I haven't had a chance to review the ruling. I'll be reviewing it today and will revert with comments when I get a chance.Anyone here a JD and can explain how/if the new ruling by the USSC applies to the work force?
Last edited:
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I haven't had a chance to review the ruling. I'll be reviewing it today and will revert with comments when I get a chance.Anyone here a JD and can explain how/if the new ruling by the USSC applies to the work force?
Stupid political theater.
Sleep on your stomach. Zinc up.Well I finally got the vid. In the process of kickin’ it’s monkey ass.
I've had it. Not bad. Go out to SisterDale to Blackboard BBQ and have the Wagyu brisket. It isn't fair.
Seems the Supreme Court remembered their readings from Locke and Voltaire, with a measure of Adam Smith thrown in. Asking them to review the Federalist papers might be a reading too far....1. It's the right thing to do. It's following the Constitution. You can't make me do something against my will, even for the "greater good".
2. When the sh!t goes down, the Supreme Court won't be targets # 1 through 10.
So many ways I can go with this-- but are you saying that beliefs are a product of their environments?Seems the Supreme Court remembered their readings from Locke and Voltaire, with a measure of Adam Smith thrown in. Asking them to review the Federalist papers might be a reading too far....
Seems the Supreme Court remembered their readings from Locke and Voltaire, with a measure of Adam Smith thrown in. Asking them to review the Federalist papers might be a reading too far....
I'm saying that the Supremes recalled Locke's assertion about natural rights to life, liberty and property, and his statement about the rights of a people who find themselves abused by their government. That they might have recalled Voltaire's declaration that freedom of speech must be preserved, especially when it is critical of church and state. (The current church being progressive political ideology) That by making this decision, they offered proof of Adam Smith's dictum that people act in regards to their own self-interest, as you implied their decision was at least partially based upon. Forgive me if I'm putting words into your keyboard.So many ways I can go with this-- but are you saying that beliefs are a product of their environments?
When I was teaching government in Nevada, every semester I would go to the local offices of our good representatives and pick up pocket copies of the US Constitution. I would pass them out in class, telling my students that they were courtesy of Senator Reid or Ensign or Heller, or Congressman Gibbons or Amodei. I'd also tell the students that the offices were glad to get rid of them since they weren't using them.My 18 year old government students will leave my class with a better understanding of the constitution than many of our elected "experts."
But they'll be told to "...try and read the constitution sometime..." lol
We cover many of the federalist papers too btw...even though most of them are not in the TEKS
The last couple of years have provided ample opportunities to develop hypotheticals for courses in Constitutional Law or government. E.g.,:I'm saying that the Supremes recalled Locke's assertion about natural rights to life, liberty and property, and his statement about the rights of a people who find themselves abused by their government. That they might have recalled Voltaire's declaration that freedom of speech must be preserved, especially when it is critical of church and state. (The current church being progressive political ideology) That they made this decision, they offered proof of Adam Smith's dictum that people act in regards to their own self-interest, as you implied their decision was at least partially based upon. Forgive if I'm putting words into your keyboard.
When I was teaching government in Nevada, every semester I would go to the local offices of our good representatives and pick up pocket copies of the US Constitution. I would pass them out in class, telling my students that they were courtesy of Senator Reid or Ensign or Heller, or Congressman Gibbons or Amodei. I'd also tell the students that the offices were glad to get rid of them since they weren't using them.
The last couple of years have provided ample opportunities to develop hypotheticals for courses in Constitutional Law or government. E.g.,:
I teach a graduate level law course on the side and spend a few weeks on the Constitution.
- Free speech and rights to assemble (and whether law enforcement could have regulated the 90 days of unabated riots in Portland)
- Federalism and the extent of federal powers
- The extent to which the executive branch can exact its authority (very relevant to the OSHA mandate issue)
- The issue of packing the court
I can tell from the spirited discussion that it’s the first time many students have had these discussions . . . grad level students!
Is it because undergraduate professors are afraid of taking on what may be perceived as sensitive topics and making remarks that may come back to bite them? I.e., they’re afraid of being cancelled?
I've taught college level American and Modern European history for 12 years now. Most students at the graduate level are hearing these arguments for the first time for the reasons you suspect. Many professors are afraid of cancel culture. I was blessed enough to identify two others who shared my beliefs and we had discussions in the department, only behind closed doors. Later I learned two other colleagues shared our views but would never meet with us. That's a total of 5 professors and the institution I worked at, fired or refused tenure or failed to renew contracts on 3 of them.I teach a graduate level law course on the side and spend a few weeks on the Constitution.
I can tell from the spirited discussion that it’s the first time many students have had these discussions . . . grad level students!
Is it because undergraduate professors are afraid of taking on what may be perceived as sensitive topics and making remarks that may come back to bite them? I.e., they’re afraid of being cancelled?
I've taught college level American and Modern European history for 12 years now. Most students at the graduate level are hearing these arguments for the first time for the reasons you suspect. Many professors are afraid of cancel culture. I was blessed enough to identify two others who shared my beliefs and we had discussions in the department, only behind closed doors. Later I learned two other colleagues shared our views but would never meet with us. That's a total of 5 professors and the institution I worked at, fired or refused tenure or failed to renew contracts on 3 of them.
On the other hand, the overwhelming majority of instructors at the college level, in my experience, actually subscribe to the progressive illiberal agenda. So many students have never been exposed to the ideas or processes you are advancing. The students live in a bubble, they do not watch nightly news, read a newspaper, or a textbook for that matter. They have access to the entire accumulated knowledge of mankind in a matter of minutes on their phone but they would rather use that device to play Minecraft, or watch Tik-Tok videos. Have you noticed the media use of a new term the last couple years; "influencer"? I have students whose career goals now include being an "influencer". Social media is making it easier and easier to alter reality, to find your own little bubble and exist therein. Students are bombarded by progressivism constantly, when they exist in their own little digital bubble, the impact is magnified. Hearing any other perspective is quite literally shocking to them.
You want me to pump something into my body that has been proven NOT to work? Quit listening to the news and LOOK AROUND YOU. Check your friend that have been vaccinated and gotten pumped full of every booster they can get...yep, they are still getting it even with their masks and shields. Sometimes you have to just use plain old good common sense and figure this out all on your own.Because it makes no sense; you and many others are choosing to go against the grain of science and the health of your fellow Americans. Focus on being the solution and not the problem; advocate vaccinations and Boosters. Cut the bs.
Right on. I always thought it was ironic that a “progressive”’s policies don’t result in any progress at a societal level. They only result in a degradation of cultural norms and standards. Take the “progressive” policies of the Soros-elected DAs around the country. They only result in improving the life of the thugs that spend little to no time in jail for criminal violations. Meanwhile, at a societal level, a sense of security is reduced due to increasing crime rates. And, there’s no deterrence when thugs commit a robbery of items below $900 and are not arrested and charged. That’s progress?We hear the term "progressive" all the time. In order for someone to be progressive, they've got to actually make progress at something worthwhile and something that makes a positive impact. These "progressives" are really nothing but obstructionists to decency, good will, traditional values, business acumen and common sense.
Let’s connect sometime. Maybe MM can provide you with my email.I've taught college level American and Modern European history for 12 years now. Most students at the graduate level are hearing these arguments for the first time for the reasons you suspect. Many professors are afraid of cancel culture. I was blessed enough to identify two others who shared my beliefs and we had discussions in the department, only behind closed doors. Later I learned two other colleagues shared our views but would never meet with us. That's a total of 5 professors and the institution I worked at, fired or refused tenure or failed to renew contracts on 3 of them.
On the other hand, the overwhelming majority of instructors at the college level, in my experience, actually subscribe to the progressive illiberal agenda. So many students have never been exposed to the ideas or processes you are advancing. The students live in a bubble, they do not watch nightly news, read a newspaper, or a textbook for that matter. They have access to the entire accumulated knowledge of mankind in a matter of minutes on their phone but they would rather use that device to play Minecraft, or watch Tik-Tok videos. Have you noticed the media use of a new term the last couple years; "influencer"? I have students whose career goals now include being an "influencer". Social media is making it easier and easier to alter reality, to find your own little bubble and exist therein. Students are bombarded by progressivism constantly, when they exist in their own little digital bubble, the impact is magnified. Hearing any other perspective is quite literally shocking to them.
Clob can provide you with directions. Bad directions.... but directions all the same.Let’s connect sometime. Maybe MM can provide you with my email.
Let’s connect sometime. Maybe MM can provide you with my email.
Biased conservative polls (Rasmussen) are going to give biased conservative results.So just when you thought members of our society couldn't stoop any lower-- Rasmussen conducted a poll--
Turns our, about 51% of Biden voters support having the "unvaxxed" sent to "incarceration facilities" against their will.
54% support fines or prison terms for people that say negative things about the vaccines on social media.
You know what-- I won't spoil the surprise. Read through this and find the little tidbits that speak to you.
COVID-19: Democratic Voters Support Harsh Measures Against Unvaccinated
While many voters have become skeptical toward the federal government’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic, a majority of Democrats embrace restrictive policies, including punitive measures against those who haven’t gotten the COVID-19 vaccine.www.rasmussenreports.com
Read about the part where they take your kids.
Well, yeah. There's not one single poll that isn't influenced by bias to some extent because humans are involved, some much more than others.Biased conservative polls (Rasmussen) are going to give biased conservative results.
I've taught college level American and Modern European history for 12 years now. Most students at the graduate level are hearing these arguments for the first time for the reasons you suspect. Many professors are afraid of cancel culture. I was blessed enough to identify two others who shared my beliefs and we had discussions in the department, only behind closed doors. Later I learned two other colleagues shared our views but would never meet with us. That's a total of 5 professors and the institution I worked at, fired or refused tenure or failed to renew contracts on 3 of them.
On the other hand, the overwhelming majority of instructors at the college level, in my experience, actually subscribe to the progressive illiberal agenda. So many students have never been exposed to the ideas or processes you are advancing. The students live in a bubble, they do not watch nightly news, read a newspaper, or a textbook for that matter. They have access to the entire accumulated knowledge of mankind in a matter of minutes on their phone but they would rather use that device to play Minecraft, or watch Tik-Tok videos. Have you noticed the media use of a new term the last couple years; "influencer"? I have students whose career goals now include being an "influencer". Social media is making it easier and easier to alter reality, to find your own little bubble and exist therein. Students are bombarded by progressivism constantly, when they exist in their own little digital bubble, the impact is magnified. Hearing any other perspective is quite literally shocking to them.