OlDawg

Can’t post it as I don’t use X. But, saw a funny post from Jon Lovett. In a surprise twist, the Epstein files released the attorney general. lol

I thought both sides argued their cases pretty well. I didn’t agree with some of Wong’s assertions about ‘no foreign national’s children ever being citizens’ because she totally disregarded legal domicile, and WKA relied on domicile. But, domicile seemed to be a question among some of the Justices also. I wonder if SCOTUS tries to find a way to rule that an EO can’t address this question of citizenship without directly addressing constitutionality. Basically, they rule the EO unconstitutional, but don’t really totally close the quandary of the meaning of the 14th. They kind of punt, and hope it goes away for a while. I could see there being multiple decisions using different rationale on this one instead of just a majority and dissenting using similar stances.

6 month bids are at $72. Not the lows. But, certainly not the highs. With current efficiencies, $70's are a good medium between costs for the consumer and margins available for maintenance by the refiners. People forget they have to have room for maintenance. Most of our refineries have been running 110% for a long time with only 'band-aid' fixes. It's akin to running your car at max RPM's for 2-3 years, and never changing the oil. You know it's going down, and when it does, it will be for an extended time because the damage will be magnified. It used to be break even was in the $80's. But, our efficiencies have drastically dropped the number. *The 6 month bid number is global. The other numbers and comments are for the U.S.

Hopefully, he's correct. He is retired. So, not sure how he's getting his info.

What I thought was interesting were the basic arguments. Both advocates were arguing for original intent. They just disagreed on said intent. The real change was the implication. I found the typical sides somewhat reversed. The ACLU typically argues form a 'living Constitution' framework. They believe the interpretation should change with the times. Except, not in this case. In this case, Wong specifically stated that even if Congress voted 435-0 to modify citizenship, they shouldn't be allowed to because of her interpretation of the 14th. This is typically an originalist/textualist argument. The Solicitor General was arguing that times had changed, and the original intent was misinterpreted in earlier cases. So, he was basically arguing that the current times and events showed that the Framers of the 14th wouldn't have meant how it was being applied in the current interpretation. He was using current events to justify meaning, along with historical text and rulings. I just thought it struck me as almost a reversal of argument roles. I'm also surprised Sauer didn't hammer home the point that 'allegiance' also requires agreement from the people of the U.S. more than he did. It's not just a one-way street where the immigrant says they want to be here. The people of the U.S.--via immigration laws--have to say they're willing to accept their allegiance. Until immigration law changes by the People's will through their Representatives, illegal immigrants are just that--illegal, and not supposed to be here. Thus, their children shouldn't be here. If they want to come to the U.S. through legal channels, the People typically welcome with open arms.

Not really. He's using a group of posters on this forum as examples by inference. But, he knows who he's talking to, and so do they and everyone else. I thought the standard was "Do you want the younger viewers of this forum reading this?"

Temporary visitor = temporary allegiance ≠ permanent citizen. Oops... Maybe her wallet was born in Japan?

lol Yep. All different shores. Always joke the Navy taught me how to blow things up, so I got a degree to learn how to design and build stuff for a well-rounded curriculum. My brother did 13 as an ET aboard the Grayling (fast attack sub), and my son was the Senior Chief nuke tech on the Ronald Reagan for 13. (Dad flew helos in the Navy and Air Force for 4 years each.) My brother and son both got more useful skills for civvy life than I did. Funny thing is, I went in to be an ATC (AC) after Reagan fired them all. My dad taught me how to fly while crop dusting on the farm. He was also a private flight instructor at LP airport when we moved here. So, I thought it would be a cool job. But, after enlistment, I was told the schools were full. So, they looked at my background, my ASVAB was a 99 (twice because they thought I cheated the first time), saw I was a beach lifeguard, college swimmer, and "asked" to reclassify me. Of course, they hounded me for about 3 weeks to see if they could con me into the nuke program first. Had me standing straight guard duty to see if I would give in. I didn't. So Boom! I went from the air to the water. lol Had to give up diving when my son was born. Wife told me I could only have one dangerous hobby. I chose motorcycles. I’d been riding since I was young, and enjoy the freedom. Still ride when I can. She used to ride along before her Parkinson’s Plus. We used to have a lot of fun taking short weekend trips here and there.

Better 1/2 and I saw Fleet Week in Seattle in the 2010's. Pretty nice set up with the air show and everything over the water in the harbor. I was never assigned a ship. I think my old rate is now an ND. At least I saw that somewhere a few years ago. So, I never participated while serving. I was 'galavanting' other places most of the time anyway. lol

Actual transcript from SCOTUS oral arguments is out. [Hidden Content]

Better marketing to add a surcharge clause. Grab a blank contract template from one of the big boys. I’m sure they have the clause in their contracts. Just copy it, and add it to your contracts. Then, you can tell your customers you’re holding prices, but you have to add the surcharge because of current fuel costs. Easier on you and contract negotiations, and makes you seem like you’re willing to be helpful when most are in a bind. But, you still maintain your profit margin, and may even come out ahead without ‘raising prices’ if you set the surcharge with enough of a margin. Again…just me.

Then, the dirty harmonics from the diesel generators powering the chargers fries the electronics on the big rigs, and we're now running a shortage of Macks. Of course, Mack trucks are actually owned by Volvo, and we've made the Swedes angry somehow, so they'll be upping the prices. We could hire more truckers to help offset some cost. But, they can't speak or read English.

They’re still in the development stage for trucking companies. Need more dirty power to replace the dirty diesel. No constant 60 Hz for them. They be bad boys.

Remember the 9 Scariest Words.

Just be proud of those 1,000 imaginary EV chargers you helped build to help with your fuel costs.