaign have fallen through. It's a very complicated matter and requires extensive knowledge of American politics which is why I really don't like it when non-Americans who don't know the intricacies of the system criticize it.
I guess the roots of it issue is not the System itself, but rather the strength that political parties have gained in the past century. It's said that one of the major enemies of the Constitution are political parties and James Madison discussed it rather extensively in his Federalist No. 10 essay.
I haven't had a snowball's chance of a political appointment to anything since Che died. I'm not a very political person.
It is a union job, though. Here is the job description.
This weekend I went to the Enoch Pratt Library. It's HUGE. It has a very nice science fiction collection, a good selection of graphic novels, a special Edgar Allan Poe collection, and many Anime dvds, so I'll finally get to see what all the fuss is about without paying any monies or downloading anything.
Comments
So, the legend was born that Germany was awesome and totally rocking on a military level, yet stupid politicians stabbed the soldiers in the back. People didn't realize that they were just lucky.
Completely different story in WWII, because then, the Nazis led the war, and stupid Nazis don't know when to quit, meaning Germany lay in ruins.
Also, in WWI, many war-traditions from the olden days were still alive. Pilots in a dogfight would wave their wings when they ran out of ammo and the other pilot would stop shooting, because, well, you don't shoot someone without ammo. Chivalry was still not quite dead, yet the weapons were modern already. WWII - none of that was left. When the Germans retreated from Russia, they had the order to leave nothing but scorched earth, so they destroyed absolutely everything they came across. Systematically.
Why can't the liberals spend less time whining and more time actually doing something? Even during the Clinton years, the Republicans got their stuff together. I just don't see the Democrats doing the same. (And for the record, I'm a moderate.)
The Democrats are going to win the next election because Bush is such a bonehead, not because they have anything great to offer.
Oh, btw - Today I was unofficially offered a job with the District of Columbia Attorney General's Office. I'm gonna be an Assistant Attorney General. Huzzah!
My new boss said that I'll get the offer letter next week to make it official. Unless something goes wrong, Heaven Forfend, I'll start work in a fortnight.
I felt very, VERY old yesterday when I saw a TV commercial for Luv's baby diapers that had the Beatle's All You Need Is Love playing in the background and altered to say "All you need is Luv's".
Also, people can complain about their governments all they want, but if you're living in a democracy, you have to realize that the public is responsible for their government. I can be pissed off about Schäuble all I like, but I know the problem lies in the population, because people are unaware of what things mean.
Also, your president holds a lot of power, in my opinion more than should be concentrated to one single person in a democracy.
Well, I'm not really in a position to criticize your system of government, since I don't know all that much about it. It's just the impression I get.
I guess the roots of it issue is not the System itself, but rather the strength that political parties have gained in the past century. It's said that one of the major enemies of the Constitution are political parties and James Madison discussed it rather extensively in his Federalist No. 10 essay.
It is a union job, though. Here is the job description.
This weekend I went to the Enoch Pratt Library. It's HUGE. It has a very nice science fiction collection, a good selection of graphic novels, a special Edgar Allan Poe collection, and many Anime dvds, so I'll finally get to see what all the fuss is about without paying any monies or downloading anything.
This is my new favorite bookstore.