Manhole Eunuchsbane Posted October 3, 2017 Share Posted October 3, 2017 Just now, Nasty LongRider said: Thanks! You might want to consider duelly, for when you demand satisfaction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongRider Posted October 3, 2017 Share Posted October 3, 2017 13 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said: You might want to consider duelly, for when you demand satisfaction. And doolely for when, you know, you don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DireWolfSpirit Posted October 3, 2017 Share Posted October 3, 2017 Dually Truck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted October 3, 2017 Share Posted October 3, 2017 I’m sure Trump’s single issue Second Amendment supporters are going to love hearing this: Quote "What happened in Las Vegas is in many ways a miracle. The police department has done such an incredible job and we’ll be talking about gun laws as time goes by,” Trump told reporters. http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/353571-trump-what-happened-in-las-vegas-is-in-many-ways-a-miracle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mlle. Zabzie Posted October 3, 2017 Share Posted October 3, 2017 Want to bring folks attention to Chamber of Commerce v. IRS, which is a huge District Court case in the tax world, that was just handed down in Texas (Western District). Basically, the CoC, aided and abetted by Allergan, was suing against certain "anti-inversion" regulations that the IRS promulgated pretty much to kill the Allergan/Pfizer deal (it worked). The IRS issued the regulations without notice and comment period, taking the view that since they issued them as temporary and proposed at the same time that they didn't have to comply with the APA's notice and comment period requirements. WRONG said the judge. This is a big deal for two reasons. The first is that practitioners (including yours truly) thought that the CoC didn't have standing to sue (the standing issue will absolutely be appealed) under the anti-injunction act). The second is that this puts limits on the IRS's ability to issue "legislative" regulations, targeted in the way that they were in temporary form, without a normal notice and comment period. To be clear, I personally think it is absolutely the correct policy decision, but it brings a lot of uncertainty into huge suites of Treasury regulations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shryke Posted October 3, 2017 Share Posted October 3, 2017 Another day, another mass shooting and the gun nuts are already circling the wagons to insure nothing will be done about it. Probably the best thing I saw on the right-wing/gun-nut side about this was actually from from O'Reilly of all people. Quote “This is the price of freedom," he continued. "Violent nuts are allowed to roam free until they do damage, no matter how threatening they are." http://thehill.com/homenews/media/353503-bill-oreilly-las-vegas-shooting-the-price-of-freedom It's nice to at least see someone on that side being honest that this is what they are ok with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mother Cocanuts Posted October 3, 2017 Share Posted October 3, 2017 15 minutes ago, Shryke said: Another day, another mass shooting and the gun nuts are already circling the wagons to insure nothing will be done about it. Probably the best thing I saw on the right-wing/gun-nut side about this was actually from from O'Reilly of all people. http://thehill.com/homenews/media/353503-bill-oreilly-las-vegas-shooting-the-price-of-freedom It's nice to at least see someone on that side being honest that this is what they are ok with. Doesn't sound like a "gun-nut" to me. You can't prevent negative consequences least of all by imposing some blanket rule that presumes everyone is a likely violent offender. It is the price of freedom. You can't have it both ways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Week Posted October 3, 2017 Share Posted October 3, 2017 17 minutes ago, Mother Cocanuts said: Doesn't sound like a "gun-nut" to me. You can't prevent negative consequences least of all by imposing some blanket rule that presumes everyone is a likely violent offender. It is the price of freedom. You can't have it both ways. Complete freedom achieved by 59 people in Las Vegas (and family and friends) and counting. As ME said before, Freedom ain't Free -- in this case, it is soaked with the blood of innocents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mother Cocanuts Posted October 3, 2017 Share Posted October 3, 2017 1 minute ago, Week said: Complete freedom achieved by 59 people in Las Vegas (and family and friends) and counting. As ME said before, Freedom ain't Free -- in this case, it is soaked with the blood of innocents. Your response makes no sense. Freedom is free; that's the reason it's "freedom." Don't tell me that you believe freedom and complete safety are a packaged deal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.