You have the right to earn whatever someone is willing to pay you. If that "earns you a living" good
If NOT, then you have to do something to increase the value of your labor. there were several reasons why I busted my butt to get into good schools and ultimately a law degree and masters in labor law/labor relations. It was because with those degrees I cold make a six figure salary before I was thirty. Now when I hear 30 year olds whining they cannot support a family on minimum wage, I say DUH. I got minimum wage jobs out of the way when I was a student. Most smart and ambitious people do
Golly.....she should retire soon. She should be made to retire!
She WILL retire soon! :lol: Just look at this pic!
https://www.businessinsider.com/sup...irement-sotomayor-trump-4-appointments-2018-6
If it’s true, y’all liberals should start getting your sexual assault victims ready,
Hahahaha
Its not an "investigation", its a ploy to hold a cloud of illegitimacy over Trump that justifies opposing everything he does by claiming it is done in furtherance of Russian interests.
Maybe Trump will nominate a female, what would liberals do then, or maybe even a black female. Lol lol
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
How many fishing poles do you have in the water in this thread? If you could ****ing try to comment on the actual story it would be a welcome change. So far you are sitting in your glass house throwing stones in every direction.
I don't even see Drudge on this story, I remain skeptical about it being true.
If true, the Republicans will nominate a judge with solid credentials that Democrats will be hard pressed to object to considering the partisan slant of Kagan and Sotomayor. Democrat Presidents are going to nominate progressive outlook judges and Republican Presidents are going to nominate conservative outlook judges. That is just what we can expect going forward.
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg Will Retire from the US Supreme Court in January, 2019
I haven't seen anything about this anywhere else, the article is 2 days old. It is plausible, she is 85, has had problems with cancer. It would be sad to lose such a brilliant jurist and I expect another acrimonious fight to appoint a successor along the now customary partisan approach.
The person I was replying to had something to say about "a win is a win no matter how." I just was wondering how that was different from Democrats.
The rest if your post is....obvious. Yes, Democrats will nominate more progressive judges and Republicans will appoint mire conservative judges. No ****! Also, if you dump a bucket of water over their head, they might get a little damp.
A Democrat will appoint a more liberal judge with solid credentials. Like maybe.....I don't know....Merrick Garland.
The person I was replying to had something to say about "a win is a win no matter how." I just was wondering how that was different from Democrats.
The rest if your post is....obvious. Yes, Democrats will nominate more progressive judges and Republicans will appoint mire conservative judges. No ****! Also, if you dump a bucket of water over their head, they might get a little damp.
A Democrat will appoint a more liberal judge with solid credentials. Like maybe.....I don't know....Merrick Garland.
The person I was replying to had something to say about "a win is a win no matter how." I just was wondering how that was different from Democrats.
The rest if your post is....obvious. Yes, Democrats will nominate more progressive judges and Republicans will appoint mire conservative judges. No ****! Also, if you dump a bucket of water over their head, they might get a little damp.
A Democrat will appoint a more liberal judge with solid credentials. Like maybe.....I don't know....Merrick Garland.
So are you saying that everyone should go to law school and study labor law?You have the right to earn whatever someone is willing to pay you. If that "earns you a living" good
If NOT, then you have to do something to increase the value of your labor. there were several reasons why I busted my butt to get into good schools and ultimately a law degree and masters in labor law/labor relations. It was because with those degrees I cold make a six figure salary before I was thirty. Now when I hear 30 year olds whining they cannot support a family on minimum wage, I say DUH. I got minimum wage jobs out of the way when I was a student. Most smart and ambitious people do
Garland was appointed as a gimmick. We both know it, I am just honest about it.
Actually you could not be more Wronged.What we just witnessed with the Kavanaugh Nomination
and Confirmation was an attempt at Jury Selection tampering and worse.The actual Framing
of a Supreme Court Nominee.Far worse than the crap Teddy Kennedy and Patrick Leahy and Joe
Biden pulled on Clarence Thomas.But similar.
Um ... pardon the Moi Here Ye Here Ye.Who was it that Nominated The First Woman on the
Supreme Court Sandra Day O'Connor.Who eventually became The Swing vote on the court.
Initially considered a Moderate Republican,her decisions eventually became more and more
Radicalized.Lesson learned.Plus back in THEM! days the Supreme Court Confirmation process
was not radicalized and turned into some Chuckie { the Cheese } Schumer Show.
O'Connor was confirmed in the Senate by a 99-0 vote.
I'll take a Textualist or an Originalist any day over a leftist judicial activist.
So are you saying that everyone should go to law school and study labor law?
That is your narrow thinking.How you could get that narrow a meaning from what I said is really amusing.
Yes I got that and it is honestly commendable and praise worthy, but for each one like you and there are many there are countless who have the drive and smarts yet they lack the opportunity and than there are those who are not meant to be lawyers or doctors. Are they not to be ever to make a decent wage or have a comfortable life?What I was saying is I knew I wanted to make more than minimum wage so I invested in education to make myself worthy to make a six figure salary before I was thirty.
That is because you are incapable of thinking beyond appearances.There are many ways to do that-engineering, medicine, business etc. Sitting around smoking dope, getting knocked up when you are in HS, etc and then whining you cannot support a family on 8 bucks an hour wages doesn't get you much sympathy with many of us
Note, it was explicitly stated Kavanaugh is not a textualist. Moreover, the founding fathers all knew the constitution would need to change with the changes in society, hence the amendment process.
Being an "originalist" is sort of like being a Taliban or Wahabbi Muslim - no changes, no interpretations, no alterations to the original text.
I dislike extremes, especially extremes that work for specific facets of our society over the rest - and those extremes tend to be republicans/conservatives.
I love it when someone who is wed to the income redistribution scheme claims someone else's ability to think or see things is limited. I hate to say the obvious but there are no guarantees in life other than death. You don't have a guarantee of a comfortable life. that being said, if you work hard, your chances of having a comfortable life are vastly increased. If you remain in high school till you earn a degree, you don't create a child before you are married, and you don't get involved in drugs, your chances of being impoverished are less than one in 20That is your narrow thinking.
Yes I got that and it is honestly commendable and praise worthy, but for each one like you and there are many there are countless who have the drive and smarts yet they lack the opportunity and than there are those who are not meant to be lawyers or doctors. Are they not to be ever to make a decent wage or have a comfortable life?
That is because you are incapable of thinking beyond appearances.
You just proved my point. Because you can not defend, yes, that narrow and limited thinking that I pointed out you find it necessary to label me without any basis. I honestly thought you smarter than that.I love it when someone who is wed to the income redistribution scheme claims someone else's ability to think or see things is limited.
You just proved my point. Because you can not defend, yes, that narrow and limited thinking that I pointed out you find it necessary to label me without any basis. I honestly thought you smarter than that.
Nor do I want to or attempted to asses it, nor are you able to evaluate what I can or can not evaluate.I don't think you are able to evaluate how smart I am.
I confuse nothing and made no comment about any philosophy only about your comments. Is your reading comprehension off?.you confuse a philosophy you dislike with "narrow thinking"
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?