Moderators: LyricalRico, nate33, montestewart
Zonkerbl wrote:Quote the Bible all you want. I will throw down with you over any topic, any source. You feel bad because I threw the Bible back in your face? YOU SHOULD.
Go back and read the Bible more carefully and maybe you won't get your rhetorical butt kicked next time.
Zonkerbl wrote:Quote the Bible all you want. I will throw down with you over any topic, any source. You feel bad because I threw the Bible back in your face? YOU SHOULD.
Go back and read the Bible more carefully and maybe you won't get your rhetorical butt kicked next time.
TheSecretWeapon wrote:I can't speak for zonker, but I'm fine with folks quoting from the Bible. I do find it interesting how often those quotes are used to condemn people for certain behaviors vs. stuff Jesus preached about loving, forgiving, not judging, etc.
dckingsfan wrote:At the heart of a ruling is a finding that the president laid down a blanket rule that confers benefits; he did not merely announce a decision to refrain from enforcement on a case-by-case basis. The court found: “DAPA modifies substantive rights and interests—conferring lawful presence on 500,000 illegal aliens in Texas forces the state to choose between spending millions of dollars to subsidize driver’s licenses and changing its law.” In rebuking the administration and adhering to a nationwide injunction, the court affirms critics’ argument that the president overstepped his legal authority. It is a victory for the rule of law and executive restraint. “I think it is unlikely that five justices of the Supreme Court will lift the stay and allow the administration to proceed prior to the district court’s final ruling on the merits,” Gaziano says. “Thus, it is quite possible the DAPA program will remain enjoined for the remainder of Obama’s presidency.”
nate33 wrote:dckingsfan wrote:At the heart of a ruling is a finding that the president laid down a blanket rule that confers benefits; he did not merely announce a decision to refrain from enforcement on a case-by-case basis. The court found: “DAPA modifies substantive rights and interests—conferring lawful presence on 500,000 illegal aliens in Texas forces the state to choose between spending millions of dollars to subsidize driver’s licenses and changing its law.” In rebuking the administration and adhering to a nationwide injunction, the court affirms critics’ argument that the president overstepped his legal authority. It is a victory for the rule of law and executive restraint. “I think it is unlikely that five justices of the Supreme Court will lift the stay and allow the administration to proceed prior to the district court’s final ruling on the merits,” Gaziano says. “Thus, it is quite possible the DAPA program will remain enjoined for the remainder of Obama’s presidency.”
Hooray for a judge with some actual courage!
popper wrote:I read more and more that if Bloomberg enters the race he would give Hillary one hell of a fight, and if he defeats her, stand a good chance of becoming the next President. It would make the Democratic primary much more interesting to follow.
DCZards wrote:I'm fine with folks quoting the Bible, the Quran, the Bhagavad Gita or whatever scripture they believe in. Because the essential message of all of them is our Oneness.
dobrojim wrote:Google history unfolding kristol on Iraq.
No one, ever, under any circumstances, should give any authority or credence to anything this man says. He's correct less often than the proverbial broken clock.
nate33 wrote:dobrojim wrote:Google history unfolding kristol on Iraq.
No one, ever, under any circumstances, should give any authority or credence to anything this man says. He's correct less often than the proverbial broken clock.
I don't know how that man became associated with conservatives. There's nothing conservative about him.
Zonkerbl wrote:Is this an infringement on free speech? Or an important lesson in consequences for a college student?
http://www.npr.org/2015/06/02/411186666 ... ution-laws
TL;DR - An oil pipeline protester/college student locks himself to a truck, preventing progress in oil pipeline construction. Fire department comes and cuts him loose - he holds up the pipeline construction for 90 minutes. Is charged with trespassing, but also fined by the amount of value of all the business he held up while protesting.
When I first heard this I was furious, but on the other hand I think there are more productive channels. Shutting down a construction business that's just trying to do their jobs is just mean spirited. Unless those guys are actively spilling oil everywhere you might be better off trying to contribute to lobbying efforts to tighten oil pipeline regulations.
OTOH I come from a long line of Communist hippies who used to chain themselves to nuclear reactors, and I protest that this hallowed tradition is being shot down by dirty capitalists in tophats.
Zonkerbl wrote:Just had a talk from Ricardo Hausman about "networks" the other day and how each person's productivity is determined not just by their level of education but their access to networks of people who can do stuff they can't.
Kind of leads to uncomfortable questions, like, is the best way to reduce poverty is try to increase a certain poor villages access to the outside world? Or move as many people in that village out to where there are more networks? You almost inevitably have to conclude the latter.
Which is something I knew already. The development story for the last hundred years has been, poor people moved to the city where the jobs are. In countries where cities were generating high skilled jobs, poverty has decreased.
Most development projects in rural areas are a complete waste of time. The only one that makes sense is land reform, which makes it easier to sell your land and use that money to move to the city.
Zonkerbl wrote:Is this an infringement on free speech? Or an important lesson in consequences for a college student?
http://www.npr.org/2015/06/02/411186666 ... ution-laws
TL;DR - An oil pipeline protester/college student locks himself to a truck, preventing progress in oil pipeline construction. Fire department comes and cuts him loose - he holds up the pipeline construction for 90 minutes. Is charged with trespassing, but also fined by the amount of value of all the business he held up while protesting.
When I first heard this I was furious, but on the other hand I think there are more productive channels. Shutting down a construction business that's just trying to do their jobs is just mean spirited. Unless those guys are actively spilling oil everywhere you might be better off trying to contribute to lobbying efforts to tighten oil pipeline regulations.
OTOH I come from a long line of Communist hippies who used to chain themselves to nuclear reactors, and I protest that this hallowed tradition is being shot down by dirty capitalists in tophats.