[BadKosh]

So waste and poorly conceived programs which led to this is what you want?

[andi*pandi]

You fail at reading comprehension.

[subego]

My local insight.

This is over property tax hikes and Chicago Public Schools' pension obligations.

Republican Governor Rauner promises to veto a property tax hike, or a CPS pension bailout. Democratic House Speaker Madigan responded by procedurally locking up the budget in the House for three years and running. It's the world's longest game of chicken.


Bonus detail: Madigan's day job is as the most whoop-de-shit real estate tax attorney in the state.

[The Final Dakar]

So, which one of them is up for reelection first?

[subego]

I'm not sure, but of course, Madigan just needs to swing his district, which he's held since 9 months before I was born.

For those playing the home game, I'm 45.

[The Final Dakar]

Yeah I looked it up. I guess the question is whether a dem could beat Rainer. Is there polling on what people want?

[subego]

That actually doesn't matter. Illinois voters don't flip. Which side is more motivated determines the election.

The Democratic front runner is a dull bajillionaire who was caught on tape by the Feds horse-trading for a political appointment with Blago.

[The Final Dakar]

Well if there's one thing that defines Illinois its bipartisan corruption

[BadKosh]

MORE:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/c...20-column.html

[Chongo]

Nice. Rahm gets his own place. "Rahmonia" sound almost as nice as "Otisburg"

[andi*pandi]

Do you understand satire?

[Cap'n Tightpants]

I'm pretty sure he isn't taking it seriously and just rolling with it.

[andi*pandi]

Chongo, probably. Badkosh....

[BadKosh]

Can't find any California version yet. Plenty of earthquake stuff though.

[Chongo]

Since Texans claim the right to subdivide into 5 states, here are a couple of proposals.



in a "serious" map, this is Nate Silvers' from the Houston Chronicle.


I doubt it would happen. That would mean eight more (R) senators.

[Cap'n Tightpants]

8 more senators, creating and even larger Repub majority (6-4).

[andi*pandi]

Hey, don't forget Austin.

[Cap'n Tightpants]

?? Austinland and New New Mexico would likely be blue, but the rest are clearly red.

[subego]

Carve up California at the same time to even it out.

[The Final Dakar]

D.C. And Puerto Rico.

Honestly, I used to be against it but I could see some logic it breaking up high pop states. California and Texas voters do suffer from their votes being worth a lot less than they should be, plus the outcome being a foregone conclusion on a national scale.

[subego]

Clever girl.

[The Final Dakar]

Irony incoming
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/bernie-a...-hire-lawyers/

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and his wife, Jane Sanders have hired prominent defense attorneys, amid an FBI investigation into a loan Jane Sanders obtained to expand Burlington College while she was its president, CBS News confirms.
…
Sanders top adviser Jeff Weaver told CBS News the couple has sought legal protection over federal agents' allegations from a January 2016 complaint accusing then-President of Burlington College, Ms. Sanders, of distorting donor levels in a 2010 loan application for $10 million from People's United Bank to purchase 33 acres of land for the institution.

According to Politico, prosecutors might also be looking into allegations that Sen. Sanders' office inappropriately urged the bank to approve the loan.

[P]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

D.C. And Puerto Rico.

Honestly, I used to be against it but I could see some logic it breaking up high pop states. California and Texas voters do suffer from their votes being worth a lot less than they should be, plus the outcome being a foregone conclusion on a national scale.

D.C. is a constitutional amendment away, and that won't happen, and Puerto Rico doesn't seem to be all the in favor of statehood. Yes it got big majorities in the last few referendums, but only because the opposition boycotted the vote.

Note that demographics are less stable than we like to think. California was securely Republican until -92, and Texas as a whole might be a swing state as soon as 2024. At the same time I could see the Rust Belt going redder over time.

[subego]

OTOH, PR may end up a lot more red than one might imagine.

[Cap'n Tightpants]

Another genuine "WTF?!?" moment from the Marxists at HuffPo.

"An Open Letter To Gay, White Men: No, You’re Not Allowed To Have A Racial Preference"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/...b0f7875b83e459

You prefer dating white people? Too bad, that makes you racist, and people should shame you for it. People of all colors and creeds should have equal access to your junk, that's equality!

[Cap'n Tightpants]

Originally Posted by subego 

OTOH, PR may end up a lot more red than one might imagine.

The first person who goes down there speaking fluent Spanish will take it in a landslide. Note Rubio in 2016, he thrashed all other Repub and Dem candidates.

[subego]

Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants 

Another genuine "WTF?!?" moment from the Marxists at HuffPo.

"An Open Letter To Gay, White Men: No, You’re Not Allowed To Have A Racial Preference"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/...b0f7875b83e459

You prefer dating white people? Too bad, that makes you racist, and people should shame you for it. People of all colors and creeds should have equal access to your junk, that's equality!

I'm certainly likely to find certain ethnicities more attractive than others. No question there.

I don't think I've come across an ethnicity where I've never been able to find someone hot enough to bang.

While I won't get all catty about it like this guy, if I see a person has "won't date [X]" on their profile, it might net a raised eyebrow.

The same would occur with "will only date [X]", and it doesn't matter to me if the person refusing is a minority. That's it's swell when minorities do it is only part where I feel he's completely barking up the wrong tree.

[Cap'n Tightpants]

All of it is wrong, because he's even counting subconscious preference, claiming that you can be trained to be sexually attracted to other races. What he doesn't understand is, to do that you'd need to use the same methods used by evangelicals in "gay conversion therapy" (ie. exploiting the Mere-Exposure effect), validating their practices and making themselves no better than the people they rail against. Hypocrites. The ends don't justify the means, dicking with someone's mind is wrong and free will matters. In fact, it's just about the only thing that matters.

[subego]

Well, let's call out the elephant in the room. The big reason gays rail against conversion therapy because it calls into question the supposed immutable sexuality we're born with.

We both know immutable sexuality is a crock of shit.

With that out of the way, it leaves the legit question about conversion therapy of any type. Does the person genuinely want it, or have they been coerced by society into wanting it?

This author is trying to pressure people into wanting it. Which I agree is both hypocritical, and a dick move.

[subego]

To put it another way.

Okay: you can change what you're attracted to.

Very not okay: there's something wrong with you for not wanting to change it.

He's doing the latter, and can **** off for it, but that doesn't invalidate the former, upon which the he builds his very not okay argument.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by subego 

We both know immutable sexuality is a crock of shit.

How do you know that? What do you base that on? Do you have any evidence to back that up?

Originally Posted by subego 

This author is trying to pressure people into wanting it. Which I agree is both hypocritical, and a dick move.

I think you can have a more nuanced take of the article without having to agree with the author that “you're not allowed to have certain preferences”. Merely calling it “Marxist” is intellectually lazy. I can see how Asian and black homosexuals feel insulted when they read “no chocolate, no rice”, and think it is useful to address the racial divide within the gay community — even if you don't agree with the proposed solution.

[Cap'n Tightpants]

Comments like “no chocolate, no rice” are prejudiced and insensitive, however the sexual preference itself isn't. I'm generally not attracted to women who are: brunette, over ~5' 6", or obese, but that doesn't make my choices wrong. Laughably, there are even nutcases who believe you're "transphobic" if you refuse to have sex with someone because they have a penis.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants 

Comments like “no chocolate, no rice” are prejudiced and insensitive, however the sexual preference itself isn't. I'm generally not attracted to women who are: brunette, over ~5' 6", or obese, but that doesn't make my choices wrong.

I agree with that, although in my case my taste shifts subtly depending on where I was living. In the US, I was more tolerant to higher weight, in Japan I got to appreciate Asian women of all stripes, etc. You adapt to the local ecosystem However, I never got into obese women, for example, that's just not my thing.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by subego 

Well, let's call out the elephant in the room. The big reason gays rail against conversion therapy because it calls into question the supposed immutable sexuality we're born with.

Heh, I thought the big reason they're against it is because it's torture and ineffective.

[Cap'n Tightpants]

This is why modern (aka. 3rd Wave) feminism is cancer:

"Beyond Pro-Choice: The Solution to White Supremacy is White Abortion"
https://medusamagazine.com/beyond-pr...white-abortion

"Regular" feminists should be pissed, it's shit like this that makes them all look bad.

[Doc HM]

Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants 

This is why modern (aka. 3rd Wave) feminism is cancer:

"Beyond Pro-Choice: The Solution to White Supremacy is White Abortion"
https://medusamagazine.com/beyond-pr...white-abortion

"Regular" feminists should be pissed, it's shit like this that makes them all look bad.

And the politics of that site and that article are reconciled with the clickbait links and images how??
Apart form the unending stream of nonsense in the actual words as well that is...

[subego]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

Heh, I thought the big reason they're against it is because it's torture and ineffective.

This depends on context.

The thesis of the article is a white person who isn't into a given minority, can "conversion therapy" themselves into finding that minority hot. Is this torture? Can it not be effective?

Contrast this with a religion who persecutes homosexuals and then offers conversion therapy as a coping mechanism for the attendant self-loathing.

The latter is torture and ineffective. Is this inherent to conversion therapy or a result of the context under which it's employed.

[subego]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

What do you base that on?

A lifetime of observing humans display mutable sexuality.

[Cap'n Tightpants]

Originally Posted by Doc HM 

And the politics of that site and that article are reconciled with the clickbait links and images how??
Apart form the unending stream of nonsense in the actual words as well that is...

I have no idea what you're trying to say. Left-wing radicals are inconsistent? Medusa is a known mouthpiece for the 3W feminist agenda.

[subego]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

I think you can have a more nuanced take of the article without having to agree with the author that “you're not allowed to have certain preferences”. Merely calling it “Marxist” is intellectually lazy. I can see how Asian and black homosexuals feel insulted when they read “no chocolate, no rice”, and think it is useful to address the racial divide within the gay community — even if you don't agree with the proposed solution.

I didn't call anyone a Marxist, and I basically defended almost the entirety of the article.

Is that not nuanced enough?

[subego]

Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants 

This is why modern (aka. 3rd Wave) feminism is cancer:

"Beyond Pro-Choice: The Solution to White Supremacy is White Abortion"
https://medusamagazine.com/beyond-pr...white-abortion

"Regular" feminists should be pissed, it's shit like this that makes them all look bad.

I vote troll.

[andi*pandi]

Originally Posted by Doc HM 

And the politics of that site and that article are reconciled with the clickbait links and images how??
Apart form the unending stream of nonsense in the actual words as well that is...

I'm not entirely unconvinced that site isn't satire. Every single post is ridiculous. Also, month-old website with admins who don't know to untag each post Uncategorized... newbs.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Modest_Proposal

[subego]

Looks like there's a good chance medusamagazine.com is owned by the same guy who owns ageofshitlords.com.

Top article there at the moment terms Canada "snow Mexico".

[Cap'n Tightpants]

Given how crazy 3W feminism has become, it's difficult to tell. I think it's real, though, a lot of their rhetoric comes directly from people like Anita Sarkeesian and Laurie Penny.

[Waragainstsleep]

Originally Posted by subego 

A lifetime of observing humans display mutable sexuality.

If something has the capacity to change, does that mean it must be possible for us to deliberately change it?

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by subego 

A lifetime of observing humans display mutable sexuality.

Anecdotes are no substitute for scientific evidence.

Originally Posted by subego 

I didn't call anyone a Marxist, and I basically defended almost the entirety of the article.

You are right, CPT dismissed it as “Marxist”, not you, I was a bit sloppy in my reply (I thought you'd put it into context to CPT's post you quoted).

[subego]

Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep 

If something has the capacity to change, does that mean it must be possible for us to deliberately change it?

Inherently? No.

But, it's not like I just made up the idea of conditioning or something. Is not motivation one of the things possible for us to deliberately change?

[subego]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

Anecdotes are no substitute for scientific evidence.

I hope people who claim they're "born this way" are given the same admonition.

The most obvious example which doesn't fit into the widely held model on how sexuality works is people flipping once they get gender segregated.

Speaking of gender, there's an obvious gender difference when it comes to sexual mutability.


Of course, as always, I'm willing to hear alternative explanations.

[Chongo]

The most infamous anecdote is Anne Heche.

[Cap'n Tightpants]

It's what I call sexuality of preference vs sexuality of opportunity.