canceled.2021.1
#AMERICAISDEAD
Cry harder
Anatta .. Are You Ready To Join Our Cause Now?
- Thread starter philly rabbit
- Start date
Cry harder
You have yet to demonstrate any familiarity with the correct use of the term.
I do and I understand that each has a role in enforcing the 14th Amendment.
Congress can write law that forbids a state to act in a fashion hostile to a citizen's federally protected rights and SCOTUS has a role to decide upon a challenged law's constitutionality if the state ignores Congress.
SCOTUS, in striking down such a law is not assuming Congressional / legislative powers, it is exercising the power of judicial review. There should not be any problem with overreach as long as the Court follows the guidelines set-out in Marbury that explains the duty of Justices and reminds them where their allegiance should be (to the Constitution and its foundational principles).
If your position is (as it seems to be to me) that judicial review (striking sown a law) is, in and of itself, a extra-constitutional exercise of power by the Court, then arguing over details is kindasorta pointless.
Not what I said; I said you were claiming this incontrovertible power of the people and states to decide upon matters not in the federal realm, but ignoring / disallowing the fact that the 14th Amendment was the people and states surrendering some of that sovereignty and granting the federal government NEW powers over internal actions of states.
Making the Bill of Rights enforceable upon the states brings all mechanisms of the federal government to bear to effect that command -- including the federal courts deciding upon the legitimacy of challenged state law.
Someday you might come to understand and accept that the rights of the people are not just what is listed in the Bill of Rights.
The fact is, (as I touched on above) Slaughterhouse fucked up the intent of the 14th. It altered the mechanism for rights protection by the feds. It changed the dynamic from government needing to prove a power exists to do what it wants to do, . . . to having a citizen needing to prove a direct rights injury from the law (that their due process or equal protection rights were violated in addition to teh base rights violation). The burden was shifted so that first, a right needs to be proven to exist, then it needs to be proven to be a right that falls within the ambit of the feds to protect it, and finally that the state possesses no reserved power to act in that space and is actually barred from acting by the 14th . . .
As I said, short of revisiting and overturning Slaughterhouse, Griswold and the penumbral rights theory is a crude workaround for that but neither liberals or conservatives will allow it to reach its potential.
That's BS. Legislatures can act without any outside request or directive; the courts need to have an action brought by a party that needs to prove standing . . . SCOTUS just can't act on its own and issue decrees that act as law. Either you don't understand how this all works or you are using terminology in such a sloppy manner just to deceive . . .
.
No Cos don't do it, don't sell your soul to the anti-christ..........
Given what we have seen thus far, can you define meltdown??
I'm not worried about his language. I think more about what they will do in Office.
Clinton
1. we know Clinton -what you see is what you get. She's an utter failure in every metric I can think of.
a. wars
b. honesty ( none)
c. threat to separation of powers ( claiming she will go past even Obama's EOs)
d. big gov't spend and tax more - more byzantine tax code
e. I don't rust her on the TPP either - she says what is convenient, and has no ethics/principles
+ I get tired of being the "unwanted white guy" in he Democrats Party-it's small potatos, but still aggravating
considering I was a Dem all my life
~~~~~
Trump
1.outrageous/skittish/ foul mouthed racist.
2.Willing to use NATO as a cash cow
`````````````````````````
but I think Trump would have the entire WH NSC to moderate the NATO "transactional policy' of PAYGO.
further I think he would be more stable - afterall his is basically a person campaign, he hasn't got Repub .institutional support.
Getting the reigns of power would sober his speech
b0ttom line
it's either the devil you know or the devil you don't.
I trust my political instinct that Trump couldn't be this crazy when POTUS -there is too much institutional support,
and being POTUS is a serious weight they all carry.. but I do recognize that is a gamble.
Clinton is such a complete and utter screw up - with really no redeeming features - she a "no go"
I could go 3rd party again. but it's like eating my broccoli -it's the sane healthy thing to do - but I am tired of it.
I don't agree it will, they said that would happen when he got the nom, BUT IT DIDN'T HAPPEN!!
That big mouth is a window to that evil soul, the shallow little 8th grader looking to hurt others, if they have hurt him or not..
He insulted almost all the leadership in the gop, many very badly.. You think any foreign devil leaders will be spared if he didn't even spare them?? IMHO you ppl are kidding yourself...
Many of them (not you) think it's funny he picks on the ppl they hate, but they won't think it's very funny when their turn comes around, & it will, just like the Vets, the women, the Muslims, the Mexicans etc etc etc......
stick him in AF1- give him a few "Hail to the Chief's" and it takes all the hot air out of them.
They start to get all this apparatus around them -living in the WH too -and it sobers them up.
It also destroys their reformist mindset (Obama) but that's another issue..
It's hard to be racist when you got all the power -and all the little people make nice to you.
But like I said..that's all tangential.. I don't like him..he's obnoxious as well .
But I do not care anymore. I am really tired of being Mexico's dumping ground -while they suck up our jobs.
Hillary won't even address that -instead her mock conversion to opposing the TPP is all she shows.
She's a globalist, interventionist, corporatist, hack partisan. liar arrogant power junkie. Regulatory law pusher.
and if you want to talk about divisiveness -how afr do you think she could work with Republicans? she's innate partisan poison
So while Trump is sickening to listen to - Hillary offers nothing. There is absolutely no good reason to support her. none.
Even the Supreme court -I see the crappy Kagan & "Latina woman" Sotomayor..WTF is that?
Robert's is stellar, and Scalia at least came up with textualism..AND the conservatives
also backed gay marriage, and diversity in enrollment. The conservatives are actually the grown ups on the court
I'm a professional telephone operator. got the home office set up -all that
The only reason Mexico hasn't glommed up infomercial sales/lead generation is because Americans speak in idioms that foreign operators do not.
Also American's are reluctant to buy from "foreigners" -so my niche is safe. Thankfully I am a really good salesperson.
But the Phillipines have taken most customer service jobs, and India has taken most technical support jobs.
They don't pay much more then minimum wage, but you don't have to stand on your feet all day like retail/fast food.
So for older less skilled workers they are considered good jobs
I think his supporters like that. Like sports team fanatics, they are into the brand. They like the simple slogans. They like the vague answers and the way he can't finish a thought without going off on a tangent. He's imperfect and raw. His appeal to them is exactly what's wrong with him. He shoots from the hip. To many people, though, that's an important quality. One thing nobody ever accuses Trump of doing is the dreaded "talking down to the crowd". Frustrated voters might find that appealing.
I am baffled, myself. He seems to be trying to lose if you ask me.
The ones in India are pretty bad most of the time, & the Philippines is usually bad also.. I know many here & can understand a thick accent but many of those over there are unintelligible, especially w/ crappy connections... I ask for a supervisor & usually can get one w/ a nice Calif accent.
I have never had one from Mexico, although Apple use to have a call center way up in Ontario Canada somewhere & I liked talking to them & their thick Canadian "drawl"..lol
IMHO he can't lose his fans, they are solid as a rock, as he said he can kill someone & they would still love him...... (or rather their illusion of him)
Sad thing is many of these fans first loved rubio, cruz, bush etc..
Then when their little heroes were squashed by the mean & vindictive little handed SOB they cheered & tossed those heroes under the bus......
As much loyalty for them as they had for their parties platform-almost none, the once free market globalism party will now be the trump nationalist party & they cheer!!
75 a day vs. $75,000 a year: How we lost jobs to Mexico
He's a young, talented man chasing the American dream: a car, a house and one day a family of his own. And he just landed a dream job as an engineer at General Electric with good pay.
Except this engineer isn't in America. He's in Mexico.
Carlos is a college-educated, manufacturing engineer who makes $1,500 a month working the production line at a GE plant in Mexico.
He loves GE and sees a future there. His salary works out to about $75 a day.
"I really like my job," Carlos told CNNMoney. "I have to keep working harder and save money so I can get to a better position." (Carlos is not his real name. To protect his job, CNNMoney chose to withhold his name.)
Carlos' aspirations and drive could mirror those of any 24-year old American with similar skills.
But his job is in Mexico, where GE has 17 manufacturing plants and 10,000 employees.
A typical manufacturing engineer that works for GE in the United States makes nearly $75,000 a year, according to an analysis of salaries compiled by Glassdoor.
That works out to about $312 a day ... or four times more than Carlos' salary.
That wage gap can easily explain why so many manufacturing jobs have left the United States.
Since 2000, the U.S. has lost about 5 million manufacturing jobs.
One expert, Robert Scott at the Economic Policy Institute, estimates that the U.S. lost roughly 800,000 jobs to Mexico between 1997 and 2013. He cites NAFTA -- the North American Free Trade Agreement signed in 1993 -- as the key driver for job losses.
Before NAFTA, Mexico's government had restrictions on foreign companies and who they could hire. NAFTA nullified those rules and America's trade deficit with Mexico has ballooned -- meaning we're bringing in a lot more goods from Mexico than we're sending there. That's good for American consumers but bad for manufacturing workers.
http://money.cnn.com/2016/03/31/news/economy/mexico-us-globalization-wage-gap/
Is it really good for consumers?? You get a cheap toaster & several of your neighbors are now working @ walmart & getting welfare...
A corp makes big bucks selling cheap crap here, pays little or no actual taxes & leaves the unemployed for us to take care of, along w/ the roads & bridges their trucks use to deliver the crap...
good point Bill. nobody makes out in this except for the corps.Is it really good for consumers?? You get a cheap toaster & several of your neighbors are now working @ walmart & getting welfare...
A corp makes big bucks selling cheap crap here, pays little or no actual taxes & leaves the unemployed for us to take care of, along w/ the roads & bridges their trucks use to deliver the crap...
I mean I'm all for Mexico getting a higher standard of living-but not from blatant outsourcing like NAFTA does
I would think it's virtually impossible to divest from companies that "benefit" from NAFTA.
It's gotta go in favor of bilateral trade agreements
I do see that. But a person has to run a business in the climate that exists.
What's more important fixing the outsourcing; or personal divesture?
No I'm not a "telemarketer". I never call anyone ,ever. they call in
philly rabbit
Verified User
Which one of the mods are you?
philly rabbit
Verified User
Those created jobs in Mexico under the same NAFTA agreement were outsourced to other countries. Mexico remains without a middle class because their government remains corrupt and Mexico didn't benefit at all from NAFTA.
I think you are right. "trickle down capitalism". Mexico is without a doubt the most corrupt county.la mordida at work
Has Trump proven to you that he can be presidential this week?