Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Why do people confuse and conflate multi-ethnic/multi-racial with multiculturalism? The demographic groups the parties chase are not from some alien and separate cultures. The phrase 'culture wars' may help feed the confusion, but we all share an American culture, but with differencing social values.The Republicans are a slightly built man trying to hold up a bus. And how it is weighing down on them. Everything is coalescing into a perfect storm against them. They've shown their hand, they will no longer follow the Constitution as their political party is now their god.
Unfortunately demographics in the nation are about to render them irrelevant in national elections. So we endure this last round of childish tantrums from them and then off to the woodshed. Then off to military boarding school where no one will hear form them again.
Lets hear it for multiculturalism huh? I believe both liberals and conservatives will rue the day the minority becomes the majority. Then we'll all be one big Detroit.
The Republicans are a slightly built man trying to hold up a bus. And how it is weighing down on them. Everything is coalescing into a perfect storm against them. They've shown their hand, they will no longer follow the Constitution as their political party is now their god.
Unfortunately demographics in the nation are about to render them irrelevant in national elections. So we endure this last round of childish tantrums from them and then off to the woodshed. Then off to military boarding school where no one will hear form them again.
Lets hear it for multiculturalism huh? I believe both liberals and conservatives will rue the day the minority becomes the majority. Then we'll all be one big Detroit.
thanx for the video link. I may have seen it before, but it looks like a new look at it would be funconsequence and purpose as a means of legal interpretation is a relatively new invention and affords a wide latitude of bias and subjectivity when interpreting the law.
The Republicans are a slightly built man trying to hold up a bus. And how it is weighing down on them. Everything is coalescing into a perfect storm against them. They've shown their hand, they will no longer follow the Constitution as their political party is now their god.
Unfortunately demographics in the nation are about to render them irrelevant in national elections. So we endure this last round of childish tantrums from them and then off to the woodshed. Then off to military boarding school where no one will hear form them again.
Lets hear it for multiculturalism huh? I believe both liberals and conservatives will rue the day the minority becomes the majority. Then we'll all be one big Detroit.
American itself already is the melting pot. Comparing a nation to a city is a fallacy. The economy of a city is far less diverse than the economy of a country.
But cons love their one off fallacies that 'appear' to be reasonable. Con-talk-radio is built on the lie that if you can find one fallacious example that 'appears' to debunk someone else argument, then you have debunked it.
In reality, not by a million miles.
Did anyone voice a protest? I am sure I heard somebody did, but so what? It was accepted as a fait accompliIn the 1800 election, Thomas Jefferson defeated then-president John Adams.
A month before Jefferson was to take office, a Supreme Court vacancy opened up.
Adams nominated someone, and his nominee was quickly voted on.
So, the actions of the Founders make it very clear what they believed was supposed to happen in cases such as we face now.
thanx for the video link. I may have seen it before, but it looks like a new look at it would be funconsequence and purpose as a means of legal interpretation is a relatively new invention and affords a wide latitude of bias and subjectivity when interpreting the law.
I see no reason why a fresh new look at the law would be troubling. Here is one side of an argument on an interesting subject, specific to patent law
Yet despite these routine pronouncements by courts that they are rigidly adhering to claim text, it still seems that claim scope is wildly unpredictable. If one looks to the Federal Circuit, that court can apparently read the same text to reach almost any outcome. The court has held that the word “a” means “one or more,”31 and it has also held that it means “only one.”32 It has held the word “plurality” to mean “more than one,”33 and it has also held the word to mean “one.”34 It has held that using the word “normal” limits a claim to technology in common use at the time of patent filing,35while using the word “regular” does not.36 The list of inconsistencies and contradictions goes on. - The Interpretation-Construction Distinction in Patent Law
thanx for the video link. I may have seen it before, but it looks like a new look at it would be funconsequence and purpose as a means of legal interpretation is a relatively new invention and affords a wide latitude of bias and subjectivity when interpreting the law.
I see no reason why a fresh new look at the law would be troubling. Here is one side of an argument on an interesting subject, specific to patent law
Yet despite these routine pronouncements by courts that they are rigidly adhering to claim text, it still seems that claim scope is wildly unpredictable. If one looks to the Federal Circuit, that court can apparently read the same text to reach almost any outcome. The court has held that the word “a” means “one or more,”31 and it has also held that it means “only one.”32 It has held the word “plurality” to mean “more than one,”33 and it has also held the word to mean “one.”34 It has held that using the word “normal” limits a claim to technology in common use at the time of patent filing,35while using the word “regular” does not.36 The list of inconsistencies and contradictions goes on. - The Interpretation-Construction Distinction in Patent Law
No, I'm looking for indicators, not guarantees.
No they wouldn'tYa gotta love this headline. Senate is back from Spring Break (you mean they were doing anything before that) and all set to not do a single thing about a huge number of things.
Especially to pay attention to Obama's choice of someone to fill the vacant seat on the Supreme Court.
Read full story @ The Senate Will Not Confirm Merrick Garland
This should surprise no one. For one it's an election year. Second, if the roles were reversed the Dems would be doing the same thing. What other faux outrage are we going to drum up next?
Many people including Senator Kennedy did not forget that Bork did what others refused to do -- fire Archibald Cox. Of course, later on people would say Cox was going to resign after firing Cox. How convenient.Indeed he was "Borked." It was immediately after Bork...
again, you are misusing the term, multiculturalismThe Republicans are a slightly built man trying to hold up a bus. And how it is weighing down on them. Everything is coalescing into a perfect storm against them. They've shown their hand, they will no longer follow the Constitution as their political party is now their god.
Unfortunately demographics in the nation are about to render them irrelevant in national elections. So we endure this last round of childish tantrums from them and then off to the woodshed. Then off to military boarding school where no one will hear form them again.
Lets hear it for multiculturalism huh? I believe both liberals and conservatives will rue the day the minority becomes the majority. Then we'll all be one big Detroit.
No they wouldn'tYa gotta love this headline. Senate is back from Spring Break (you mean they were doing anything before that) and all set to not do a single thing about a huge number of things.
Especially to pay attention to Obama's choice of someone to fill the vacant seat on the Supreme Court.
Read full story @ The Senate Will Not Confirm Merrick Garland
This should surprise no one. For one it's an election year. Second, if the roles were reversed the Dems would be doing the same thing. What other faux outrage are we going to drum up next?
Dems have never refused to consider a Supreme Court nominee and have suported numerous ultra conservative judges like Scalia, Thomas and Alito
again, you are misusing the term, multiculturalismThe Republicans are a slightly built man trying to hold up a bus. And how it is weighing down on them. Everything is coalescing into a perfect storm against them. They've shown their hand, they will no longer follow the Constitution as their political party is now their god.
Unfortunately demographics in the nation are about to render them irrelevant in national elections. So we endure this last round of childish tantrums from them and then off to the woodshed. Then off to military boarding school where no one will hear form them again.
Lets hear it for multiculturalism huh? I believe both liberals and conservatives will rue the day the minority becomes the majority. Then we'll all be one big Detroit.
The Republicans are a slightly built man trying to hold up a bus. And how it is weighing down on them. Everything is coalescing into a perfect storm against them. They've shown their hand, they will no longer follow the Constitution as their political party is now their god.
Unfortunately demographics in the nation are about to render them irrelevant in national elections. So we endure this last round of childish tantrums from them and then off to the woodshed. Then off to military boarding school where no one will hear form them again.
Lets hear it for multiculturalism huh? I believe both liberals and conservatives will rue the day the minority becomes the majority. Then we'll all be one big Detroit.
American itself already is the melting pot. Comparing a nation to a city is a fallacy. The economy of a city is far less diverse than the economy of a country.
But cons love their one off fallacies that 'appear' to be reasonable. Con-talk-radio is built on the lie that if you can find one fallacious example that 'appears' to debunk someone else argument, then you have debunked it.
In reality, not by a million miles.
A melting pot? Perhaps, but the melting pot is the exception for certain cultures, not the rule for all. Culture matters and there are many cultures in the U.S., some which have been here for hundreds of years that are distinctly different than the majority culture and act in a distinctly different way. For example, black culture has gotten further away from the culture of the dominant group to the point of simply making up a culture of their own. One can argue that the more their culture becomes popularized the more we are all dragged down as a result. Melting in this direction would be a disaster indeed. And speaking of economies, blacks and Hispanics/Latinos are net takers of tax revenue, while whites and Asians are net payers. This is a fact. So Detroit, here we come.
Actually it hasn't beenNo they wouldn'tYa gotta love this headline. Senate is back from Spring Break (you mean they were doing anything before that) and all set to not do a single thing about a huge number of things.
Especially to pay attention to Obama's choice of someone to fill the vacant seat on the Supreme Court.
Read full story @ The Senate Will Not Confirm Merrick Garland
This should surprise no one. For one it's an election year. Second, if the roles were reversed the Dems would be doing the same thing. What other faux outrage are we going to drum up next?
Dems have never refused to consider a Supreme Court nominee and have suported numerous ultra conservative judges like Scalia, Thomas and Alito
Already addressed in this thread.
Why do people confuse and conflate multi-ethnic/multi-racial with multiculturalism? The demographic groups the parties chase are not from some alien and separate cultures. The phrase 'culture wars' may help feed the confusion, but we all share an American culture, but with differencing social values.The Republicans are a slightly built man trying to hold up a bus. And how it is weighing down on them. Everything is coalescing into a perfect storm against them. They've shown their hand, they will no longer follow the Constitution as their political party is now their god.
Unfortunately demographics in the nation are about to render them irrelevant in national elections. So we endure this last round of childish tantrums from them and then off to the woodshed. Then off to military boarding school where no one will hear form them again.
Lets hear it for multiculturalism huh? I believe both liberals and conservatives will rue the day the minority becomes the majority. Then we'll all be one big Detroit.
Many people including Senator Kennedy did not forget that Bork did what others refused to do -- fire Archibald Cox. Of course, later on people would say Cox was going to resign after firing Cox. How convenient.Indeed he was "Borked." It was immediately after Bork...
Wikipedia: Elliot Lee Richardson (July 20, 1920 – December 31, 1999) was an American lawyer and politician who was a member of the cabinet of Presidents Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford. As U.S. Attorney General, he was a prominent figure in the Watergate Scandal, and resigned rather than obey President Nixon's order to fire special prosecutor Archibald Cox.
In October 1973, after Richardson had served just five months as Attorney General, President Nixon ordered him to fire the top lawyer investigating the Watergate scandal, Special Prosecutor Archibald Cox. Richardson had promised Congress he would not interfere with the Special Prosecutor, and, rather than disobey the President or break his promise, he resigned. President Nixon subsequently asked Richardson's second-in-command, Deputy Attorney General William Ruckelshaus, to carry out the order. He too had promised to not interfere, and also tendered his resignation. The third in command, Solicitor GeneralRobert Bork, planned to resign after firing Cox, but Richardson persuaded him not to in order to ensure proper leadership at the Department of Justice during the crisis.[12] Bork carried out the President's order, thus completing the events generally referred to as the Saturday Night Massacre.
The Republicans are a slightly built man trying to hold up a bus. And how it is weighing down on them. Everything is coalescing into a perfect storm against them. They've shown their hand, they will no longer follow the Constitution as their political party is now their god.
Unfortunately demographics in the nation are about to render them irrelevant in national elections. So we endure this last round of childish tantrums from them and then off to the woodshed. Then off to military boarding school where no one will hear form them again.
Lets hear it for multiculturalism huh? I believe both liberals and conservatives will rue the day the minority becomes the majority. Then we'll all be one big Detroit.
American itself already is the melting pot. Comparing a nation to a city is a fallacy. The economy of a city is far less diverse than the economy of a country.
But cons love their one off fallacies that 'appear' to be reasonable. Con-talk-radio is built on the lie that if you can find one fallacious example that 'appears' to debunk someone else argument, then you have debunked it.
In reality, not by a million miles.
A melting pot? Perhaps, but the melting pot is the exception for certain cultures, not the rule for all. Culture matters and there are many cultures in the U.S., some which have been here for hundreds of years that are distinctly different than the majority culture and act in a distinctly different way. For example, black culture has gotten further away from the culture of the dominant group to the point of simply making up a culture of their own. One can argue that the more their culture becomes popularized the more we are all dragged down as a result. Melting in this direction would be a disaster indeed. And speaking of economies, blacks and Hispanics/Latinos are net takers of tax revenue, while whites and Asians are net payers. This is a fact. So Detroit, here we come.
You married a false meme. Enjoy the honeymoon.
In the 1800 election, Thomas Jefferson defeated then-president John Adams.
A month before Jefferson was to take office, a Supreme Court vacancy opened up.
Adams nominated someone, and his nominee was quickly voted on.
So, the actions of the Founders make it very clear what they believed was supposed to happen in cases such as we face now.
