View Poll Results: Which is a worse piece of legislation?

Voters
9. You may not vote on this poll
  • 2011 NDAA

    4 44.44%
  • 2010 PPACA

    2 22.22%
  • Both Equally Bad

    3 33.33%
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 16 of 16

Thread: Worst Piece of Legislation

  1. #11
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,591

    Re: Worst Piece of Legislation

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    Which is NOT the topic of the thread.
    How are your posts relevant? I was explaining how each piece of legislation could be considered "worst" depending on a) standing alone

    b) potential long term impact

  2. #12
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    The greatest city on Earth
    Last Seen
    08-04-12 @ 04:27 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    31,089

    Re: Worst Piece of Legislation

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    ...Apparently he forgot about the 2011 NDAA which allows for indefinite detention of American citizens on extremely questionable claims of supporting terrorism. The 2011 NDAA now allows the US Government to accuse ANYONE of providing some unstated level of support to terrorists as grounds for indefinite detention....
    no, it does NOT.

  3. #13
    Equal Opportunity Hater
    obvious Child's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
    Last Seen
    12-09-14 @ 11:36 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    19,883

    Re: Worst Piece of Legislation

    Quote Originally Posted by Thunder View Post
    no, it does NOT.
    Yeah it does. The 2011 NDAA effectively allows the Federal government to accuse you of supporting terrorism and then lets them indefinitely lock you up.

    Granted, NASA had this power before, but it was pretty limited especially since they'd had to admit aliens exist.
    "If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu

  4. #14
    Student
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Last Seen
    03-06-13 @ 02:59 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    272

    Re: Worst Piece of Legislation

    No, the SCOTUS already ruled that trials are mandatory even for gitmo detainees. I think it's hard to top the Patriot Act either, or continuous renewal of funds for the Iraq invasion. This bill does have some needed components to it, whether one agrees with the mandate or not. A public option is what passed originally in the House and was sought by like 58 Senate democrats btw, not the mandate, so McConnell has no room to cry about it now.

  5. #15
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,077

    Re: Worst Piece of Legislation

    ACA - egregious expansion of power over 311 million soveriegn individuals whose costs will wreck the federal fisc.

    NDAA - egregious expansion of power over a handful of soveriegn individuals whose costs will not wreck the federal fisc.



  6. #16
    Equal Opportunity Hater
    obvious Child's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
    Last Seen
    12-09-14 @ 11:36 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    19,883

    Re: Worst Piece of Legislation

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    ACA - egregious expansion of power over 311 million soveriegn individuals whose costs will wreck the federal fisc.
    That largely remains to be seen. Cost projections are just that, cost projections. Furthermore, what people like you never address is the comparison cost to the status quo. It's rather dishonest to say this bill sucks because it will bankrupt us while ignoring that staying on track will do the same thing.

    No one here who detracts from Obamacare has ever argued the cost of Obamacare in the context of the status quo. There's a reason for that.

    NDAA - egregious expansion of power over a handful of soveriegn individuals whose costs will not wreck the federal fisc.
    Considering how your criteria of cost is questionable, your argument essentially is begging the question. Which we know is a fallacy. Try again and with less fail.

    Maybe you think giving the Federal government the right to lock up anyone indefinitely for questionable charges is okay?
    "If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •