I once saw a woman on television that said Odumbo was going to pay off her mortgage and give her a free phone. Wow. *laughs*

You're lying and deflecting... again. Same old regular BS, different day. :)

i've pointed out countless times how pie is an idea whose time has come, yet CW seems content to ignore the pie at hand. what is he so afraid of?

Maybe the cat got his tongue!? ;)

http://www.chrisweigant.com/2018/12/28/my-2018-mclaughlin-awards-part-2/#comment-130713

I do seem to remember you getting a response the same day I commented to CW that it would be great to see the website without ads and asked how that was even possible when Don Harris's incessant advertisements are allowed unabated. He said it was an excellent point. He was correct... as he so frequently is. :)

It's a good thing that this is not a video comment section so you can't see me crying from your hurtful words.

Does your computer automatically videotape you when you cry and post it? Nice fantasy you got there, Don. :)

Your astute observations are devastating.

Your response to good advice is more fantasy and fabrication.

The website has been updated when needed.

It is still incomplete and needs updating now and hasn't been updated:

Substitute 2018 and 2020 where appropriate until site update is completed.

Cw ignored it when it new, when it was updated for 2018 and again when updated for 2020.

You're ignoring it now while whining about him ignoring it. Why don't you stop whining about him ignoring the same thing you're obviously ignoring.

And the whole time the idea has been current.

Getting an answer from CW is the only way to find out why he is ignoring this idea, until then all I can do is wonder and keep asking.

Actually, there is a lot more you can do... like updating your website and completing it instead of insisting that it's updated when it clearly states on the home page that it isn't (again, see blockquote above).

That is how every other person that was ever ignored finally got an answer, if they got one.

How obtuse does one have to be in order to make the nonsensical claim that he knows "how every other person that was ever ignored finally got an answer."

And what I am asking CW to do is to do his job of informing citizens and live up to his claim of a reality based blog by acknowledging reality and addressing the very real idea of One Demand- not at all unreasonable requests.

That's your fantasy, Don... but certainly: Not. His. Job.

So I repeat: You're complaining about him neglecting your "idea" while you are doing exactly the same thing and have been for quite awhile now. That's a fact. :)

i've pointed out countless times how pie is an idea whose time has come, yet CW seems content to ignore the pie at hand. what is he so afraid of?

Regardless of your opinion or mine, the SCOTUS will likely rule in favor of the bakers...

This is indicated by the fact that, if the SCOTUS was on the side of the gay couple, they wouldn't have ruled anything.. They just would have let the original ruling stand..

So, it doesn't matter what you or I think.. It only matters what the SCOTUS rules.. And I think it's pretty clear which way the SCOTUS is going to rule, once they do actually make a real ruling..

ILLEGAL immigrants..

Wrong. There are millions of American citizens who live in households with family members who aren't citizens who would undoubtedly be underrepresented and cause their states to lose federal funding, particularly regarding education but also a myriad of other things like Medicaid, etc., where the federal census is used for allocation.

States like California, Florida, New York, and Texas can simply raise the dollars they're no longer receiving at the federal level due to the undercount of American citizens by raising taxes on citizens of those states via income taxes (except Texas and Florida who have no state income tax) or by substantial increases in property and sales taxes, etc. to account for the undercount difference. :)

I just want to say that this column is a very impressive distillation of a densely packed news day. In an era dominated by audio-video there is still great power in the well written word.

Yes, sir... totally agree. :)

The key is to find something that many citizens want that could inspire this 10-20% of the vote to be unpredictable.

Pie. Obviously. :)

If citizens knew they had the option to participate in One Demand it could have an effect on some of the gerrymandered districts and some Senate races.

It's too bad then that your advertising link here on the blog is completely nonfunctional and your website is several years old and hasn't been updated after repeated and multiple posters have informed you of this fact.

If you don't care enough about your "idea" to have a functional link on the blog and a website that is kept current, why on Earth should anyone else?

You are the living proof of how valuable you believe your idea is, and you're asking for receipts for something you're not willing to proffer. Requesting repeatedly that another person provide time and attention to your cause that you are demonstrably and repeatedly not willing to give means never having to wonder why you're being ignored/neglected. :)

That's like saying those who suffer great harm because President Trump was elected should have just voted for President Trump and then they would not suffer any harm..

It's like saying, "Give up your principles and then you won't be harmed when you have to compromise them..."

It's a ridiculous argument..

But it should be who causes the greatest harm to the other. As the baker's harm is self-imposed by their choice they are suffering no harm that they are suffering by anything but their own choice.

So, yer saying that those who FORCED the choice on the bakers have NO RESPONSIBILITY whatsoever??

I was wrong. You ARE a typical Democrat.. Hehehehe :D

And of course the baker must enjoy self-imposed harm because the baker follows a religion and the couple must enjoy self-imposed harm because they are getting married. :D

hehehehehehehe

I dunno.. I have been married going on 38 years and the fun and good far outweigh the harm.. :D

How a Wyoming rancher summarizes the Mueller report..

“We know that old boy (President Trump) didn’t actually steal any horses, but he’s obviously guilty of trying to avoid being hanged for it.”

Sums it up perfectly...

It's like yer inside their heads.. :D

heh

Yup, that's it exactly..

Put another way.. EVERYONE should treat those polls as if they have NO representation of Trump supporters...

Once that is understood, the polls can be put in their proper context..

I *AM* constrained to point out that Hillary thought the same thing..

She thought she had a chance in "Trump" country and chose to allocate assets to those states at the expense of "sure thing" states like Michigan and Pennsylvania..

She thought wrong....

The instinctive reaction of the Dem/Lib to the question "Whom you gonna vote for" is to wave his arms and jump up and down while shouting the name of his/her favorite Lib candidate at the top of his/her lungs

The instinctive reaction of the Rep/Con to that same question is "NOYFB", but being too polite to say that, he/she actually responds with "Undecided"!

Let it be known that I have no dog in this hunt..

My disgust for gay activists who want to force their chosen lifestyle on others who may not believe as they do is matched by my disgust for those religious demagogues who shove religion down the throat of those who chose not to believe as they do..

I am not saying either party fits either or those categories, but generally speaking, that's where I stand....

Completely and utterly objective...

Which is why no one here had a problem with Sarah Huckabee Sanders being told to leave a restaurant by the restaurant manager...

Discrimination is perfectly acceptable when the RIGHT people are discriminated against..

Notable exceptions noted.. :D

Exactly... Everyone discriminates... In and of itself, it's a fact of life...

the distinction in the case of gay marriage is whether the person refusing a gay person a wedding cake is doing so based on only one person's beliefs or both. is the ability of gay people to marry a belief or a right? the supreme court ruled in obergefell v hodges that it was a right, but that was in respect to public policy, not private business. essentially, in a conflict of beliefs the government isn't allowed to take sides. however, the current court being what it is, my guess is they'll claim marriage equality is enough of a grey area to give the baker a pass, and his discrimination will be ruled legal.

Agreed...

however, it's a very slippery slope between there and pharmacists refusing to sell birth control, or not allowing the enforcement of laws to prevent infection by anti-vaxxers.

The slippery slope is alleviated if not eliminated by using the Great Good/Harm algorithm...

Whoever suffers the greater harm will win the day...

In this case, compromising one's core christian beliefs just to make a living is the greater harm when compared to a gay couple who has to drive down the street to a different baker who doesn't have a moral objection to their lifestyle..

Yep, I heard that.. Hopefully he will also not forget to campaign in states he thinks are a "sure thing" ala Hillary Clinton..

If Biden is the nominee, the 2020 presidential campaign is going to as fun as watching the 2019 NBA champions play their special brand of basketball.

I have no doubt it will be entertaining. Not an aficionado of basketball, I can't comment on the comparison.. :D

enjoy the NBA champions while you've got them. new york has been waiting half a century.

the distinction in the case of gay marriage is whether the person refusing a gay person a wedding cake is doing so based on only one person's beliefs or both. is the ability of gay people to marry a belief or a right? the supreme court ruled in obergefell v hodges that it was a right, but that was in respect to public policy, not private business. essentially, in a conflict of beliefs the government isn't allowed to take sides. however, the current court being what it is, my guess is they'll claim marriage equality is enough of a grey area to give the baker a pass, and his discrimination will be ruled legal. however, it's a very slippery slope between there and pharmacists refusing to sell birth control, or not allowing the enforcement of laws to prevent infection by anti-vaxxers.

JL

Did you hear what Biden said the other day about, if he is the nominee, he is going to campaign in Trump country and he thinks he can win in Florida and Texas and Georgia and others.

If Biden is the nominee, the 2020 presidential campaign is going to as fun as watching the 2019 NBA champions play their special brand of basketball.

The poll found former Vice President Joe Biden holding a sizable lead on the Democratic field, with a 10-point lead on Trump in a hypothetical head-to-head matchup.

Anyone on the Left who is putting ANY faith in polls this far out is simply desperate for something to hang their hat on...

Even if you ignore the penchant for Trump supporters to NOT do polls, this far out has absolutely NO BEARING on Nov 2020..

Anyone who says different is merely desperate..

The president tweeted on Monday morning that his campaign has received more than 100,000 ticket requests for the event in an arena that only holds 20,000 people.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fox-friends-trump-supporters-camped-out-florida-rally

What's the Democrat candidates' plans to woo back for Democrats who are Trump supporters??

Besides demonizing them and attacking them as racists, I mean.. :^/

Well played, Sir.. I salute you.. :D

Sorry.. Didn't mean to let the cat outta the bag.. :^/

"Dick move, Banner!!!"
-Iron Man, AVENGERS AGE OF ULTRON

Ahhh.. So Stig was in "complete agreement"...

Then he actually READ the comment and, all of the sudden, he is NOT in "complete agreement"...

:eyeroll:

DH was simply showing off how easy it is to draw praise from the Dumbocrat Peanut Gallery...

Just spout off with platitudes, shiny beads and shallow flattery and the Lemmings fall all over themselves to slap you on the back and treat you like one of the gang...

:D

Well played, Sir.. I salute you.. :D

Well, not quite in complete agreement. I consider your Big Democrat analogy a gap in your gear train. Otherwise, top notch.

Heh

Funny how DH is scum of the earth when he says something you don't agree with..

But when he toes your Party slavery line??

"Well said.."

:eyeroll:

I am pleased to find I am in complete agreement with these five posts. Well said!

Here, let me help ya out..

"Well.. er... Uh.... That's different!!"

:eyeroll:

Everyone here (NEN) advocates discrimination against the Right and Trump supporters all the time..

So, you'll forgive me if I can't shed too many tears for a gay activist couple who targeted bakers solely based on their religious beliefs..

I guess it only matters if Left Wingers are discriminated against.. :eyeroll:

Which is WHY the bakers chose NOT to make the cake for the gay/lesbian couple.. Because they did not want to experience the harm..

I am not sure what point you are trying to make..

Perhaps the baker wanted to make a stink by refusing to bake the cake for the gay couple.

Yea.. The bakers put out an ad on CRAIGSLIST saying, "Any gay or lesbian couple. Please come to our shop so we can refuse to make you a cake and cause the loss of business and all the death threats from supposed "tolerant" Left Wingers.."

Yer really reaching there, bub...

Just like the gay/lesbian couple is discriminating against the bakers by choosing THEM over any other baker who would gladly do their cake for them...

These bakers were TARGETED by the gay/lesbian couple BECAUSE of the bakers' religious beliefs

Mr. Trump, even from a remove, always promised to be the most important figure at the debate. Regardless of the specific debate questions, many Democratic voters will be listening for how each candidate plans to take down Mr. Trump.
https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/campaign-wire-election-2020/card/1560859018

Now THAT oughta be worth some laughs. :D

I can see the benefits from both sides...

Yes.. And the bakers chose NOT to compromise their religious beliefs..

So the gay/lesbian couple is not causing any harm to the baker.

Yer right.. Because the bakers chose NOT to compromise their religious beliefs..

The baker is discriminating against the gay/lesbian couple.

Yes...

Just like a Democrat who runs a business to help candidates win elections would be discriminating against a GOP'er who wants the Democrat business to help him win his election..

The baker could easily adapt their business to fit their religious beliefs by offering a choice of only standard wedding cakes without any customization.

That would cause greater economic harm to the bakers.. Plus you get into the whole "artist" thing as well..

If you approach a painter and ask them to paint you in the nude, do they not have the right to refuse such a request?? What if you happened to be gay.. Could the artist refuse the request??

Of course..

Then gay/lesbian couples that want a customized cake instead of the cakes offered by the baker would have no basis for discrimination.

And the couple have a dozen different bakers that they can choose from.. In this case, the couple WANTED the christian bakers so as to make a stink..

Just because something is different in one way does not mean it is not the same in the ways it is the same.

Except for that they are NOT the same in what matters most..

The greater good/harm...

Patrol Officer John Hetland
Racine Police Department, Wisconsin
End of Watch: Monday, June 17, 2019

https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/13839e8d10b9303c8d9aee50576e15b15f4844be91d15073a21097a85b780c50.jpg

I have been tracking Officer Down stats for quite a while now..

It's wholly depressing to realize how many cops die across the country.. :(

In THIS scenario the correct ruling is to rule in favor of the bakers..

It all comes down to the Greater Good/Greater Harm argument...

Which serves the greater good...

Which Party would suffer the greater harm...

Logically, rationally and objectively...

Apples and Eskimos...

That's a safety issue that has nothing to do with religious freedom and everything to do with saving lives..

THAT scenario is in no way relevant to THIS scenario...

But THOSE scenarios aren't THIS scenario..

In THIS scenario the correct ruling is to rule in favor of the bakers..

To run your business as you see fit??

The hell it don't..

Religious freedom not not give you the right to discriminate against people or violate their rights.

Which rights are you referring to??

The right to have a wedding cake made??

The bakers in question are NOT interfering with the rights of the gay couple to have a wedding cake made..

The bakers in question are simply affirming their RIGHT not to have to do it..

The couple in question are free to go to one of the other DOZEN bakers in the area that will have NO problem making a gay cake for a gay couple..

So, the gay couple's "rights" are not being interfered with in the least..

It's the BAKER'S rights that are being ignored..

So if the baker does not want to make cakes for gays/lesbians the baker is free to make the sacrifice for their religious beliefs to find a line of work that does not require violating their religious belief.

One has to look at the greater good. Or, in this case, the greater harm..

Who is harmed more??

The religious couple who have to give up what they love and lose their livelihood??

Or the gay couple who simply must find a different baker in an area where there are dozens...

Obviously the greater harm is to the religious couple..

Hence the ruling...

If you look at the situation OBJECTIVELY, free from hysterical emotionalism, the answer is clear...

Justice Thomas urges U.S. Supreme Court to feel free to reverse precedents

(Reuters) - Justice Clarence Thomas on Monday urged the U.S. Supreme Court to feel less bound to upholding precedent, advancing a view that if adopted by enough of his fellow justices could result in more past decisions being overruled, perhaps including the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion nationwide.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-court-thomas/justice-thomas-urges-u-s-supreme-court-to-feel-free-to-reverse-precedents-idUSKCN1TI2KJ

Say goodbye to Roe v Wade, Democrats...

So, yea... Occasional Cortex is using those words VERY lightly.. She just wants to throw bombs... :eyeroll:

WTF!??

How did "rebellious" replace "religious"??? Musta slipped on the spell check...

That SHOULD read:

The SCOTUS is simply going to re-affirm that religious rights take priority over non-discrimination rights.. Especially when other options are available to those being "discriminated" against..

This will probably not change anything, other than to delay the case from being heard in the Supreme Court for another year.

The writing's on the wall...

The SCOTUS is simply going to re-affirm that rebellious rights take priority over non-discrimination rights.. Especially when other options are available to those being "discriminated" against..

It's funny.. The Left Wingers who push these publicity-seeking bullshit cases are the ones who are actually being discriminatory... :D

Howz THAT for irony.. :D

Once again. A perfect example of why it's IMPOSSIBLE to take Democrats seriously when it comes to their "outrages"..

Because the FACTS clearly show that it's NOT "outrage" that prompts their outbursts..

It's clearly nothing but Party bigotry and slavery..

Trump says U.S. agency will begin removing millions of illegal immigrants

Trump also said in the tweet that Guatemala "is getting ready to sign a Safe-Third Agreement."

President Trump....

Making America GREAT Again....

Exactly..

Democrats are whining SOLELY because Republicans are better at cheating (if it is, in fact, cheating) than the Democrats are...

The only people who would not be counted are people who should not be counted anyways..

ILLEGAL immigrants..