Jump to content


Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • Content Count

  • Joined

Community Reputation

63 Excellent

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I spent about a month on and off in Montreal once during a project. It's surprising how many people only speak French, and there's a significant percentage that are insulted/annoyed when visitors can't speak it. I could certainly understand if this has somewhat stunted the city's growth. In that regard it's not unlike Cincinnati, wherein the old school lifelong dynasties running the show seem to be perfectly okay with minimal growth so long as it keeps the aura of the place on an even keel.
  2. DarkandStormy et. al. - is this propaganda as well or is this one okay? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dK3LbVFgyqQ Objectively, that video isn't as funny nor relevant because Trump is a strict teetotaler so the parody aspect isn't there. Nevertheless, it's still slightly humorous to hear videos played back like this, particularly when the speaker is rambling on. Why folks on the far left can't take jokes is beyond me.
  3. I remember when slowing down someone's speech in a video was just funny because they sounded drunk. It was a trend for awhile a few years ago, you can probably find thousands of videos like this on the internet. But in 2019, the anti-Trump movement is so aimless, futile, and hypersensitive that hastily edited joke videos are taken as serious affronts. This is the type of reactionary nonsensical whining that will lose the 2020 election.
  4. Ram23


    The end of May came a few days early: https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9144415/theresa-may-resigns-brexit-tory-leadership-election/ Boris Johnson, likely the next prime minister, has pledged to get out of the EU by the end of October, with or without a deal. Exciting times.
  5. Ram23


    Trump signs memorandum requiring immigrant sponsors to pay for social services https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-memorandum-requiring-immigrant-sponsors-pay-social-services President Trump is signed a memorandum Thursday that will enforce a 23-year-old provision requiring sponsors of legal immigrants in the U.S. to reimburse the government for any social services such as Medicaid or welfare used by the immigrant, Fox News has learned. The provision was part of the 1996 Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA) and Welfare Reform laws that were signed by then-President Bill Clinton, but despite being enshrined in federal law, the rule has not been enforced. Under the provision, each future sponsor of an immigrant would need to sign an affidavit that would spell out the financial responsibilities for the sponsored immigrant and create a collection mechanism to recover funds from the sponsor. The Department of Health and Human Services is to collect the data of the sponsors and the immigrants, while the Treasury Department would collect the funds.
  6. ^ I haven't heard any rumors but my initial instinct was that they simply don't want to have a grand opening in the middle of an active construction site. It makes practical sense to me - this is a flagship urban store next door to their HQ and they want to ensure the site is perfect before they open it up. You don't want to worry about scaffolding over the sidewalk, trucks beeping, stacks of drywall being carried into the building, etc. Plus there's some liability concerns. I've worked on projects that could have been phased (as this one appears it could have been) but owners often prefer to wait until everything is ready to go and there can be a clean flip of the switch between construction and occupancy.
  7. Correct - these liberal states know they do not have the support required to change the constitution, so they've crafted a roundabout way to circumvent it without the requisite 3/4 of states. I believe this should and will be found unconstitutional because of that. The question is whether or not states can form pacts to ultimately and collectively override provisions of the Constitution instead of amending it. I think this would be an interesting and time consuming case, and if this pact were to ever get above the 270 threshold, depending upon the timing (say it occurs a month or two before a presidential election), could result in abject political turmoil the likes of which have never been seen before. The scenarios are downright dangerous. There are all sorts of practical problems, as well. National vote recounts would be a doozy - imagine Florida in 2000 but infinitely more complex, widespread, and tumultuous. Also, this is clearly partisan legislation - does anyone really think California would send its electors to vote for Trump should he win the popular vote but lose the electoral college in 2020? They'd leave the pact - and while the legislation doesn't allow for this, there's no enforceable punishment provisions. Here are a few good takes: https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2019/02/09/why-the-national-public-vote-scheme-is-unconstitutional/ https://blog.harvardlawreview.org/the-danger-of-the-national-popular-vote-compact/
  8. ^ I think he means that the public funding deals themselves are completely different, which is accurate. The deal with the Bengals for Paul Brown Stadium is among the worst agreements in the history of stadium funding. By comparison, the public funding for FC Cincinnati is relatively innocuous. Now, it's still more public money than the city/county should have spent, but it's not even in the same ballpark as the PBS deal.
  9. I'm not sure how this is perplexing - the reasons you just listed are exactly why he is the frontrunner right now. Perhaps you're often surrounded by like-minded leftists, but the bulk of Americans, including the silent majority in the middle who swing presidential elections, don't want presidents who support crackpot ideas like the Green New Deal and slavery reparations. Swing voters in Ohio, Michigan, and Pennsylvania roll their eyes at these things.
  10. Ram23

    Women's Rights

    We are talking about the state legislature, regarding their passing right-wing abortion legislation. In the statehouse, most of Cincinnati's representatives are Democrats. In my district, the Democrat usually carries 80% of the vote. By comparison, in suburban/rural districts, Republicans may be "safe" but with closer to 50-60% of the vote. Whatever you may think of the US Congressional Districts map, the state maps are fairly straightforward: http://www.ohiohouse.gov/members/district-map http://www.ohiosenate.gov/senators/district-map
  11. Ram23

    Women's Rights

    This isn't gerrymandering, it's simply the reality of population distribution. You can look at precinct level data and see it - I was one of about 10 people to get a Republican ballot at the last primary in my precinct. Hundreds of folks got Democrat ballots. Urban areas might lean 95% to the left, whereas the bulk of Ohio's suburban and rural districts might lean 55% to the right. There's not many ways you can draw up districts, especially ones as concise and small as statehouse districts, that would overcome that reality.
  12. I didn't say anything about the First Amendment, I said the "concept of free speech," the core fundamental human right the First Amendment helps to protect. However, the greatest threat to free speech in an increasingly global, connected society is no longer government (if only because the First Amendment has proven so effective), but the handful of multinational companies that everyone on earth has grown dependent upon to control and transmit our words, thoughts, and ideas. The gravest challenge to free speech in the 21st century will not be government censors, it will censorship under the guise of corporate algorithms. The writing is on the wall - until Facebook deletes it, that is.
  13. This is a great tool - if we, as a society, truly value the concept of free speech, we must hold the few corporations that control an increasing majority of communication to a higher standard. https://whitehouse.typeform.com/to/Jti9QH
  • Create New...