All Activity

It was 6/3, I'm pretty sure. While I don't really like the outcome, I believe it was the correct ruling based on Constitutional law.

It's hard to disagree with that statement. There are two things you can do: Live with it or change it. The votes aren't there to change it, so....

I can break it down in one acronym "TDS". It was a 5/4 decision and one of those in the majority cannot define what a woman is. There is no telling how many terrorist will come back as an adult and us citizen and get away with an attack.

My youngest grandson may change your mind. I mean he's 3, but he's a bad 3. Lmao.

That Jasper vs WOS game will be insane.

OK, help me out here. You applauded tis decision. But you apparently understand that it was strictly for the slaves. How is this relevant now? The problem for America is the unintended consequences that has happened and will continue to happen. These are not good for America. So, explain why you think bad unintended consequences for America is good!

I was commenting on some of your other sentences... "For clarification: schools run a background check from the DPS database. If that comes back "clear", the school check references. Former employers are only technically allowed to provide 1. dates of employment 2. eligible for rehire yes/no 3. they may also provide safety info for DOT sensitive positions. Anything beyond the above listed information can expose the former employer to legal trouble." And my comment was they are ok to provide any factual information as long as the prospect signed a release and it is truthful and non-inflammatory. Your limitation of only 3 things that an employer can "technically" provide is incorrect. I've tested it in court. A few times...

Wouldn’t find me betting against you.

100% - my guess is he retires under a Democrat President

Incidentally, this is the second very major decision Roberts has been a disappointment on IMHO. First, he twisted like a contortionist to make sure Obamacare was considered legal, and allowed to be implemented. Now, he fails to see the functional flaws in this decision. Two decisions that have the greatest impact on every single person on U.S. soil or territory--legal, transient, illegal or not--he has shown himself to be anything BUT a conservative. They are probably the two biggest decisions from the SCOTUS during his tenure. The only one comparable would be Roe v Wade overturned.

They might not score on us again this year 😁🙃

How do the Bobcats look this year?

Yep. I'd enjoy hearing some insight after listening to the BU coach interview with Stepp. He seemed like he has the temperament to really help the program over there.

What happened to your "The Constitution is a living document, and changes with the times" argument? (That was one of the funniest things to me. Liberal/Progressives--who typically argue the Constitution is a living document--wanted to maintain an originalist stance, and vice versa for the originalist/textualists. The typical stances were almost flipped.) This was never going to fly as an EO, and it shouldn't be handled in that manner. Too important a question, and it should require a high bar to change. The arguments were fascinating. I think they opened a lot of people's eyes to issues they hadn't thought about. I don't agree with the interpretation. But, the--basically 5 to 4--decision shows it was a question that needed to be addressed. The Administration made a mistake in trying to push it through an EO. If they'd passed something through Congress, it may have been a different outcome. By going the EO route, they basically sealed the outcome from the start. Now, the SCOTUS ruling has made it all but impossible to change. Immigration, Visa, and entry laws can be addressed, but, they--and the enforcement--will change with Admins. It will be a similar issue to if it was addressed via an EO. The Administration DID receive a win for immigration control by being able to deny entry asylum unless on our soil. But, it will just mean illegal entry will try to pick up again. They also won on the issue of Temporary Protected Status actually being 'Temporary.' Maybe there can be a way to limit certain benefits going to underage citizens of illegal immigrants/students/temporary visitors that wouldn't rely on the citizenship question of the minor, since that's a major way illegal immigrants are receiving benefits they aren't due, and is the main draw for illegal immigration.

Well spoken young man.

Falcon needs to jump on over to the political forum. They'd fit right in.

🍿

I’m gonna keep posting these clips because they make me realize how we, as Americans, take things for granted. We don’t appreciate how good we have it. Even with inflation and high gas prices, Europeans are so impressed with A/C everywhere, variety in our grocery stores, the size of our retail outlets, portions served in restaurants, and our hospitality. To put it in a nutshell….Americans are spoiled.

If Jasper beats WOS…I wonder how long until a special board meeting is called…

Wow! Was my go to stop when in Livingston. Now will have to find a different spot.

I'm making sure I will be on the sidelines for this one. Can't wait.

Because people didn't know what to do with slaves after they were freed. 80 years before, the enslaved were not free.