User Profile: The Third Archon

The Third Archon

Member Since: November 02, 2010


123 To page: Go
  • [1] January 29, 2015 at 9:15pm

    Now, is it Texas Muslim Capitol Day in the sense that the Muslim population of Texas is largest in Austin, or is it a day where a lot of Muslims gather at the capital in Austin to put on a religious display (not unlike the Christians are fond of doing).

    Responses (1) +
  • [-2] January 29, 2015 at 9:13pm

    I for one welcome our cyber overlords and think they’ll do a marvelously superior job leading than the current crop of plutocrats.

    Responses (1) +
  • January 29, 2015 at 9:07pm

    It doesn’t really matter what she thinks about the legality of it, because she’s removable at will be Obama, so it’s not like she can do anything but follow it. If it’s to be declared unconstitutional, as a Pennsylvania district court has purported to do I believe, it will be done by the courts. Or Congress will pass a law superseding it (and I’m sure this Congress prays the courts take the political responsibility for undoing Obama’s move). The AG can’t affect that–I’m not even sure if the AG would be the one arguing its constitutionality in a challenge. I think that might be the Solicitor General (well the office, maybe the actual SG).

  • January 29, 2015 at 8:08pm

    “, the mammal likely only consists of fewer than 50 individuals across North America.”
    If true, that’s likely an extinct species.

    Responses (1) +
  • January 29, 2015 at 5:15pm

    “Abortion is being used as a convenient form of birth control.”
    That’s the dumbest thing I’ve heard all day, and I’ve been reading Blaze articles for a laugh today.

  • [1] January 29, 2015 at 4:29pm

    Good for them–we’ll get to see how committed Obama is to stopping KXL. Also, OF COURSE they did–they KNOW Obama will veto it (if he follows through with what he said most recently), so what do they have to lose? They aren’t responsible for any bad consequences that might happen from KXL, because KXL won’t happen (at least, again, if Obama vetoes) because of this vote, but it WILL make a symbolic appeal to certain of their constituents. Win-win.

  • January 29, 2015 at 2:25pm

    To clarify, the existence of the statute allowing for an independent prosecutor did in fact continue beyond Nixon’s administration, and as many of you may remember was invoked during Clinton’s administration. However, this was all based on that original statute, which I believe was the only one of its kind before or since, and was allowed to expire. Thus while the SCOTUS passed on its constitutionality once, it was a very divided opinion, with Scalia dissenting. If Scalia represents the majority thinking of the current Court on that issue, then if the Congress tried to pass (as I believe it would have to) the same statute again to empower the appointment of a special prosecutor, it might renew the review of the constitutionality of the issue and the SCOTUS might go the other way this time.

  • January 29, 2015 at 1:46pm

    Well under current precedents, it’s dubious whether or not the Court would allow an independent prosecutor structured the way (Scalia is certainly no fan) it was structured in the Nixon case at least (and I’m not aware if we’d ever done anything similar). Congress allowed the provisions for appointing and empowering an “independent special prosecutor” (and the Special Division) to expire, I believe, so they’d have to pass a new law anyway–and that’s what might fall afoul of the appointments clause (assuming they used the same structure as before–with the AG required to go to the Special Division and have them appoint the special prosecutor) in the view of the current Court. Then again, the Court might not divide along typical lines on this issue.

    Responses (3) +
  • [1] January 29, 2015 at 1:35pm

    ““We give convicted foreign criminals a get-out-of-jail-free card to live in the United States because we cannot permanently detain them and their countries of origin refuse to take them back,” Poe said Wednesday. “This is a dangerous and deadly Achilles heel in our immigration system.””
    Not exactly–you still CAN (under the law) imprison them (in America) for the crime(s) they commit while here, before you try to deport them. Maybe if you weren’t locking humans in cages for substance addiction problems and other ******** reasons, locking those who commit SERIOUS crimes, alien or no, for the term of their sentence would actually be a feasible possibility.

  • [5] January 29, 2015 at 1:29pm

    I love the headline (not the article headline, the one on the homepage): “Jesse Ventura goes after dead Navy SEAL”

    Yeah, maybe, but you’re being highly disingenuous here–he didn’t go after just ANY old random deceased Navy SEAL (just assuming for the sake of argument that your characterization is accurate), he went after Chris Kyle, who was made fair game when a book and a movie were made about him.

    The idea that you can publicize the story of a soldier and make it visible, INVITE cultural consumption and by extension debate–then shield yourself behind this privilege of hero worship America tends to grant military (at least those that fit its narrative)–is laughably absurd. You don’t get to be like “everyone should hear his story,” THEN act like THEY’RE the bad person for just giving their honest response to the story after they did what you wanted and gave it their attention in the first place.

  • [-1] January 29, 2015 at 1:21pm

    “The mayhem started as former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger was being escorted into the hearing room to discuss global challenges and U.S. national security strategy. Kissinger, who served as national security adviser and secretary of state under Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford, was met by protesters as he sat down.

    “Arrest Henry Kissenger for war crimes!” they chanted.”
    Wait, wait, wait–that guy is STILL ALIVE?!

    Responses (1) +
  • January 29, 2015 at 1:08pm

    ““I want them all to die in a fire.” (Male, aged 26-35 with Doctorate)”
    And that’s different than Christian doctrine…how exactly?

    ““They make me a believer in eugenics….They pollute good air…I would be in favor of establishing a state for them… If not, then sterilize them so they can’t breed more.” (Male, aged 46-55 with Master degree)”
    LOL–that’s not how religion (or ideology writ large) works. People believe the religion of their parents because they’re their parents–authority figures in which children implicitly trust–not because they’re “genetically predisposed to Christianity.” XD

    Responses (1) +
  • January 28, 2015 at 1:56pm

    Yeah, like those bastard treasonous terrorists/freedom fighters against the British Empire–the American founders. XD

  • [1] January 28, 2015 at 1:51pm

    “Robber Had a Gun. But Victim Had a Bigger One.”
    Where did this ridiculous idea that a larger gun magically gives one an advantage in a gun fight come from? Seems to me like at close range it’d be the FASTER gun (or the faster shooter) that would have the advantage, size being quite irrelevant (or only indirectly relevant as it affects how fast it can be drawn, aimed, and shot).

    Responses (2) +
  • [-4] January 28, 2015 at 1:44pm

    Y’all DO know she isn’t NEARLY as stupid as her feigned command (or rather lack thereof) of the English language would suggest, right–she’s putting on an act FOR YOU, the intended constituent. Now WHAT does that say about her opinion of YOUR intelligence and values, that she seems to think sounding like a drunken moron is what will appeal to you…?

    Responses (2) +
  • January 28, 2015 at 1:36pm

    Yeah, except here’s the problem–just like the use of conventional nuclear weapons, the use of an EMP is all but guaranteed to have spillover effects upon the user (if it’s a state, which are almost certainly the only entities with the capacity and motive to construct an EMP producing device). With the interconnected nature of telecommunications technology (to say nothing of economies writ large), knocking out any large segment of the global communications network (but ESPECIALLY America, where much of the infrastructure either exists or is routed through) would be CATASTROPHIC for the remainder.

    The only people who would ACTUALLY be likely to use an EMP generating device are fanatics, like religious extremists for example, who don’t care about the fallout and its possible consequences for them–and such a device would have to be created first for them to use it (and I have serious doubts about the competency and/or resources of most religious extremist groups to centralize everything needed to invent and build such a device out of whole cloth).

    Responses (4) +
  • [-4] January 28, 2015 at 1:26pm

    Too bad it didn’t land in Dick Cheney’s lap. XD

    Responses (1) +
  • [2] January 28, 2015 at 12:44pm

    Oh, but NOW that a corporation’s policy cuts against something YOU like, SUDDENLY you CARE about regulation of corporate policy-making?! OH–INTERESTING. VERY interesting how fast all your purported “principles” fly out the window when YOU’RE the one paying their cost…


    Responses (1) +
  • [2] January 28, 2015 at 11:28am

    “Can You See Why School Administrators in Utah Had a Problem With 15-Year-Old’s Dress?”
    Oh yeah definitely, I see exactly what the problem was–Utah.

  • January 26, 2015 at 12:14pm

    Yes, you just go ahead and ban abortion without changing anything else and see how well that works out for you. The blind leading the blind.

123 To page: Go