Is that what Indiana is known for ?
The interview ?
Ba*ZingGoP ! ?
* caption added
[Or irony of whosure state ?]
Showing posts with label Law. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Law. Show all posts
Wednesday, April 01, 2015
Wednesday, July 30, 2014
Where does this fit?
Two Congresses less than one "do nothing"? RMS*
-/-
Congress sues the president for not implementing a law they wanted to dismantle.
They didn't want the mandate, but they wanted it now.
Proof of the Rove strategy, it's political.
They don't want to impeach because Democrats would want to run against that.
They want him to not follow due process for the border crises that is a result of a law they passed.
But proof that it is not political, that's the ticket.
It is not political because they are sticking up for the process exactly on a law that they don't want to process. Which is exactly why the congress is so popular and the president only relatively so.
It's political, and it's not political, but the people need to decide which political non-political game they want congress to play.
DEVO?*
Where does what fit?
*also V insert 7-31-14
-/-
Congress sues the president for not implementing a law they wanted to dismantle.
They didn't want the mandate, but they wanted it now.
Proof of the Rove strategy, it's political.
They don't want to impeach because Democrats would want to run against that.
They want him to not follow due process for the border crises that is a result of a law they passed.
But proof that it is not political, that's the ticket.
It is not political because they are sticking up for the process exactly on a law that they don't want to process. Which is exactly why the congress is so popular and the president only relatively so.
It's political, and it's not political, but the people need to decide which political non-political game they want congress to play.
DEVO?*
Where does what fit?
*also V insert 7-31-14
Wednesday, March 30, 2011
RIGHT TO LIFE?
Friday, May 07, 2010
Hierarchy of Hypocrisy
Hating to generalize I note my potential logical fallacy in the following. Nevertheless, between the 2nd amendment and the 14th amendment, there seems a hierarchy for some. From Right to Bear Arms to Citizenship Rights where does the 1st amendment fit in? (*)
A. There is no hierarchy in constitutional amendments.
B. There are Supreme Court rulings that influence their dynamics.
C. So many blogs are moot points. (GOTO 1st sentence)
Of course maybe my posts are just moot or problematic. Problematic in generalizing and leaping. Unfortunately you must read, to decide. In generalizing there may be some association between the authors of certain events but not necessarily relevant. In the above case I simply point to fact that removal of citizenship is being considered for some but not their guns, while free speech is an element that might be fringe but relative. Meanwhile in an earlier and adjacent thought, some of this new found legislative fury seem like WMD.** Weapons of Mass Distraction. It would seem that all this populist rancor is really keeping Homeland Securiy busy. And while I support all rights reasonably used, I cannot help but feel that it really is a burden on our security. A bit more responsible reporting and responsible associating might help, but then how one goes about that...almost makes me long for a unitary executive. BTW: the dot, dot, dot was a rhetorical segue or moot question.
My potential obtuseness was not an attempt to be excedingly careful***, yet the cause and effect might be anachronistic(i.e. flip-flopped). The links to previous word choices were not intentionally designed to be more than a search for my previous usage, but they do seem to bring up some previous associations which show the importance of the process and progress, not to mention providing hope.
(*) an alternative link.
(**) not that early: My first referencing of Weapon of Mass Distraction.
(***) but maybe an antidote to some talk show hosts that muddle the search for terrorist
[Oh, and I do not vouch for the legal analysis or terminology in my ABC's. And had not intended to close with the SCOTUS link when I set out. Let alone the less than inflammable association with security. But it does seem that it is wierd that flammable and moot have similar usage issues as does the roots or branches of Faust, let alone Devil's Advocates. But no, that is the legal process, not to mention political, and word and world modifying dynamics, or as I have stumbled out(or coined) "dymanics". I will conclude with the issue that there was some Beckian confusion in the topic of a National Prayer Day in regard to what was canceled and what is being fought and by whom. But the ideas which Thom Hartmann yesterday contrasted was a National Day of Reason to share and balance the National Day of Prayer. While I suggested a National Day of Faith. But would that be legal? Not without debate, moot and inflammable or not.]
A. There is no hierarchy in constitutional amendments.
B. There are Supreme Court rulings that influence their dynamics.
C. So many blogs are moot points. (GOTO 1st sentence)
Of course maybe my posts are just moot or problematic. Problematic in generalizing and leaping. Unfortunately you must read, to decide. In generalizing there may be some association between the authors of certain events but not necessarily relevant. In the above case I simply point to fact that removal of citizenship is being considered for some but not their guns, while free speech is an element that might be fringe but relative. Meanwhile in an earlier and adjacent thought, some of this new found legislative fury seem like WMD.** Weapons of Mass Distraction. It would seem that all this populist rancor is really keeping Homeland Securiy busy. And while I support all rights reasonably used, I cannot help but feel that it really is a burden on our security. A bit more responsible reporting and responsible associating might help, but then how one goes about that...almost makes me long for a unitary executive. BTW: the dot, dot, dot was a rhetorical segue or moot question.
My potential obtuseness was not an attempt to be excedingly careful***, yet the cause and effect might be anachronistic(i.e. flip-flopped). The links to previous word choices were not intentionally designed to be more than a search for my previous usage, but they do seem to bring up some previous associations which show the importance of the process and progress, not to mention providing hope.
(*) an alternative link.
(**) not that early: My first referencing of Weapon of Mass Distraction.
(***) but maybe an antidote to some talk show hosts that muddle the search for terrorist
[Oh, and I do not vouch for the legal analysis or terminology in my ABC's. And had not intended to close with the SCOTUS link when I set out. Let alone the less than inflammable association with security. But it does seem that it is wierd that flammable and moot have similar usage issues as does the roots or branches of Faust, let alone Devil's Advocates. But no, that is the legal process, not to mention political, and word and world modifying dynamics, or as I have stumbled out(or coined) "dymanics". I will conclude with the issue that there was some Beckian confusion in the topic of a National Prayer Day in regard to what was canceled and what is being fought and by whom. But the ideas which Thom Hartmann yesterday contrasted was a National Day of Reason to share and balance the National Day of Prayer. While I suggested a National Day of Faith. But would that be legal? Not without debate, moot and inflammable or not.]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)