The Right To Bear Arms

[danielpalos]

Just Standard, "right wing hate on the poor" in the Age of Corporate Welfare, right wingers? How charitable.

If you're poor because you choose not to work, there is a solution that doesn't require society to do anything at all. It requires effort from you, though, so many stoners living in their parents' basements and posting vacuous slogans online won't take it.

dude; you are simply resorting to right wing propaganda and rhetoric. our current president wants to make the rich richer and the poor, poorer, via Public Policy. You can't, "blame the poor", any more.

You don't have to take it from somebody else to make yourself successful… That's the fatal flaw with socialism.
Envy rules your sorry ass motherfuckers lives… LOL

our current president wants to make the rich richer and the poor, poorer, via Public Policy. You can't, "blame the poor", any more.

Robin Hood was a crook

A rich guy can "purchase" public office and "make himself richer while making the poor, poorer, is better?"

 

[danielpalos]

Says the letter of a federal Doctrine and State, statutory law?

Says the regulations of every state re unemployment benefits. Sorry.

If you had an example of a law supporting your claim to benefits, you'd have posted it by now.

A Conflict of Laws, you claim.

Should I ask California for an, Order to Show Cause; on why unequal protection of the law should be tolerated?

A Conflict of Laws, you claim.

Not at all. A conflict between your feeling of what the law should be and the reality of the actual law.

Should I ask California for an, Order to Show Cause; on why unequal protection of the law should be tolerated?

By all means. Be sure to post their mocking response to you.

The law is, employment at will. that means, employment at the will of either party. there can be no attainder to that legal concept.

The law is, employment at will.

Exactly. The law isn't UE benefits at will.

There is no basis to deny or disparage benefits on an at-will basis, but for, "right wing, political hate on the poor."

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Says the regulations of every state re unemployment benefits. Sorry.

If you had an example of a law supporting your claim to benefits, you'd have posted it by now.

A Conflict of Laws, you claim.

Should I ask California for an, Order to Show Cause; on why unequal protection of the law should be tolerated?

A Conflict of Laws, you claim.

Not at all. A conflict between your feeling of what the law should be and the reality of the actual law.

Should I ask California for an, Order to Show Cause; on why unequal protection of the law should be tolerated?

By all means. Be sure to post their mocking response to you.

The law is, employment at will. that means, employment at the will of either party. there can be no attainder to that legal concept.

The law is, employment at will.

Exactly. The law isn't UE benefits at will.

There is no basis to deny or disparage benefits on an at-will basis, but for, "right wing, political hate on the poor."

There is no basis to deny or disparage benefits on an at-will basis

Sure there is. UE isn't for quitters or never workers.

You have no state law or regulation that says it is, or you'd have posted it already.

 

[Rustic]

If you're poor because you choose not to work, there is a solution that doesn't require society to do anything at all. It requires effort from you, though, so many stoners living in their parents' basements and posting vacuous slogans online won't take it.

dude; you are simply resorting to right wing propaganda and rhetoric. our current president wants to make the rich richer and the poor, poorer, via Public Policy. You can't, "blame the poor", any more.

You don't have to take it from somebody else to make yourself successful… That's the fatal flaw with socialism.
Envy rules your sorry ass motherfuckers lives… LOL

our current president wants to make the rich richer and the poor, poorer, via Public Policy. You can't, "blame the poor", any more.

Robin Hood was a crook

A rich guy can "purchase" public office and "make himself richer while making the poor, poorer, is better?"

That sounds like an excuse, taking money from someone else never improves one's life. You don't need to take from the successful, make your own wealth.

 

[danielpalos]

A Conflict of Laws, you claim.

Should I ask California for an, Order to Show Cause; on why unequal protection of the law should be tolerated?

A Conflict of Laws, you claim.

Not at all. A conflict between your feeling of what the law should be and the reality of the actual law.

Should I ask California for an, Order to Show Cause; on why unequal protection of the law should be tolerated?

By all means. Be sure to post their mocking response to you.

The law is, employment at will. that means, employment at the will of either party. there can be no attainder to that legal concept.

The law is, employment at will.

Exactly. The law isn't UE benefits at will.

There is no basis to deny or disparage benefits on an at-will basis, but for, "right wing, political hate on the poor."

There is no basis to deny or disparage benefits on an at-will basis

Sure there is. UE isn't for quitters or never workers.

You have no state law or regulation that says it is, or you'd have posted it already.

Employment at will is defined by federal Doctrine in American law.

 

[danielpalos]

dude; you are simply resorting to right wing propaganda and rhetoric. our current president wants to make the rich richer and the poor, poorer, via Public Policy. You can't, "blame the poor", any more.

You don't have to take it from somebody else to make yourself successful… That's the fatal flaw with socialism.
Envy rules your sorry ass motherfuckers lives… LOL

our current president wants to make the rich richer and the poor, poorer, via Public Policy. You can't, "blame the poor", any more.

Robin Hood was a crook

A rich guy can "purchase" public office and "make himself richer while making the poor, poorer, is better?"

That sounds like an excuse, taking money from someone else never improves one's life. You don't need to take from the successful, make your own wealth.

Republicans plan massive cuts to programs for the poor

 

[Rustic]

You don't have to take it from somebody else to make yourself successful… That's the fatal flaw with socialism.
Envy rules your sorry ass motherfuckers lives… LOL

our current president wants to make the rich richer and the poor, poorer, via Public Policy. You can't, "blame the poor", any more.

Robin Hood was a crook

A rich guy can "purchase" public office and "make himself richer while making the poor, poorer, is better?"

That sounds like an excuse, taking money from someone else never improves one's life. You don't need to take from the successful, make your own wealth.

Republicans plan massive cuts to programs for the poor

Handouts have never made anyone's life better… Just visit an Indian reservation sometime. It makes life much worse

 

[Divine Wind]

Your Second Amendment rights are not unlimited....

Do you believe your rights are granted by the Constitution or that you have those rights and listing them in the Constitution is simply a means to limit government?

 

[danielpalos]

our current president wants to make the rich richer and the poor, poorer, via Public Policy. You can't, "blame the poor", any more.

Robin Hood was a crook

A rich guy can "purchase" public office and "make himself richer while making the poor, poorer, is better?"

That sounds like an excuse, taking money from someone else never improves one's life. You don't need to take from the successful, make your own wealth.

Republicans plan massive cuts to programs for the poor

Handouts have never made anyone's life better… Just visit an Indian reservation sometime. It makes life much worse

Private charity only covers multitudes of sins, not simple poverty. You confuse the issue. That is why I never take the right wing seriously about economics, but for, "twice a day".

 

[danielpalos]

Your Second Amendment rights are not unlimited....

Do you believe your rights are granted by the Constitution or that you have those rights and listing them in the Constitution is simply a means to limit government?

Our Second Amendment limits government.

 

[Rustic]

Currently the federal government does not work for us, we work for the federal government. They are spending all of our money…

 

[danielpalos]

Currently the federal government does not work for us, we work for the federal government. They are spending all of our money…

end the drug war, right wingers.

 

[Cellblock2429]

Yipper it's as obsolete as a muzzle loader imho.

/--- Libs also agree freedom of the press is obsolete since newspapers no longer use the Franklin printing press or crow quill pen. Shut her down.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[Cellblock2429]

Trying to live modern life according to the Constitution is much like trying to live modern life according to the Bible. Both are subject to vast interpretation.

/---- What year did the Bible become obsolete?


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[Rustic]

Robin Hood was a crook

A rich guy can "purchase" public office and "make himself richer while making the poor, poorer, is better?"

That sounds like an excuse, taking money from someone else never improves one's life. You don't need to take from the successful, make your own wealth.

Republicans plan massive cuts to programs for the poor

Handouts have never made anyone's life better… Just visit an Indian reservation sometime. It makes life much worse

Private charity only covers multitudes of sins, not simple poverty. You confuse the issue. That is why I never take the right wing seriously about economics, but for, "twice a day".

The federal government is not here to help… Optimally it's supposed to be not seen and not heard…

 

[Rustic]

Trying to live modern life according to the Constitution is much like trying to live modern life according to the Bible. Both are subject to vast interpretation.

/---- What year did the Bible become obsolete?


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

The Bible is a Christian thing they just don't understand… LOL

 

[P@triot]

A rich guy can "purchase" public office and "make himself richer while making the poor, poorer, is better?"

Snowflake, wealthy people cannot "purchase" a public office. They must run for office and they only way they can win is if they receive more votes. Hell, the last presidential election should have taught you that much. Hitlery tried like hell to purchase the White House and got her ass kicked.

http://nypost.com/2016/12/09/hillary-clintons-losing-campaign-cost-a-record-1-2b/

 

[P@triot]

There is no basis to deny or disparage benefits on an at-will basis, but for, "right wing, political hate on the poor."

There is no basis to even have government "benefits". Check the U.S. Constitution just once, snowflake.

This is why nobody takes the left seriously about politics, economics, current events, government, the U.S. Constitution, business, history, or facts.

 

[P@triot]

Employment at will is defined by federal Doctrine in American law.

Exactly, snowflake. However, benefits at will are not. Thanks for playing. You may go now.

 

[P@triot]

Private charity only covers multitudes of sins, not simple poverty.

1. That is simply not true. As usual, you were caught lying.

2. Even if that were true (and again, it's not) - so? Do you have a point? There is no such thing as a poverty-free nation. Stop being an immature idealist and study economics before commenting.

This is why nobody takes the left seriously about politics, economics, current events, government, the U.S. Constitution, business, history, or facts.