tvc184

Well, we have you here to educate us! 🙄

I thought it would take about 3 days to move forward. It took 1. 😎

The long arm of the law…..

And I never suggested otherwise. I was commenting on “everyone else”. For some jobs, a 4 day week is just what the doctor ordered.

The case is not over however. This was not a final ruling but a temporary refusal to halt (injunction) Texas as the case moves forward.

For what it’s worth, I worked a 4 day week for 20 years. It made a lot more sense in my job with 24 hours of hourly and mandatory coverage however as there benefits to the public and very little to no detriment or extremely little. Unlike schools, no one had to schedule their time around my job.

Since they are salaried and not hourly, sure.

Beaumont is on fire. I was at my (retired from) department tonight and we were hearing about it a few hours ago. As far as I knew at the time, none seemed to be connected. Certainly information can change.

I listened to part of the oral arguments in front of the Supreme Court. This was from the opening statement (I think) by the NRA. Taking Petitioner's allegations as true, that is what Respondent did here. In the Lloyd's meeting, she explicitly threatened to bring an enforcement action against Lloyd's unless Lloyd's "ceased providing insurance to gun groups, especially the NRA." The claim is that Maria Vullo from the NY Department of Financial Services, with regulatory authority over insurance, companies and others, coerced the insurance companies to cut ties with insuring the NRA and others because Vullo didn’t like the NRA’s political speech. NY’s stance is that telling or suggesting that insurance companies cut their affiliations with those groups for purposes of “political speech”, is not against the First Amendment and free speech. Then to do so at the threat of possible regulatory actions against the insurance companies. Things that make you go hmmmm….. So a guy is standing on the sidewalk stating his political belief about some issue. A cop comes along and tells him, if you don’t stop giving your opinion, I’m going to find a reason to put you in jail. Now the officer has not stated a specific crime that you might have committed but he’s going to do his best effort to try to find a reason to put you in jail because he doesn’t like what you were saying. Is that coercion or just a suggestion which is what I drew from NY’s claim. Violation of free speech? Along comes Brown Jackson who is having a hard time determining if that is coercion or just giving a talk on the importance of reputation. Like a member of the government can say under the First Amendment, people should take more Omega-3 fatty acids (typically in fish) because it’s heart healthy. That would be free speech and the pork industry would not have free speech grounds to deny that statement from the government. Brown Jackson’s suggestion in the oral arguments was that even though you have regulatory authority over an industry, is it okay to just suggest that it’s in their best interest if they stop insuring a company because you don’t like their political speech? So her query was, is it really coercion to tell people that the government “might” take action against you if you don’t stop insuring people due to their political speech or is it really a person making a suggestion such as, we recommend you cut down your body mass index. I guess if she has a hard time defining a woman, she has an equally hard time with a government official threatening a person, but the other person should just take it as a well-being suggestion.

I wonder if the public had voiced concerns to the board members about the results or hardships of 4 days. I am assuming that the issue had to be brought up from somewhere for there to be that much interest. Obviously most employees would rather be off for 3 days instead of 2 but does that help the students or the parents? I have no clue but I don’t think it’s likely that this just floated down from the sky.

This thread has obviously run its course. It was about passing an immigration law but has skewed off into attacks and comments that have nothing to do with the topic.

There is no fallacy as it was a question. If I ask you do you like tacos or hamburgers better, that’s not a fallacy because they’re 1000s of other foods. Was Biden was chosen because of hundreds of other candidates weren’t as capable? Sorry but you don’t have hundreds to choose from.

All amendments do the same. The Sixth Amendment doesn’t grant us the right to an attorney, it denies the government the authority to stop you from obtaining counsel. The First Amendment doesn’t grant us freedom of religion, it denies the government the authority to force a belief. And so on….. I am a strong believer in the Second Amendment however it’s just like the others.

So does a leader of anything represent what you stand for? What do my family values have to do with a president or candidate? Jimmy Carter was probably one of the most down to Earth, decent and very religious leaders to ever hold the office and certainly in my lifetime. He led the country down the drain however and got kicked out by a landslide after one term. Which is better, a devout Christian who almost no one questions his sincerity and personal life but a horrible leader or a person who had some transgressions in his past but whose policies lead to prosperity? Neither stops me from nor leads me to my personal beliefs and values. Does the President, no matter who it is, affect yours?

If I was voting for a spiritual leader then none of them would get my vote. From JFK’s well known flings to Clinton's Oval Office affair that he was compelled to address on national television, to one time front runner to be the president in Democrat Gary Hart and so on, the Republicans hardly have a monopoly on infidelity. Trump’s accusation as far as I know happened well before he became president however the two Democratic presidents that I mentioned happened in their term and in the White House. I think I will look elsewhere for moral guidance other than the Democratic Party…. 🤣🤣🤣

The Great Switch Myth…. 🤣🤣🤣

You are probably correct… there are millions of Canadians pouring across the border in caravans but for some reason have gone unnoticed. I hear that Detroit and Seattle now have a huge homeless population because of all the White Canadians streaming into this country.

Looking at the KFDM photo, it’s actually almost at the back door of the station.

At least the police didn’t have to go far since it is half a block from the police station. They could have walked to the crime scene.

WRONG!! They are of an excellent design, I am sure paid for at a high engineering and consulting cost. These signs scream of success!! Seriously, if you are going to waste money on such an endeavor, that is the best they could come up with? On the order hand, maybe one of the big oil companies donated the money and it really has no bearing on the taxpayers. On the other hand is it any different than the money wasted on the Welkom To Nederland sign?

Maybe they would prefer unlawfuls.

Because millions of people aren’t crossing illegally. Would you pull thousands of agents off the southern border and send them to the Canadian border?

This bill would force the US to enforce their own law and detain illegal aliens who commit burglary (breaking and entering) and theft. The Democrat leader in the House said the Republicans were, “throwing together legislation that targets immigrants”. Immigrants? The Dems just laid their cards on the table and broadcast what try are trying to gain. People illegally enter the country and then commit a crime and the Democratic parties refers to them as immigrants, otherwise known as unregistered Democrats. Thirty-seven Democrats crossed the aisle and voted for this bill.

So where did Phelan’s $9 million come from, local donors? I can only find Covey with almost $1 million but I am still looking. I am assuming they some of these pages aren’t updated. You define radicals as anyone that you don’t agree with. I guess school choice is radical. It is certainly okay if you don’t like conservative politics but that doesn’t make them radicals. It only means that you lean left and don’t agree.

Feeling matter, results don’t…..