brenthutch
-
Content
11,005 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
37 -
Feedback
0%
Everything posted by brenthutch
-
Did I ever say it was?
-
Given the scope of the ruling I felt it was self evident. Clearly there is a need, on this forum, to spell out the obvious.
-
And North Carolina. To be perfectly clear, I said “strikes a blow” not eliminated all together
-
I was referring to Harvard’s system of discrimination based upon race.
-
Facts don’t care about feelings https://rollcall.com/2020/10/15/if-you-dont-like-the-supreme-court-blame-harry-reid/
-
If you guys focused a bid more on intellect and a bit less on emotion you wouldn’t get so butt-hurt when the world doesn’t revolve around your feels.
-
No Joe, you have it backwards, the SC protected individual rights and freedom of expression. Using your AR-15 analogy….If a state passed a law requiring every household to own an AR-15 and owning a gun was against your religion, should you still be compelled to do so despite your deeply held religious beliefs? The SC said no, you shouldn’t have to. Moving on to Student Loan Forgiveness. This one isn’t even close. Even Nancy Pelosi said Biden couldn’t do it. The power of the purse resides in the legislative branch not the executive. If the Ds thought it was a good idea they could have done it when they controlled both chambers. Loan forgiveness was just a cynical carrot to be dangled in the faces of the uninformed just prior to an election to buy votes with false hopes. Moving on to Harvard’s systemic race based discrimination…do I even need to say more? The SC upheld the ideals of MLK for a colorblind society, something the left used to support.
-
Joe said group, not protected group. You are either being lazy, tired or drunk, either way get some sleep. The world has a big celebration tomorrow
-
First of all you answered a question with another question. Second you asked me how many Imams I new…not how many are on a google search. Try again
-
Should a Jewish printer be compelled to print flyers for a Nazi rally?
-
All of them but that is not the point now is it? If they refused on religious grounds should the state compel them do do so anyway? “Your go-to moves are to play dumb and then, if presented with a direct question, you point out a squirrel/deflection…”
-
If you don’t like it you can always move back.
-
So how about compelling an Imam to perform a gay wedding?
-
Just like butchering a pig is no different than butchering a lamb. Or making a halal butcher process non-halal chicken. It takes exactly the same resources/work/butchering as a halal chicken. But you know that and you are just being obtuse.
-
Or a bunch of gay people wanted a gay themed website and the web designer did not sell gay themed websites anymore than a paint store sells sushi.
-
What if the pigs were brought to the kosher butcher, and he was the only butcher around? Do his religious beliefs outweigh the needs of the red necks (or Nazis) to enjoy tasty ribs and some tantalizing pulled pork?
-
How about if a bunch of red necks demanded of that Kosher butcher to prepare a bunch of hogs for their barbecue?
-
What in particular has you guys so hysterical? Student loans? That was a massive overreach by the executive, widely viewed as unconstitutional. Religious liberty? It’s enshrined in the first amendment, pretty straightforward. Systemic race based discrimination? Obviously a violation of the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment. Some of you folks are going on about gay marriage and interracial relationships. I saw nothing of the sort. So what gives?
-
What does any of that have to do with stopping Biden’s student loan forgiveness scheme or ending systemic race base discrimination?
-
Two words…. moral hazard
-
Seems my cause is doing just fine #winning
-
So it was worse sixty years ago when Democrats were in charge?
-
Article II, section 2 of the U.S. Constitution, gives the Senate the responsibility to advise the president about nominees and the authority to consent to (approve or reject) those nominations. “U.S. President Barack Obama nominated over 400 individuals for federal judgeships during his presidency. Of these nominations, Congress confirmed 329 judgeships, 173 during the 111th & 112th Congresses[1] and 156 during the 113th and 114th Congresses.[2]” So it looks like Republicans approved the vast majority of Obama’s nominees, rejecting only far-left radical zealots.
-
https://rollcall.com/2020/10/15/if-you-dont-like-the-supreme-court-blame-harry-reid/ Eight years later in 2013, it would be Harry Reid and a Democratic majority that would do away with the filibuster for executive branch appointments and judicial nominations, with the exception of the Supreme Court. Despite warnings from the minority that it was a decision they would live to regret, Reid and the Democrats deployed the nuclear option anyway. Their day of reckoning came on Jan. 20, 2017, with a Republican president and Senate in control of judicial nominations. For the past four years, President Donald Trump and Republicans have done their constitutional duty in nominating and confirming federal judges, including now three Supreme Court nominations. But don’t blame Trump or Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell. Blame Harry Reid who put politics ahead of principle and opened the door for Justices Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and soon Amy Coney Barrett. just like I said
-
A distinction without a difference, the Ds changed what they needed to get what they wanted. They eliminated the filibuster for judicial nominees despite being warned of the consequences. They ignored the advice and suffered accordingly.
