Thread: Olbermann suspended for campaign donations

Originally Posted by Fovezer

Yes, I know that. It doesn't change the fact that legislation needs to pass BOTH chambers, though. I think the House should be expanded to 600+ seats, too. They have the same representation in the Senate, and that is ridiculous and extremely undemocratic.

So let me get this straight. We have abroken stsyem full of blood sucking leeches and your answer is to put more into the mix? Yeah i dont think ill go with that but at least your giving what you think would help.

Originally Posted by hawgballs

Semantics. You use "the news agencies are using the word, so it must be correct" and I, as well as others, have pointed out the logic step by step how correct the statement "52% majority does not necessarily equate control of the Senate" truly is.......


Semantics - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary Just in case you don't know what semantics means.....

There is nothing semantic about it your just wrong. Why do you think the first defintion of control was looked over and the second posted?

1. manage: to exercise power or authority over something such as a business or nation

Yeah once again ill stick with the news agencies with how it was phrased.

Originally Posted by hawgballs

Semantics......... And you keep proving it.......

But just for shits or giggles, if the majority party can't get the legislation that they want passed, because there are 42 other guys holding it up, who is assering the "control"? The majority (58 ) or the minority (42)?

Now whos arguing symantics? Does the largest man always win the fight? No of course not. Control is a relative term and never applies 100% of the time. In this particular case it was used because going by numbers the dems kept control of the senate. In reality no one ever really has control in the sense your trying to reffer to.