Yeah you can call him all sorts of things and public speaking was clearly not a strong suit of his, but G. W. Bush was not stupid (at least not any stupider than our other politicians).

1. pic your favorite

2. right click and save image

3. click on My 2+2 at the top left of the page

4. update your avatar

5. upload image from computer

6. save changes






i have no way of knowing and im no expert but being a poor public speaker doesnt justify the things he said. in most cases he just didnt know whats up. i would guess obama and ever other candidate over the last 20 years is substantially more intelligent. in what area of life, politics, or education did he demonstrate above average intelligence?

electoral college system sucks.

some states vote delegates proportional to general vote, some All or Nothing. Wat?

need to spend more time with making the proper Senate and Representative votes mean something. TERM LIMITS PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE.

Tax the crap outta lobbyists. For ever dollar they "contribute" (read BUY") a candidate, they must put $2 toward the national debt.

USA needs a candidate like Lee Iacocca NOW. Give me a business(wo)man that will make the tough choices. Make US bite the bullet for a decade....but with a friggin BUSINESS PLAN. Geo-politics..lol. Money makes the world go round. Fix the money. Career politicians planning anything other than reelection campaigns should be locked up for operating an economy without a license.

he quit doing coke?

proof to confirm disco still wins at poker



2k hand sample baby weeeeeee. all .5/1 becuz that's where the real champions play.

in b4 SAH asks for cbing stats

Was wondering if anyone tech savy could help me with a "connecting to merge-skin's client issue" -

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/48...r-fix-1252802/

Is Black Chip not accepting US players anymore? One of my buddies signed up through them, and it said they don't accept players from the US. He's not from NY either, he's from Missouri.

Lobbying generally gets a bad rap, but it's pretty crucial to our system imo. The only reason we've gotten even close to the point where we are with poker legislation (aka the reason poker isn't banned with criminal punishments to people caught playing it) is because of the ppa lobbying for us. How much money would the ppa have if for every $3 donated to the PPA they could only use $1 for lobbying purposes?

everything is relative, every other lobbying group would take a hit as well and proportionally things would be about even

not that i've been made aware of. Perhaps missouri is one of the 7 or 8 states they don't accept?

im def no expert on lobbying (i vaguely remember a kevin spacey movie) but everything ive read and seen leads me to believe the $ in politics has messed up the country so badly and people arent even that mad about it

as someone holding a real estate license im blown away by all the $ and favors being thrown around and nobody does a thing. the government is supposed to represent you. if a realtor represents you they have to disclose in writing if they have any financial or personal interests that may influence them. otherwise they lose their license and face legal action. politicians can pass laws and then get a nice seat on the board of these companies collecting a fortune while nobody seems to care. politicians have an interest in companies that sell products directly to the government. imo it should be considered treason if you get bribed (any slick way, shape, or form) when youre supposed to be looking out for the public

2 min in this guy touches on my point. i find it strange, fascinating, and scary that nobody seems to talk about it or care. every single citizen should be forcing politicians to discuss and deal with the problem yet everyone seems more interested in gay marriage or where the president was born. the system and laws were created ages ago and $ has hacked it.

Hint.....lobbying groups are lobbying for individuals weather they are corps or groups like the PPA.

Yeah, since the SCOTUS upheld the "corporations are people too" ruling. Unreal.

How do you get around these limitations?

Note: The maximum size of your custom image is 80 by 80 pixels or 250.0 KB (whichever is smaller).

It amazes me people still don't understand that court case at all. Read the Constitution/Bill of Rights again. It doesn't give rights to anyone. In general it outlines a super-basic list of things the federal government can do and it's supposed to be prohibited from doing anything else, but just in case (and it's shown to have been needed), the Bill of Rights listed some things the government absolutely could not do. Among those is they could not restrict free speech. Note that the Bill of Rights does not give any specific group a right to free speech, it prevents the government from infringing upon free speech. It's not that corporations are people, it's that the text of the first amendment states:

The Supreme Court ruled that laws telling a corporation they could not spend their own money to buy advertising from another private company in order to get their opinion out there was the government "abridging the freedom of speech". I'd like to think anyone intelligent would realize this as well. Read the actual majority opinion if you don't believe me. If you want to amend the Constitution to allow the government to restrict free speech in cases where it impacts certain things you are free to do so, but as written now the federal government simply does not Constitutionally have the power to do so. Also note I am somewhat sympathetic to that case because it's simply not fair that money can literally buy votes. But under the current Constitution, the government simply can not Constitutionally limit their ability to spend their own money to get their message out in the public.

change the size of the image to make it fit

Zach I will be honest I have not read the opinion and am no expert on the case. It does seem to me, however, to be absurd to think that the Bill of Rights applies equally to corporations as it does to individual citizens. To equate individuals with corporations seems untenable in a variety of ways.

Think about it in terms of restrictions on government and the initial goal of the Constitution (super limited federal government) vs. granting rights to individuals and it makes a whole lot more sense. In fact although it's basically been ignored there is literally a section in the Constitution that lists what the federal government can do. Everything not listed there (pretty sure it's A1S8 or something?) the federal government was not initially allowed to legislate and it was up to the States to legislate. Since elections in general were supposed to be State matters, the federal government has clearly not been given the power to legislate who can run ads having to do with elections. Another amendment that's pretty relevant:

Again I'm not saying the Constitution is perfect or that it would be the best way to handle it (for example back then people and State was a lot more interchangeable than it is today), but it's pretty clear that under the Constitution the Supreme Court made the correct decision in that ruling assuming their goal was to uphold the US Constitution.

Yup. I do think an amendment overturning citizens united will happen eventually..maybe even in obama's 2nd term. Dems getting majority in house and senate this election would help. fingers crossed.

ok maybe not anytime soon since 3/4 states have to ratify but one day

Thanks Zach, I'll check it out more. If it takes an amendment so be it. Corporations' sole responsibility is to the shareholder, which generally means maximizing profits. It is quite clear to me that individual citizens have concerns other than profits. Protecting the commons (clean air, water, etc.) and preserving a livable habitat for future generations are a few concerns that government should have a hand in caring for, but that corporations completely discount, mainly because earning shorter term profits at the expense of long term sustainability is generally how things work in capitalism. Anyway, just my 2c.

Who would have thought a guy that wears an Umbrella as a hat would be so smaht.

dat metagame

Was down by less than a point in 2 of my fantasy leagues right b4 Dallas scored at the end. Had Witten in one w/ the TD and Bryant in the other for the 2 point conversion. Ship it!

so now that discos a poker pro again i think he should do some kind of prop bet. Something like XXX volume with YYY wr at 100nl fr on merge. Seems like exactly what this forum needs right now, a way to channel all their inner disco hate.