Every time I see a Swords Comic, I think, “They have to be running out of things to do, right?” I mean, how many ideas around swords can you have?

But Garfield has been around approximately 300 years just making jokes about a fat cat. But they usually suck now, and that makes me sad.

But then I remember that Dinosaur Comics has done over 4,000 comics with the exact same panels every time, and whenever I find time to check it out, I always laugh. So I guess that makes me happy, because if you’re funny and clever and talented, you can keep it up. Thank goodness for talented creators. Not sure why I went into this rant here on a random Saturday, but probably nostalgia. Anyway, thanks for posting.

This is utterly adorable! Such a dapper gentleman you have!

What is this scene? Vaggie looks like she’s on a pirate ship! Maybe from when she’s singing the duet with Camilla in season 1? Whatever it Takes I think? I’m just trying to remember why she would be on a pirate ship, but sometimes the animation goes by so fast I miss things

Yes to the filibuster, no to the quorum. Although I think you might be using quorum incorrectly. If you mean these as 1 question, about simply removing the filibuster and setting the minimum threshold for passing a bill to 50 votes, then that happens automatically, although it’s actually 51 votes without a tiebreaker.

Answer here, my personal opinions below. The filibuster is a Senate rule, not a law, and can be changed by a simple majority vote of the Senate. It does not require approval by the house or president. Changing or creating exceptions to the filibuster has been done several times over the years, from budget acts to disapproving actions of the executive branch. More recently, it has been removed for approval of federal judges. Harry Reid, a Democrat Senate Majority Leader got rid of the filibuster for approving federal judges, not including Supreme Court justices. Republican Mitch McConnell followed up a few years later by removing it for SC justices.

Without the filibuster, any business (well, almost any) such as approvals, bills, etc. requires a simple majority of Senators voting, assuming they have a quorum. If there are no absences or vacancies or abstentions (Senators there but not voting), that’s 100 Senators, so 51 votes needed. If there are only 95 Senators voting, you would only need 48 votes (half of 95 is 47.5, so 47 would not be enough). If there is a tie (50-50, for example), the Vice-President (technically acting as the President of the Senate) can break ties, so a bill could only pass with 50 Senators voting yes, rather than 51, if you add in the VP’s vote.

Quorum of the Senate is not a Senate rule. It comes from the Constitution, which says that a quorum is a majority of the full Senate (always 100). Vacancies are not counted. This means at least 51 Senators have to be physically there for any business to proceed. Changing it would require a constitutional amendment.

In my opinion, Harry Reid’s filibuster removal was somewhat understandable, as Republicans really were obstructing judges, but it was nonetheless a political mistake and backfired horribly, opening the door for Republicans to eventually follow-up by removing the filibuster for SC justices and take firm control of the court. Removing the filibuster for ALL business, including laws, would have similar risk. John Thune, the current Republican Senate Majority Leader, has resisted doing so, despite pastor from Trump. I disagree with Thune on almost everything politically, but respect the backbone/wisdom of keeping the filibuster in place. In general, a good rule is “never give yourself political power you wouldn’t want your political opponents to have.” I kind of feel the same way on the quorum question, but I think that’s not exactly what you were asking. No one really has a major problem with quorum rules, excepting rare intentional absences.

That describes the entire Star Wars Expanded Universe. Every character was critically important to the survival of the galaxy! Some strong books, some weak ones, and its ridiculous storylines all look phenomenal compared to the travesty of Disney canon, IMO

True, but I liked how they referenced Glup in the early Yuu’zhan Vong books by the asking about how he basically was the only reason Tattooine survived the Desolation! Nice nod to previous characters

We’re not there yet, but I could see a bit more fear-mongering smashing us into V For Vendetta territory

This is wonderful, and I love how Darth Bane is at the top! In my mind, he’s the real originator of the Sith, despite not being the first. Although all my knowledge is non-canon because of fucking Disney, but regardless, great job!

I built my first computer in college with a friend helping me. It didn’t turn on, and we spent 3 days troubleshooting, switching out components (including the power supply) until we realized that the outlet we were plugging into was on a switch. We felt like morons

My dad and I quote this all the time, and no one ever knows what we’re talking about! Peter Sellers is phenomenal!

Cat: Yes, this is very nice, but where’s the plain cardboard box it came in?

Charlie’s Angels’ Colon must have been a direct to TV sequel

This and inflationary language are two of my favorites from him!

Oh, that’s the famous Sherlock Holmes fanfic author, right? And occasionally Batman fanfic!

National Treasure is a mediocre movie that I will always watch the shit out of. It is the perfect balance of ridiculousness and action, and just always brings me joy.

Better than jumping the shark

What does lamo mean? I understood the rest, and yes, my back hurts.

Northerners: The American Civil War

Southerners: The War for States’ Rights

Deep Southerners: The War of Northern Aggression

Deep Deep Rednecks: North 1, South 0, HALFTIME!

Even if that’s true (just assuming you’re correct for now), wouldn’t the effect on the industry overwhelm whatever savings? Sure, if you focus just on the deficit, maybe, but there are a lot of jobs in health insurance/administration/etc. Those people would be unemployed, or (WAY more generously) need to be retrained and transferred to other jobs. Plus there would likely be massive legal challenges, especially around all the religious hospitals, which are often the only care in an area, and working through that would cost billions.

I’m very pro-single payer/socialized healthcare in the US, but I do wonder what a transition would look like. If tomorrow, Congress passed (lol) a bill for socialized medicine (lolol) and was willing to pay whatever it took (lololololol), I bet we would increase the deficit significantly during the transition, which would be maybe 5-10 years. By the time we made that back from efficiency savings, it might be more like 30+ years. Wonder if there’s a model or white paper of that.

I’m skeptical that cost overall is a good argument in favor of single payer, at least in the short/medium term. Now, that’s the fault of the current private healthcare industry, not the fault of socialized medicine. My strongest argument is in terms of a human right to health, and an improvement to civilized society.