All Posts (Eers88)


(1) 2 3 4 ... 540 »


 
Re: Ohhell supports same-sex marriage

Joined:
12/7/2009 8:07 pm
From Charlottesville, Virginia
Posts: 10791
It is interesting to read the first few pages of this thread in light of the ruling and the massive celebration across the country.

Posted on: Ystrday 8:56 am
_________________
Open in new window
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: Ohhell supports same-sex marriage

Joined:
12/7/2009 8:07 pm
From Charlottesville, Virginia
Posts: 10791
In the eyes of the law, marriage is a contract. The legal consequences of marriage relate almost exclusively to property rights (such as whether a spouse has a right to the property) and the taxation thereof. They also affect insurance (such as the right to health insurance through a spouse's policy), employment rights (such as the right to take FMLA leave if your spouse is sick), and medical decision making for a spouse in some states. What good reason is there for a state to operate two sets of property rules for its citizens based on something as arbitrary as their sexual preference? There is no inherent characteristic of a same sex union that calls for their property to be treated differently. If we recognize that it is socially beneficial to allow a sick person to be cared for by a loved one without losing his or her job, how does the fact that the caregiver is the same sex make it any different? If it is good policy to allow spouses to avoid gift taxes if they own property jointly when one of them dies, what does the fact that the spouse is of the same sex matter?

Posted on: 6/27 2:38 pm
_________________
Open in new window
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: Who Really Won the Civil War?

Joined:
12/7/2009 8:07 pm
From Charlottesville, Virginia
Posts: 10791
Quote:

sg44gold wrote:
Quote:

Eers88 wrote:

Like any symbol, people can ascribe whatever meaning they want, but that doesn't change the fact that the flag was created as a symbol of a racist and white supremacist government.



And while you are stating this as fact ... you DO realize that those of whom you speak were all Southern DEMOCRATS!!!


True. At that time the Democrats were politically conservative, and Republicans were politically liberal. So what is your point? Democrats are bad because they used to be conservatives? Kind of a weird argument from a conservative.

Posted on: 6/26 2:22 pm
_________________
Open in new window
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: Who Really Won the Civil War?

Joined:
12/7/2009 8:07 pm
From Charlottesville, Virginia
Posts: 10791
I am not the one attempting to prohibit private citizens from engaging in free speech. Like I said, they can fly whatever flag they want in any context they want. My point is that they cannot bitch when people don't perceive flying a symbol of white supremacy as one of love and inclusion.

The discussion about the use of the word nigga arose out of white people saying black people should not be able to use the word. That is the context of the discussion. It involved a ban on speech. I am not saying private citizens should be banned from flying the flag. The context of the discussion regarding the flag arose out of a state government flying it on state grounds, which I object to. Then people changed it to a discussion about whether individuals should be able to fly it, and the General Lee and WalMart, etc. I could care less whether it is on a car in a TV show. That is art, not real life.

Posted on: 6/25 9:37 pm
_________________
Open in new window
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: WV #1!!!

Joined:
12/7/2009 8:07 pm
From Charlottesville, Virginia
Posts: 10791
Also #1 in couch potatos per capita:

Biggest Couch Potato States

Posted on: 6/25 3:25 pm
_________________
Open in new window
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: Obamacare goes to the Supreme Court

Joined:
12/7/2009 8:07 pm
From Charlottesville, Virginia
Posts: 10791
Quote:

brobison wrote:
Eers88,

What do you think about the ruling? Do you think they ruled with the concern of the people who might lose health coverage?

I was listening to NPR and I thought at the crux of the case was the law saying something about states having exchanges that subsidies could come from the federal government and that these states had not set up exchanges and the law left it as maybe the subsidies shouldn't come.

Is this normal for the SCOTUS to do things like this? Should they have required the Congress to change the law?


The Supreme Court's decision interprets the language of the ACA and doesn't act to change the law. The Court engages in statutory construction (meaning statutory interpretation) all the time. There are principles of statutory construction that courts apply, and that is what the Supreme Court did. In this case, the trial court, the court of appeals, and the Supreme Court all ruled the same way, and these are three of the most conservative courts in the country. So, it doesn't seem like they are overreaching.

The issue was whether the statute limited subsidies to people who receive health insurance through exchanges created by states, of which there are only 14, or if it also provided for subsidies when the state's exchange was run by the federal government, of which there are 36. The specific statutory provision does not expressly say that it includes exchanges operated by the federal government. Because the Court found that this language was ambiguous, meaning that it is capable of more than one interpretation, the Court then set out to determine what Congress meant. which is the standard when statutes are ambiguous. Courts interpret statutes as a whole, rather than in the limited context of a single provision, in order to provide context. The Court relied heavily on other portions of the statute that indicate that Congress intended to provide subsidies through all of the exchanges regardless of whether it was run by the state or federal government. Thus, the Supreme Court found that Congress intended to include all of them and just drafted the specific provision poorly.

The principles of statutory construction allow for a lot of wiggle room. They aren't cut and dry and don't necessarily lead to a specific result. I think the Court's opinion is sound, however, and is based more on pragmatism than anything else.

Posted on: 6/25 3:17 pm
_________________
Open in new window
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: Who Really Won the Civil War?

Joined:
12/7/2009 8:07 pm
From Charlottesville, Virginia
Posts: 10791
Quote:

WVisHome wrote:
Quote:

Eers88 wrote:


Like any symbol, people can ascribe whatever meaning they want, but that doesn't change the fact that the flag word niqqer was created coined as a symbol a derogatory reference to black people of a by racist and white supremacist[s] government. I don't know why anyone would want to fly it use the word or how they can be proud of anything the flag stands for using such a harmful word of their past in everyday speech. Southerners Black people have much to be proud of, and they have plenty of symbols words from which to choose to express that pride clearly and unambiguously.


So once again what's good for the goose isn't good for the gander.


I am not saying individuals do not have the right to fly the confederate flag. I have never said that. I also think people should be free to use whatever words they want to express themselves. They cannot complain, however, that people say they are racist and/or white supremacist when they use words that are commonly understood as racist and symbols that are correctly understood as white supremacist.

BTW - your analogy to speech and black people saying nigga doesn't work because it ignores context. I am not sure why you cannot understand that context matters, but it does.

Posted on: 6/25 1:51 pm
_________________
Open in new window
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: Obamacare goes to the Supreme Court

Joined:
12/7/2009 8:07 pm
From Charlottesville, Virginia
Posts: 10791

Posted on: 6/25 12:56 pm
_________________
Open in new window
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: Who Really Won the Civil War?

Joined:
12/7/2009 8:07 pm
From Charlottesville, Virginia
Posts: 10791
Quote:

WVisHome wrote:
The meaning of the word niqqer can change but the meaning of a flag can't.

Got it.


Like any symbol, people can ascribe whatever meaning they want, but that doesn't change the fact that the flag was created as a symbol of a racist and white supremacist government. I don't know why anyone would want to fly it or how they can be proud of anything the flag stands for. Southerners have much to be proud of, and they have plenty of symbols from which to choose to express that pride clearly and unambiguously.

Posted on: 6/25 12:53 pm
_________________
Open in new window
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: Who Really Won the Civil War?

Joined:
12/7/2009 8:07 pm
From Charlottesville, Virginia
Posts: 10791
Quote:

WVisHome wrote:
Confederate flag doesn't represent racism.

Meanwhile while the sheeple are arguing over a stupid flag....Obama signed the TPP...nail in the coffin for domestic manufacturing jobs.

But that's not important....back to your regularly scheduled bullshit.


Well, according to the founding fathers of the confederacy, it actually represents racism and white supremacy. The flag we are discussing is the battle flag of the government of the confederate states of america. Alexander Stephens, the vice president of the confederate states, noted that the United States was founded on the principle that all people are created equal, and said:

Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner- stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery subordination to the superior race is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth.

Thus, the flag represents a government that was based on the principle that whites are supreme over blacks. The founders themselves referred to racism as the "cornerstone" of their government, and took pride on it being the first government in the world founded on this principle. Now, back to your regularly scheduled bullshit.

Posted on: 6/25 10:13 am
_________________
Open in new window
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: Who Really Won the Civil War?

Joined:
12/7/2009 8:07 pm
From Charlottesville, Virginia
Posts: 10791
Quote:

brobison wrote:
https://www.yahoo.com/autos/general-le ... ing-its-122294326432.html

On the flip side, don't blame the US government. Blame the morons in this country who believe that flying the Confederate flag or even SELLING the Confederate flag contributes to the problems in SC.

The fact is, this nut ball is famous because we now have coverage of him 24-7. I don't know why the police couldn't have mistakenly thought he had a gun and shot him.

The facts are, gun control shows no sign of working for these types of crimes....I am sure that the Confederate flag on the capitol didn't tell him to kill those people....Well maybe it did but if so the problem isn't with the flag, its with the people who "heard" the flag.


I don't think you understand this right. I went to school in SC and have worked there, especially in Charleston, since 1990. I have no doubt that flying the confederate flag on the state house grounds contributes to the racial issues. SC has a culture where people actually debate whether the state should officially fly the flag of a government that was founded on white supremacy. The answer is obviously "no," but it still flies there for a reason. Racial bigotry still thrives in SC, which is why the flag that symbolizes it still flies. And because it flies, racial bigots feel emboldened and empowered to express their hate openly. There is no question the flag needs to come down, even if it doesn't talk to people.

Posted on: 6/24 9:36 pm
_________________
Open in new window
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: WVU BBall Thread for Things that Don't Need their Own Thread

Joined:
12/7/2009 8:07 pm
From Charlottesville, Virginia
Posts: 10791
Open in new window

Posted on: 6/24 4:03 pm
_________________
Open in new window
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: Big Recruiting Stretch Looking Good

Joined:
12/7/2009 8:07 pm
From Charlottesville, Virginia
Posts: 10791
You don't think Holgorsen could do that? I am not saying he will, but I don't doubt that he could.

Posted on: 6/24 4:00 pm
_________________
Open in new window
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: Big Recruiting Stretch Looking Good

Joined:
12/7/2009 8:07 pm
From Charlottesville, Virginia
Posts: 10791
Quote:

wvudee wrote:
why would a top rated TE come to wvu? I wouldn't think that would be the smartest decision for his future...


I bet Holgorsen could find a way to get him 100 catches for 1,000 yards.

Posted on: 6/24 2:49 pm
_________________
Open in new window
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: Jerry West Scholarship

Joined:
12/7/2009 8:07 pm
From Charlottesville, Virginia
Posts: 10791
It will be interesting to see whether it affects recruiting. It might matter to some players. Not everyone gets offered a scholarship named after the NBA logo.

Posted on: 6/20 7:28 pm
_________________
Open in new window
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: 2014 Hottest Year on Record

Joined:
12/7/2009 8:07 pm
From Charlottesville, Virginia
Posts: 10791
Quote:

mntnir wrote:
Liberal, conservative, whatever. I don't care. I said nothing of either. What's frustrating is coming to this site hoping to find WVU sports news to find that no one has posted in a sports thread in days, yet the soapbox is full of many new pages of bickering. Ridiculous.


So then you decide to start bickering in the sports related threads? Makes perfect sense.

Posted on: 6/18 3:47 pm
_________________
Open in new window
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: Random anything goes non-WVU College Football thread.

Joined:
12/7/2009 8:07 pm
From Charlottesville, Virginia
Posts: 10791
Quote:

SunSideLegen wrote:
Texas looking like they might get investigated for $100 handshakes.

On my phone but the story is on

Lostlettermen.com



The story about Chris Simms?

Posted on: 6/18 3:27 pm
_________________
Open in new window
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: Song Title Game

Joined:
12/7/2009 8:07 pm
From Charlottesville, Virginia
Posts: 10791
What a WONDERFUL World (Joey Ramone cover)


Posted on: 6/18 2:02 pm
_________________
Open in new window
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: Big Recruiting Stretch Looking Good

Joined:
12/7/2009 8:07 pm
From Charlottesville, Virginia
Posts: 10791
Is it typical to give kickers a full scholarship?

Posted on: 6/18 1:54 pm
_________________
Open in new window
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: Wide Receiver Me? Wide Receiver U!

Joined:
12/7/2009 8:07 pm
From Charlottesville, Virginia
Posts: 10791
Quote:

RadioShark wrote:
I had two brothers, mom only had two titties. I had to suck daddy, and that's why I drink.


You can milk anything with nipples.

Posted on: 6/18 1:52 pm
_________________
Open in new window
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 



 Top
(1) 2 3 4 ... 540 »




Login
Username:

Password:

remember me





Copyright © 2004-2011 wemustignitethiscouch.com All Rights Reserved