Big Lies

[Classic-Xer]

(02-11-2017, 09:12 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: Of course, judges are not presidents.  They are appointed by presidents and approved by Congress.  Their role is not to write laws or execute them, but to make sure the laws are being followed.

I actually sat down and read the ruling.  The standings and rights questions are settled enough in existing precedent.  For each of the following, there are court cases which establish or confirm the laws of the land.

• State colleges are port of the states, thus states have standing to bring court cases relating to their colleges.
  
• Students and faculty are part of said state colleges, thus the state has standing to bring court cases relating to state college students and faculty.
  
• Rights do not exist only for US Citizens.  People have rights.  If the government is interacting with the People, they have to respect said rights.
  
• A president can't just ignore all the laws and regulations regarding immigration.  Yes, security is a valid concern, but one must establish that each individual, one at a time, is a risk.
  

For years, I would say one cannot discriminate when providing goods and services to the public, but there were exceptions for homes, churches and private clubs.  Conservative and libertarian posters just wouldn't listen...  until I reprinted the key passage from the Civil Rights Act of 1964.  Too many people put their own prejudices ahead of rule of law, maintaining ignorance of the law to validate their prejudices.  That seems to be where you are coming from.

Again, you are most confused in labeling the red perspective as being 'American'.  FDR is at least as American as Reagan.  Thomas Jefferson is at least as American as Ayn Rand.  The country is well and truly divided with both sides having strong elements of logic, history and tradition behind them.  Your reports from inside of one alternate reality bubble aren't irrelevant, but you shouldn't mistake your bubble for reality.

I have always represented an American's perspective and I've always identified myself as an American. I have always identified myself as an independent voter who is not directly affiliated with either major party. I do not identify with the term Christianity or view myself as a Christian. I don't identify with the term rural or view myself as being rural. I have never identified with the color red or viewed myself as a red either. So, you have a problem with me because I don't exactly fit the liberal's red stereotype or the liberal stereotype you've been foolishly applying and placing on me for years. The truth is that I'm suburban voter who doesn't care about race, who doesn't care about abortion, who doesn't care about gay marriage or people being gay in general, who doesn't live by a Bible, who ignores the feelings and opinions of the Pope, who opted out of college because he view college as being needed to achieve his goals, who opted for a technical degree instead that took a lot less time and costed a lot less and eventually became a small business owner.

That's me, you can learn something and adjust your liberal view or you continue acting like a typical dip shit blue and continue paying for it image wise as well as politically. You're about the same age as my older siblings and their group of friends. So, I'm actually pretty familiar with the bulk of your age group. I assume that life was much easier for you than them based on the ideals that you're still carrying, so to speak. I say that because, whatever hippie/Democratic ideals that they entered their adult life with were either discredited, didn't hold up to the realities, or completely failed and dumped by the time that I was entering adult life with my own ideals. BTW, I only see one bubble here and a growing number of individuals who are speaking against those who are associated with the bubble.