dona, in a “live meeting” with CEO guy last week. He said we made money last year…whole room OFL.
Good idea about beach, sun, drinks. Good news is friends have gotten jobs recently, some quite long in tooth(went to janis joplin concert) and I’ve been on interviews, so hope is out there.
“When someone posts that it’s a constitutional right, they better be able to read me the line saying so” I am going to point out that, under Marbuty, that’s wrong. He’s challenging the existence of the right based solely on text, not experssing an opinion on the wrongness of Roe.”
slopefarm you ignorant slut,
I was not arguing that text alone makes something (abortion in this case) legal.
I’m arguing against the posted idea that something which has a Supreme Court decision, not a constitutional amendment, behind it, is something that the Federal government is obliged to ensure/insure.
First because it is still under debate as a state’s right,
second because the whole beginning of our OT debate was the idea that the Republican congress was not keen on funding abortions.
Obviously they’re not obliged to ensure/insure abortion, that’s why he signed an Executive Order, that’s why it’s up for debate.
re CMU’s ad hominem attack,
when he started his argument as “otherwise retrograde thinking” what is one to interpret from that statement but the idea that it is backwards thinking? enough said.
Some guy: “No it’s not! It’s not in the constitution.”
Supreme Court: “Um, sure it is, here’s a 50 page opinion explaining how we can juice this out of the constitution. It’s totally there.”
Some guy: “You just made that up! You just want there to be a right to abortion and you’re totally justifying it with a made up after the fact intrepretation of the document.”
DeLepp- I really have to try making that for a special dinner sometime. I liked the story too.
dona, in a “live meeting” with CEO guy last week. He said we made money last year…whole room OFL.
Good idea about beach, sun, drinks. Good news is friends have gotten jobs recently, some quite long in tooth(went to janis joplin concert) and I’ve been on interviews, so hope is out there.
“When someone posts that it’s a constitutional right, they better be able to read me the line saying so” I am going to point out that, under Marbuty, that’s wrong. He’s challenging the existence of the right based solely on text, not experssing an opinion on the wrongness of Roe.”
slopefarm you ignorant slut,
I was not arguing that text alone makes something (abortion in this case) legal.
I’m arguing against the posted idea that something which has a Supreme Court decision, not a constitutional amendment, behind it, is something that the Federal government is obliged to ensure/insure.
First because it is still under debate as a state’s right,
second because the whole beginning of our OT debate was the idea that the Republican congress was not keen on funding abortions.
Obviously they’re not obliged to ensure/insure abortion, that’s why he signed an Executive Order, that’s why it’s up for debate.
re CMU’s ad hominem attack,
when he started his argument as “otherwise retrograde thinking” what is one to interpret from that statement but the idea that it is backwards thinking? enough said.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/03/magazine/03food-t-000.html?ref=pasta
Maialino recipe
lech- now you’re just being ridiculous.
“has anyone here been to that new spot on Mulberry “Torrisi Italian Specialties” ???”
benson replies: I got your Italian specialties right here.
has anyone here been to that new spot on Mulberry “Torrisi Italian Specialties” ???
yeah – mailiano is good.
Supreme Court: “Abortion is a right.”
Some guy: “No it’s not! It’s not in the constitution.”
Supreme Court: “Um, sure it is, here’s a 50 page opinion explaining how we can juice this out of the constitution. It’s totally there.”
Some guy: “You just made that up! You just want there to be a right to abortion and you’re totally justifying it with a made up after the fact intrepretation of the document.”
Supreme Court: “Are you the Supreme Court?”
Some guy: “Uh….. no.”
Supreme Court: “You suck. I win.”