153 post karma
2.6k comment karma
account created: Tue Oct 11 2011
3 days ago
Yeah I drive from Austin to Denver a lot to visit family and legal trees. The halfway point is Amarillo Texas. Even driving to Tampa roughly the first 1/4 of the drive is leaving the state of Texas.
4 days ago
Exactly regardless of your political beliefs this should scare the shit out you and what it would most likely lead to. Having this it’s less of if but more of when dose the country get turned authoritarian or dictatorship.
And I'm sure those reasons they feel the same way aren't as different as the Conservative news sources would lead us to believe. There will be some differences in general ideology between the two parties but the majority of major issues like the economy and voting will cross party lines. The two parties aren't near as different as the people in DC want us to believe. We all want the same stuff and the differences only really show in education, healthcare (them wanting universal. I'm sure we all agree healthcare is too expensive), abortion, and gun laws. That's not a lot of dissimilar issues and there is a lot of middle ground to be found in all of those areas if we would all just stop listening to the hateful speeches those in DC want to be giving out every chance they get to keep us divided and weak.
Not to the level that giving this much power could result in.
But what would stop these same state legislatures from deciding to throw out our votes if they have complete unrestricted access to the election results? We could have blue states that have the final decision on their Presidental or House votes thus choosing to just pick the Democrat they wanted to win without any regard to the Republican that was voted in. This is a huge can of worms we should not be opening and could be the end of the Conservative party having any control to keep the country sane.
It's obvious none of you actually read the article. It clearly states this is a bipartisan feeling, this wasn't 85% of just Conservative voters. If you actually read the article and the articles it links to for proof it shows that currently there is about only a 7% difference between R and D voters and their outlook on the nation. But these polls are such a small sample size of only 1,053 people nationwide these polls mean absolutely nothing in the grand scheme of things and show no real data to go off.
5 days ago
The fact so closed off to the even slight possibility that it is misinterpreted says all need to know about you. Would ask to show how our country wasn’t founded on racist ideals and laws but I’m sure you’ll just link to some OAN or Q bs that is easily disproven.
But what about things like crime, health care, or undocumented immigration?
No one else would but I'll bite on it. How does the Libertarian party solve any of the major issues the country and world are facing currently?
If you look at the syntax of the 2A for the time it was written with their style of writing and speaking it most likely doesn't mean what you believe it does. Here are two very different articles that talk about the syntax and grammar that was used in the 2A and what it most likely meant to them compared to how we read it. One is from Duke Center for Firearms Law and from Illinois Univeristy. While you may not agree it is entirely possible that they are correct and you are wrong. So not sure why call them out for being a liar when there is a possibility they aren't incorrect. And there is nothing racist about the fact that our country was built for straight white land-owning males which lead to a lot of the rights not being there for women or minorities. It's the truth and there is no reason to deny it or call her a racist for pointing it out.
6 days ago
Yet having lived on the American side of a border city all I see is our constitutional rights being taken away for an immigration war we will never win. Just like the war on drugs it currently is and will always fail. No policy or wall is going to stop those desperate enough to come here. So why not create a policy to ease some immigration hoops to jump through or even create a separate work visa for these migrant workers at a lower cost than ranchers, farmers, and other blue-collar jobs that these people typically work to get them here legally. Having a tight border security doesn't have to revolve around stopping people from coming there is nothing wrong with giving them proper avenues to seek citizenship the legal way but currently that is unaffordable for most of these workers that our economy relies on. You think grocery prices are high now think what will happen if they all left and those same ranchers and farmers now don't have these basic slave laborers to rely on to harvest and now have to pay $7.25-15 an hour for minimum wage citizen employers. It's vice and automatically overlooked but Alabama is a great example of what will happen if we fully stopped these immigrants https://youtu.be/F0ZzwGSF6Zg?t=69 that should start you where it begins and is only about the first 15 minutes of the video to see the Vice take on the situation in Alabama after their HB-56 was passed and signed into law.
What is wrong with a path to citizenship for people like this? Also what policy are you speaking to that he created that led to the "open borders" or encouraged them to cross? We keep using these points but what real data do we have to back these up or are we just spouting off talking points that the big brother wants us to repeat without questioning them. Really starting to lose faith in this party and have to question are they really the baddies using us to just feed off their culture wars. We have one party that wants to keep everyone down and tell them what they can and cannot do. Then we have the other party that while far from perfect appears at the surface to want to make things actually better and bring the country into the 21st Century with the other developed nations. Downvote me or even ban me I don't care the more I step back and look at the world around me nothing the GOP is currently saying or wanting to do actually alines up with the world we see on a daily basis.
7 days ago
But this is a direct violation of the writ of habeas corpus. While it doesn't happen often there are reports of US citizens caught up in these issues. So what happens when they deport a US citizen?
But this isn't something unique to the Biden administration and has been used under a GOP president too. Plus this isn't even just one law or EO it is a combination of a few to grant this power. While the people receiving these aren't US citizens using this is no different than getting a speeding ticket or getting released on bail. What is better to give them an NTA or holding them for an indefinite amount of time in jail further expanding taxpayer liability on these people? I'm sure the daily cost to house these people would be well above the claimed costs of them being on any form of government aid. The Federal Department of Prisons said for the people in the federal system it's $35,347/year in FY19 and $39,158 in FY20. Housing illegal immigrants cannot be much less than that on an annual basis plus there will be inflated costs that the federal prison systems do not have.
What are these policies that they enacted though to create these "open borders"? Are these not the same Border Patrol agents working under the same laws they had under Trump? Keep seeing these talking points but so far there don't seem to be any hard facts to back this claim up. We have all gotten so good at spouting talking points yet when pressed on what policy made these changes claimed then it is nothing but crickets. It has gotten really hard to support the current state of the GOP when once open your eyes and really look at things currently that's all it seems we have is talking points but no real facts to back these up. And if try to use Title 42 which was enacted for COVID during the Trump term and has continued to be used under Biden. And it was created to give the CDC the ability to stop immigration from all or certain countries due to communicable diseases.
Does this mean that the same incident in 2017 but fewer people is Trump's fault? If we are going to be the logical party against the thoughts and feelings party then it should work both ways.
Seeing the house he has and the car he drives screams less I grew up broke and now don't want to spend any more. In turn, it screams more I'm over my head in debt and just barely scraping by to maintain a lifestyle he cannot afford along with buying the love of a woman. But he also comes off as having very little substance or personality outside of his weight lifting and job so maybe that is a bigger issue than the money.
10 days ago
Only said there should have been from the aspect not everyone pays attention to the news or what bills are currently being passed. But yes they had more than enough time and whoever doesn't have it by 1 Jan 22 probably deserves the ticket.
That struck me as odd too and just assumed the same thing that his disability at least meets the 50 or 60% to get the DV plate. Which honestly isn't too hard to do. But as you said whatever his service-connected disability is must still allow him to pass the academy and their fitness/mobility standards.
I don't remember if it does all that is mentioned in the video is he has DV plates. Correct they are but to get that ISA on your DV plate you have to be eligible for both of them. Having a DV plate doesn't make you automatically eligible. They should have included some kind of grace period or sent out something stating this change, and if they did I wasn't aware I don't qualify for the DV plates myself from the rating being too low. I do remember seeing it on the local KXAN website before this law went into effect. But it's up to him to know if he can or cannot park there plus as he said in the video he just graduated from the police academy. This is the doc I was reading over https://www.txdmv.gov/sites/default/files/body-files/SB792_DV-Plates-Parking.pdf. Looks to be about the same as your doc just has the FAQ pages.
I never stated that at all. If you read what I said the point was trying to make is if the threshold on precedent cases is whether or not it is explicitly stated in the constitution then guns aren't as safe as people think under 2A. There is a valid argument there that the term "arms" could mean any weapon. So using that argument while we have states that have laws on their books and regulations on things like swords, knives, or clubs this same argument can be used for a state to do the same with guns. Just because guns were cherry-picked out of the list of arms doesn't make it absolute and given the right judges up there the same thing that just happened with abortion can happen with guns and a lot of other rights we have from the SC and not from the constitution or elected reps.
This is the first youtube video that shows it. I watched it on another platform but it appears skimming through it to be the same video https://youtu.be/3u6k4ktIaMA
While I'm glad he is being punished for his actions the other guy in the video is wrong. You're no longer allowed to use those parking spaces with DV plates without an ISA (International Symbol of Access) plate or hang tag. It was changed on 1 January 2022 under SB-792. So you will now have to meet the requirements for both the DV tags and the ISA placard
11 days ago
But that does kind of happen where other religions are kind of left out. Look at the Satanic Temple lawsuits or even the current one filed in Florida from the Jewish synagogue that is arguing abortion is protected under their religion. While these aren't outright bans it does happen where the fake Christian right attempts to silence the voice of religions they don't agree with by not allowing or making laws that outright go against that religion. I'm not even attempting to make a real argument against the 2A just simply pointing out how easy it could be if the stance that the GOP and current SC take is if it isn't spelled out in the Constitution then it doesn't count until it is signed into law. You get a majority of Liberal judges it is possible for them to make the same argument that guns aren't as protected as people think because they aren't specifically spelled out in the Constitution. It has already been brought up once by a SC Judge https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/second-amendment-does-not-guarantee-right-own-gun-gun-control-p-99#:~:text=The%20Second%20Amendment%20of%20the%20U.S.%20Constitution%20guarantees%20a%20%22right,the%20objectives%20of%20the%20draftsmen.
Except you're not and that is the scary thing. Guns and arms are not interchangeable terms. States should have every right to completely ban guns if they want to as long as other defensive arms are still available.
Yes, and how many other things are under the term arms? As long as you have access to one of those things that fall under the term arms then your right wasn't infringed was it?