GeorgiaDon

His decisions and opinions written as a judge on the appellate court are what is now being used to evaluate how he would apply his legal philosophy on the supreme court. Surely even you can see how, when considering someone for promotion, you would look at how they have performed in their most recent position. It would be crazy (in a normal world, maybe not in Trumps) to disregard that. Does someone get promoted to general based on their performance as a sergeant, ignoring any evaluation of how they performed subsequently while moving through the officer's ranks? Don _____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

Here's a few more. I didn't bother to look them all up. The common thread in many of the items in Royreader's list is that they come from laws that require you to accurately describe the products you are selling. Apparently in Trumpland or Russia or wherever it's OK to sell counterfeit drugs and medical devices, pretend that prominent people have endorsed your product when they have not, and so on. 21 U.S. Code § 352 - Misbranded drugs and devices The law in question makes it a crime to sell misbranded or counterfeit drugs or medical devices, and stipulates information that must be included on the label. Apparently Royreader thinks selling unknown drugs or medical devices disguised as authentic products is just fine. Not his problem if your chemo drug is horse piss and you die of cancer, I suppose. I did not find any mention of "flatulence" or "gas". § 4.39 Prohibited practices. (a)Statements on labels.Containers of wine, or any label on such containers, or any individual covering, carton, or other wrapper of such container, or any written, printed, graphic, or other matter accompanying such container to the consumer shall not contain: (1) Any statement that is false or untrue in any particular, or that, irrespective of falsity, directly, or by ambiguity, omission, or inference, or by the addition of irrelevant, scientific or technical matter, tends to create a misleading impression. (2) Any statement that is disparaging of a competitor's products. (3) Any statement, design, device, or representation which is obscene or indecent. (4) Any statement, design, device, or representation of or relating to analyses, standards, or tests, irrespective of falsity, which the appropriate TTB officer finds to be likely to mislead the consumer. (5) Any statement, design, device or representation of or relating to any guarantee, irrespective of falsity, which the appropriate TTB officer finds to be likely to mislead the consumer. Money-back guarantees are not prohibited. (6) A trade or brand name that is the name of any living individual of public prominence, or existing private or public organization, ... if the use of such name or representation is likely falsely to lead the consumer to believe that the product has been endorsed, made, or used by, or produced for, or under the supervision of, or in accordance with the specifications of, such individual ... (7) Any statement, design, device, or representation (other than a statement of alcohol content in conformity with § 4.36), which tends to create the impression that a wine: (i) Contains distilled spirits; (ii) Is comparable to a distilled spirit; or (iii) Has intoxicating qualities. (9) Any word in the brand name or class and type designation which is the name of a distilled spirits product or which simulates, imitates, or created the impression that the wine so labeled is, or is similar to, any product customarily made with a distilled spirits base. Examples of such words are: “Manhattan,” “Martini,” and “Daquiri” in a class and type designation or brand name of a wine cocktail; “Cuba Libre,” “Zombie,” and “Collins” in a class and type designation or brand name of a wine specialty or wine highball; “creme,” “cream,” “de,” or “of” when used in conjunction with “menthe,” “mint,” or “cacao” in a class and type designation or a brand name of a mint or chocolate flavored wine specialty. Another one relating to a law requiring sellers to accurately label/not misrepresent food products they sell. Duh! I dealt with this one already. It's a crime to destroy public property including buildings, bridges, walls, and "lamps". Duh! (3)Golf and tennis; fees. No person may use golf or tennis facilities without paying the required fee, and in compliance with conditions approved by the Regional Director. Trespassing, intimidating, harassing or otherwise interfering with authorized golf players, or interfering with the play of tennis players is prohibited. I guess Royreader thinks golfers should welcome being assaulted? Also a crime for the pilot to be drunk. Why do we need laws against drunk pilots? Or drunk drivers for that matter? Damn interfering government, getting between a pilot and his booze. None of their business I say! Absolutely! If you are so stupid as to believe packages should actually contain the products listed on the label, or that prescription drugs will actually contain real medicine, or that your pilot is sober, you're a liberal fool! Get rid of all these laws and let the marketplace decide! We don't need no nanny state to protect us! These useless regulations just make it harder for dishonest folks to make a buck. Next thing you know, people will expect Trump steaks to contain actual meat! Don _____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

Clearly some regulations are "out of date", as are some laws, in that they pertain to situations that no longer are relevant. These are the usual source of those "hilarious" lists of stupid laws, such as the ones about not tying your horse to a street light on Sunday or whatever. It might be worthwhile going through the books and cleaning those up once in a while, but that is not entirely cost-free as legislatures may have to take time to pass legislation repealing old laws, and the statutes then have to be printed in x number of hard copies and distributed to courthouses/libraries etc. Sometimes it's more cost effective to just leave them be but don't enforce them. It's something else entirely to take a reasonable law or regulation, strip much of the text out of it, then invent an absurd scenario to apply the "abridged" law to, so as to make the law look ridiculous. That is a dishonest tactic used to discredit regulations or laws that are a "burden" to someone who doesn't care about the harm done by abandoning the law. An example would be Trump's absurd rant against regulations banning certain ozone-destroying chlorofluorocarbons because his buildings are so airtight his hairspray doesn't get out. Don _____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

Found it: §8103. Application of District of Columbia laws to public buildings and grounds (a) Application of Laws.-Laws and regulations of the District of Columbia for the protection of public or private property and the preservation of peace and order are extended to all public buildings and public grounds belonging to the Federal Government in the District of Columbia. (b) Penalties.-A person shall be fined under title 18, imprisoned for not more than six months, or both if the person- (1) is guilty of disorderly and unlawful conduct in or about those public buildings or public grounds; (2) willfully injures the buildings or shrubs; (3) pull downs, impairs, or otherwise injures any fence, wall, or other enclosure; (4) injures any sink, culvert, pipe, hydrant, cistern, lamp, or bridge; or (5) removes any stone, gravel, sand, or other property of the Government, or any other part of the public grounds or lots belonging to the Government in the District of Columbia. ( Pub. L. 107–217, Aug. 21, 2002, 116 Stat. 1205 .) source The term "injures" seems a bit antiquated, no doubt a consequence of the law dating to the laws origins in the 1890s. "Damage" would be the modern sense or the word. Apparently Royreader thinks it would be perfectly fine for people to damage or destroy public buildings, bridges, walls, etc. Only an over-zealous government could possibly object to someone taking a sledgehammer to, for example, the Lincoln Memorial. Don _____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

Yep. That's what happens when you refuse to do your job.The AG's job is not to be a syncophant for the president. If the AG believes an EO is unconstitutional or violates existing law, it is their job to speak up. The chaos over this EO could have been avoided had President Bannon put aside his dictatorial tenancies and consulted with the people in the Dept of State and the Dept of Justice first. Don _____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

Please provide evidence for this claim. Plenty of articles to choose from: https://www.bing.com/search?q=Obama+scrapped+immigrant+vetting+system&form=PRUSEN&mkt=en-us&httpsmsn=1&refig=a953a169fac54c78950bbe1020d9b901&sp=-1&pq=obama+scrapped+imm&sc=0-18&qs=n&sk=&cvid=a953a169fac54c78950bbe1020d9b901 However, I will say that Obama did not use the system the last so and so years, for however long I do not know. But he did scrap it in the last weeks to prevent Trump from using it.Your information is incorrect, and I can only suppose your sources distort reality out of recognition (in other words, lie) in order to inflame anti-immigrant passions. Obama suspended NSEERS, an obsolete system to register and track muslims only after they had been thoroughly vetted and admitted into the US. From the linked article: "By 2011, nearly a decade after the program was enacted, NSEERS had not resulted in a single terrorism conviction. The Department of Homeland Security determined in 2011 that the program was "redundant and did not provide any increase in security," Your statement that Obama scrapped and scrubbed the immigrant vetting system is a lie. He scrapped a system that required immigrants from predominantly muslim countries to register and be tracked after they had been thoroughly vetted prior to being issued visas. The system was a waste of money and effort as it never apprehended a single terrorist. Don _____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

In his acceptance speach at the Republican convention, Trump said America's streets would be safe again starting on day one of his administration. Not "safer", but "safe". I've been expecting him to declare martial law for a week now. Don _____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

It is a hiring freeze, not a "freeze on net new hiring". If people leave they are not replaced, the workload just gets shifted onto the people who are remaining. The problem with this is that it takes no account of the importance of the job, nor if the unit was understaffed already. For example the VA currently has 1,400 vacant positions. Somehow the VA is supposed to improve customer service and significantly reduce wait times, while working with 1,400 fewer people. Perhaps they will have to cut doctor visits to a maximum of 3 minutes? On another note, the President just signed an order to greatly accelerate environmental reviews for pipeline and other projects, and now he's signed an order barring the hiring of personnel needed to actually carry out those reviews. I'm reminded of a tactic used by the Harper government in Canada a few years ago to fast-track an oil pipeline across the Rockies and other mountain ranges. Every point where the pipeline crossed a river or salmon stream, hundreds of places in total, was supposed to get a separate environmental impact review. They mandated that the reviews be completed in an impossible time frame, stipulated that any reviews not completed in time would be taken as approval of the project, and then slashed the available staff to do the reviews by 1/3. Nice way to ram through a pipeline! Hiring freezes are the brainless way to cut payrolls, just as sequestration was the brainless way to reduce spending. The harder but more productive way is to decide what functions are necessary and fund those, getting rid of the less mission-critical functions. Of course that takes time, attention to detail, and it runs the risk that you might discover there is very little "fat" left to be trimmed. Don _____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

Unfortunately shallow, narrow, and short term is what we are going to get. Elections have consequences. I hope "the people" will not be so gullible next time. Don _____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

Donald Trump not happy about moving into government housing Be sure to scroll down and click on the video. Don _____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

He did say during the campaign that he would eliminate the EPA entirely. Then he walked that back a bit and said maybe they would keep a little tiny bit, but anything that is at all "burdensome" to industry has got to go. I think we should have all the power plants just pipe their waste into the various Trump hotels and other buildings. After all, Trump himself says they are so airtight nothing can get out to harm the environment. Don _____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

I did think of that, but there is only so much one can discuss in one post and mine are probably pushing the limit of what most SC participants care to read. Anyway I think you bring up a good point. There will be no market for all the efficiently produced goods and services the robots are generating if few people (except the ones who own the robotic factories) can afford them. Is there a way out of this conundrum? Don _____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

I think a point you are missing is that this thread started with an observation that technology is replacing humans at an extraordinary rate in an extremely wide range of jobs. Already we see that factories can operate with one person doing the work (in terms of production) that required 50 or more people back in the 1960s. A small fraction of the workforce that used to be employed in agriculture works in that field (so to speak) today, yet food production is greater than ever, because of mechanization. Now we see a big push for self-driving vehicles, financed by companies such as Uber and Google (amongst others). Why would such businesses be investing in this field? In the case of Uber it is because they visualize a not very distant future when they will not have to pay any human drivers. If things continue on their current track, within our lifetimes there will be no jobs driving vehicles of any kind, be it taxis, delivery/courier, long distance trucking, up to an likely including aircraft pilots. Even many jobs in highly skilled fields such as medicine will be filled by computers, with humans reduced to tasks that require manual dexterity such as giving injections. We are not talking about lazy people who do not want to work. We are talking about a rapidly approaching future where humans are not cost effective, where it will be cheaper for industry to use robots and computers in almost every area. In the past we could say that technology created new and better jobs faster than it destroyed old ones, but that was before modern computers. We didn't need many blacksmiths after cars replaced horses, but we needed a lot of mechanics. Things are not going in that direction any longer. It is estimated that there are 3.5 million commercial truck drivers in the US today (source); there may be almost none in 30 years. What can possibly replace 3.5 million jobs, especially considering that the replacements should provide as good a living and will have to be something that cannot itself be immediately replaced by machines? What do you think society should do in an environment where there are almost no jobs for people? It seems to me that the owners of the businesses that choose to displace workers with robots do so because the robots are more profitable. In other words, those owners will get richer and richer while many people will lose their income altogether. Shouldn't the people who are profiting from displacing human workers bear some (or even most) of the cost of dealing with the problem? What is your preferred solution? Don _____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

I could go for that. I don't think there's going to be a lot of support for it in the US and it's precisely what was done in the Soviet era with even the old babushkas, but I could go for it. Unfortunately, I think what we're going to end up seeing is more akin to the financial disparity shown in films such as Elysium. Basic jobs are done by robots making the vast majority of people unemployable at any wage. Meanwhile the ultra-rich live in their own hyper-isolated society.I think we're in for a tidal wave of robots replacing humans in 95% of jobs. Currently there is a big push for self-driving cars and trucks. I suspect in 20-30 years there will be no jobs driving trucks, taxis (and Uber, Lyft, etc). Courier services such as FedEx will have minimum wage jobs only, to take packages from the truck to the mailroom/front door or vice versa, but drivers will be robots. Human drivers will be banned as "too dangerous", as will be human pilots. Even highly skilled jobs can be better filled by robots; "expert programs" can do a better job of diagnosing illnesses, for example, displacing the majority of doctors. There will still be room for some nurses though, to give injections and change bedpans. A couple of days ago I heard a segment on NPR about computers "learning" to compose music, at least movie scores and commercial jingles. The day is not long off when we, as a society, will have to decide how to deal with an economy where humans are simply not cost-effective, except perhaps as consumers of the goods and services being generated by robots. Although the notion of a universal basic income is anathema to capitalist values, it may come to seem cheap compared to the cost of an angry population with a 90% unemployment rate. Don _____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

If only manufacturing actual goods was as easy as manufacturing alternative facts. How many jobs will be created manufacturing alternative cars? Do alternative jobs count? Don _____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

Speaking of the antichrist where was the thunder that should have accompanied the rain.I was waiting for him to morph into a 100-foot tall fire-breathing smoke demon. That speech certainly had tone for it. Don _____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

I'm pretty sure almost all of those commutations just bring sentences into line with current sentencing guidelines. We have people serving life sentences for possessing amounts of crack that would have earned just a few years for the same amount of powder cocaine. I am sure you recall that crack was favored by one socio-economic group and powder by another. Sentencing guidelines were changed a few years ago to eliminate the disparity, but the changes were not retroactive. If someone was to look at recidivism rates, it would be more relevant to compare the commuted inmates to those sentenced under present-day guidelines. Don _____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

Good luck with that. You'd have better luck trying to teach a hamster to do calculus. Don _____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

Would you have voted against the increase if you did not have kids? Do you consider education (at least through high school) "free stuff", or is it a basic human right all civilized societies are obligated to provide for? Don _____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

Even if there is a video and it was released, it would make no difference to the true believers. Trump could take a dump on a plate and say it's a chocolate eclair and some people would be telling us it's the best eclair they ever tasted, starting with Kelly-Ann Conway. Even sadder, many of them would really believe that to be true. Don _____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

There will be a tiny handprint burned into the bible Don _____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

It all depends on what the meaning of "is" is. Or emolients. It's going to be a long 4 years. Don _____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

That's how you become the best job creator god has ever made. Think of the poor iron lung manufacturers. Why do you want to kill jobs in the iron lung factories? SAD! Don _____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

But Trump is the candidate of change, and to his supporters any change is good (especially if it sticks it to Obama and progressives). We haven't seen polio-stricken kids in iron lungs since the late 1950s, that's obviously got to change. Besides, the 1950s were the last time America was great (according to Trump) so anything we can do to go back to the 50s is all just part of making America great again. Why don't you want America to be great again? Don _____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

Maybe he'll find somebody who thinks the wall is a really bad idea to put in charge of building the wall. That would fit the pattern of all his other appointments. Don _____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)