Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Showing Original Post only (View all)
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
110 replies, 16285 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (180)
ReplyReply to this post
110 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
You point out a rational path. I find it interesting that NO ONE replied to you before me.
bluestate10
Jan 2014
#91
The sequester has very little to do with the deficit reduction. The overwhelming majority of it came
okaawhatever
Jan 2014
#64
IIRC, they did what no other Congress has done; shut down all government spending stimulus, even to
freshwest
Jan 2014
#84
Brutal, your right Grumpy McCain or Money Bags Romney in hindsight was the clear choice
mikekohr
Jan 2014
#97
Those unemployment numbers and median income numbers are also AMAZING, considering that
TrollBuster9090
Jan 2014
#75
And the re-inflation of a bubble in the stock market is nothing to celebrate. Also those aren't
pam4water
Jan 2014
#83
80% of the items on the list have a DIRECT bearing on the economy and working people.
bluestate10
Jan 2014
#93
This may not be the worst time for the Supreme Court to consider this issue.
JDPriestly
Jan 2014
#49
How does that case apply to the issue of whether a religious organization has to pay for
JDPriestly
Jan 2014
#99
I think in the terms you're looking for Amos is the better case to study.
last1standing
Jan 2014
#100
In the Amos case, again, the issue was whether Section 702 of the civil rights law
JDPriestly
Jan 2014
#101
Yes, and I believe a majority will look to expand Amos here based on accomodation.
last1standing
Jan 2014
#102
But, as Scalia pointed out in Smith, people who object to war based on religious beliefs must still
JDPriestly
Jan 2014
#103
As I said, I find Scalia's opinion in Smith to be hypocritical at the least.
last1standing
Jan 2014
#104
Sorry, I didn't mean to suggest that EEOC was directly implicated in this case.
last1standing
Jan 2014
#106
Would've been better if the House wasn't standing firmly in the way at all times. [nt]
Jester Messiah
Jan 2014
#46
Nothing in that list shows that the last five years have been any better for the 99%.
last1standing
Jan 2014
#52