Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Not sure what you mean. The laws of demand and supply don't cease to exist simply for right wing expedience.But that assumes that we have a market. That is not true. Even in the gaming industry, the top three are already cornering it. National economies are controlled by third party payers and insider corporations, therefore markets are only transitionary artifacts. And the age of transitions is now consolidating into internet based automation. Market models are history.more like actually solving our dilemma in a market friendly manner simply Because we have a Commerce Clause.Upgrading? Like in that old movie where the whole NYC was one big prison and they had to rescue the president's downed helicopter from it? What was the title?We should be upgrading Ellis Island and surrounding infrastructure and generating revenue from foreign nationals in a market friendly manner.
Not sure what you mean. The laws of demand and supply don't cease to exist simply for right wing expedience.But that assumes that we have a market. That is not true. Even in the gaming industry, the top three are already cornering it. National economies are controlled by third party payers and insider corporations, therefore markets are only transitionary artifacts. And the age of transitions is now consolidating into internet based automation. Market models are history.more like actually solving our dilemma in a market friendly manner simply Because we have a Commerce Clause.Upgrading? Like in that old movie where the whole NYC was one big prison and they had to rescue the president's downed helicopter from it? What was the title?We should be upgrading Ellis Island and surrounding infrastructure and generating revenue from foreign nationals in a market friendly manner.
Upgrading Ellis Island and surrounding infrastructure will require "manufacturing" jobs.
We can create what we need, whenever we want. Our welfare clause is General not Common. We can create new Cities in more optimal locations.
FDIC underwriting can be a good thing. The Point is, Prohibition doesn't work, and is unnecessary and improper with our welfare clause, General instead of Common. We should be generating revenue from our border policy.Not sure what you mean. The laws of demand and supply don't cease to exist simply for right wing expedience.But that assumes that we have a market. That is not true. Even in the gaming industry, the top three are already cornering it. National economies are controlled by third party payers and insider corporations, therefore markets are only transitionary artifacts. And the age of transitions is now consolidating into internet based automation. Market models are history.more like actually solving our dilemma in a market friendly manner simply Because we have a Commerce Clause.Upgrading? Like in that old movie where the whole NYC was one big prison and they had to rescue the president's downed helicopter from it? What was the title?We should be upgrading Ellis Island and surrounding infrastructure and generating revenue from foreign nationals in a market friendly manner.
Upgrading Ellis Island and surrounding infrastructure will require "manufacturing" jobs.
We can create what we need, whenever we want. Our welfare clause is General not Common. We can create new Cities in more optimal locations.
The supply demand model works in 2 party systems, where negotiations run between suppliers and buyers. That produces a statistical price balance.
IN the modern economy this is not true.
In the modern economy, it is not the supplier and the buyer that negotiate about prices, but 3rd party payers, usually insurance conglomerates and various payment guarantor banking formations, all underwritten by a centralized government.
FDIC underwriting can be a good thing. The Point is, Prohibition doesn't work, and is unnecessary and improper with our welfare clause, General instead of Common. We should be generating revenue from our border policy.Not sure what you mean. The laws of demand and supply don't cease to exist simply for right wing expedience.But that assumes that we have a market. That is not true. Even in the gaming industry, the top three are already cornering it. National economies are controlled by third party payers and insider corporations, therefore markets are only transitionary artifacts. And the age of transitions is now consolidating into internet based automation. Market models are history.more like actually solving our dilemma in a market friendly manner simply Because we have a Commerce Clause.Upgrading? Like in that old movie where the whole NYC was one big prison and they had to rescue the president's downed helicopter from it? What was the title?
Upgrading Ellis Island and surrounding infrastructure will require "manufacturing" jobs.
We can create what we need, whenever we want. Our welfare clause is General not Common. We can create new Cities in more optimal locations.
The supply demand model works in 2 party systems, where negotiations run between suppliers and buyers. That produces a statistical price balance.
IN the modern economy this is not true.
In the modern economy, it is not the supplier and the buyer that negotiate about prices, but 3rd party payers, usually insurance conglomerates and various payment guarantor banking formations, all underwritten by a centralized government.
Load them up and drop them off in the San Joaquin Valley Calif and cornfields of Kansas and see how fast the find their way back home.Send them to Gitmo. Then quietly send them home from there.let's upgrade Ellis Island and increase the minimum wage; the right wing complains there are not enough white people in our republic.No more Beans for the Beanies???????
Oh noes, how long will that last, before the Taco-Panic attacks, begin?
We end our illegal problem on a permanent basis via Commerce, well regulated.FDIC underwriting can be a good thing. The Point is, Prohibition doesn't work, and is unnecessary and improper with our welfare clause, General instead of Common. We should be generating revenue from our border policy.Not sure what you mean. The laws of demand and supply don't cease to exist simply for right wing expedience.But that assumes that we have a market. That is not true. Even in the gaming industry, the top three are already cornering it. National economies are controlled by third party payers and insider corporations, therefore markets are only transitionary artifacts. And the age of transitions is now consolidating into internet based automation. Market models are history.more like actually solving our dilemma in a market friendly manner simply Because we have a Commerce Clause.
Upgrading Ellis Island and surrounding infrastructure will require "manufacturing" jobs.
We can create what we need, whenever we want. Our welfare clause is General not Common. We can create new Cities in more optimal locations.
The supply demand model works in 2 party systems, where negotiations run between suppliers and buyers. That produces a statistical price balance.
IN the modern economy this is not true.
In the modern economy, it is not the supplier and the buyer that negotiate about prices, but 3rd party payers, usually insurance conglomerates and various payment guarantor banking formations, all underwritten by a centralized government.
But don't these progressive democrat buzzwords and clauses simply mean that you find money for centralized programs by shaking it down on working people? So how w do you generate revenue from a border policy without tagging the caravans? You will just put more obligations to regular border crossing traffic, when people are already losing money on everything. I don't see how this would ever work.
automated smg's.We end our illegal problem on a permanent basis via Commerce, well regulated.FDIC underwriting can be a good thing. The Point is, Prohibition doesn't work, and is unnecessary and improper with our welfare clause, General instead of Common. We should be generating revenue from our border policy.Not sure what you mean. The laws of demand and supply don't cease to exist simply for right wing expedience.But that assumes that we have a market. That is not true. Even in the gaming industry, the top three are already cornering it. National economies are controlled by third party payers and insider corporations, therefore markets are only transitionary artifacts. And the age of transitions is now consolidating into internet based automation. Market models are history.
Upgrading Ellis Island and surrounding infrastructure will require "manufacturing" jobs.
We can create what we need, whenever we want. Our welfare clause is General not Common. We can create new Cities in more optimal locations.
The supply demand model works in 2 party systems, where negotiations run between suppliers and buyers. That produces a statistical price balance.
IN the modern economy this is not true.
In the modern economy, it is not the supplier and the buyer that negotiate about prices, but 3rd party payers, usually insurance conglomerates and various payment guarantor banking formations, all underwritten by a centralized government.
But don't these progressive democrat buzzwords and clauses simply mean that you find money for centralized programs by shaking it down on working people? So how w do you generate revenue from a border policy without tagging the caravans? You will just put more obligations to regular border crossing traffic, when people are already losing money on everything. I don't see how this would ever work.
There must be a capital way.
We end our illegal problem on a permanent basis via Commerce, well regulated.FDIC underwriting can be a good thing. The Point is, Prohibition doesn't work, and is unnecessary and improper with our welfare clause, General instead of Common. We should be generating revenue from our border policy.Not sure what you mean. The laws of demand and supply don't cease to exist simply for right wing expedience.But that assumes that we have a market. That is not true. Even in the gaming industry, the top three are already cornering it. National economies are controlled by third party payers and insider corporations, therefore markets are only transitionary artifacts. And the age of transitions is now consolidating into internet based automation. Market models are history.
Upgrading Ellis Island and surrounding infrastructure will require "manufacturing" jobs.
We can create what we need, whenever we want. Our welfare clause is General not Common. We can create new Cities in more optimal locations.
The supply demand model works in 2 party systems, where negotiations run between suppliers and buyers. That produces a statistical price balance.
IN the modern economy this is not true.
In the modern economy, it is not the supplier and the buyer that negotiate about prices, but 3rd party payers, usually insurance conglomerates and various payment guarantor banking formations, all underwritten by a centralized government.
But don't these progressive democrat buzzwords and clauses simply mean that you find money for centralized programs by shaking it down on working people? So how w do you generate revenue from a border policy without tagging the caravans? You will just put more obligations to regular border crossing traffic, when people are already losing money on everything. I don't see how this would ever work.
There must be a capital way.
I begin to think that you are right. It is also possible that he speaks no English and he uses a translator software.automated smg's.We end our illegal problem on a permanent basis via Commerce, well regulated.FDIC underwriting can be a good thing. The Point is, Prohibition doesn't work, and is unnecessary and improper with our welfare clause, General instead of Common. We should be generating revenue from our border policy.Not sure what you mean. The laws of demand and supply don't cease to exist simply for right wing expedience.
Upgrading Ellis Island and surrounding infrastructure will require "manufacturing" jobs.
We can create what we need, whenever we want. Our welfare clause is General not Common. We can create new Cities in more optimal locations.
The supply demand model works in 2 party systems, where negotiations run between suppliers and buyers. That produces a statistical price balance.
IN the modern economy this is not true.
In the modern economy, it is not the supplier and the buyer that negotiate about prices, but 3rd party payers, usually insurance conglomerates and various payment guarantor banking formations, all underwritten by a centralized government.
But don't these progressive democrat buzzwords and clauses simply mean that you find money for centralized programs by shaking it down on working people? So how w do you generate revenue from a border policy without tagging the caravans? You will just put more obligations to regular border crossing traffic, when people are already losing money on everything. I don't see how this would ever work.
There must be a capital way.
there is no common defense issue on our border; lack of faithful execution of this express and supreme law of the land, is the problem: To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;automated smg's.We end our illegal problem on a permanent basis via Commerce, well regulated.FDIC underwriting can be a good thing. The Point is, Prohibition doesn't work, and is unnecessary and improper with our welfare clause, General instead of Common. We should be generating revenue from our border policy.Not sure what you mean. The laws of demand and supply don't cease to exist simply for right wing expedience.
Upgrading Ellis Island and surrounding infrastructure will require "manufacturing" jobs.
We can create what we need, whenever we want. Our welfare clause is General not Common. We can create new Cities in more optimal locations.
The supply demand model works in 2 party systems, where negotiations run between suppliers and buyers. That produces a statistical price balance.
IN the modern economy this is not true.
In the modern economy, it is not the supplier and the buyer that negotiate about prices, but 3rd party payers, usually insurance conglomerates and various payment guarantor banking formations, all underwritten by a centralized government.
But don't these progressive democrat buzzwords and clauses simply mean that you find money for centralized programs by shaking it down on working people? So how w do you generate revenue from a border policy without tagging the caravans? You will just put more obligations to regular border crossing traffic, when people are already losing money on everything. I don't see how this would ever work.
There must be a capital way.
Capitalism; What is that, sayeth the Right Wing.We end our illegal problem on a permanent basis via Commerce, well regulated.FDIC underwriting can be a good thing. The Point is, Prohibition doesn't work, and is unnecessary and improper with our welfare clause, General instead of Common. We should be generating revenue from our border policy.Not sure what you mean. The laws of demand and supply don't cease to exist simply for right wing expedience.
Upgrading Ellis Island and surrounding infrastructure will require "manufacturing" jobs.
We can create what we need, whenever we want. Our welfare clause is General not Common. We can create new Cities in more optimal locations.
The supply demand model works in 2 party systems, where negotiations run between suppliers and buyers. That produces a statistical price balance.
IN the modern economy this is not true.
In the modern economy, it is not the supplier and the buyer that negotiate about prices, but 3rd party payers, usually insurance conglomerates and various payment guarantor banking formations, all underwritten by a centralized government.
But don't these progressive democrat buzzwords and clauses simply mean that you find money for centralized programs by shaking it down on working people? So how w do you generate revenue from a border policy without tagging the caravans? You will just put more obligations to regular border crossing traffic, when people are already losing money on everything. I don't see how this would ever work.
There must be a capital way.
You mean soviet style again? That has never worked. But yes it would end the immigration problem, because it would make the USA poorer than Honduras.
Dude we don't want them here so processing more isn['t the answer. We don[t need anymore unskilled workers or welfare recipients.there is no common defense issue on our border; lack of faithful execution of this express and supreme law of the land, is the problem: To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;automated smg's.We end our illegal problem on a permanent basis via Commerce, well regulated.FDIC underwriting can be a good thing. The Point is, Prohibition doesn't work, and is unnecessary and improper with our welfare clause, General instead of Common. We should be generating revenue from our border policy.The supply demand model works in 2 party systems, where negotiations run between suppliers and buyers. That produces a statistical price balance.
IN the modern economy this is not true.
In the modern economy, it is not the supplier and the buyer that negotiate about prices, but 3rd party payers, usually insurance conglomerates and various payment guarantor banking formations, all underwritten by a centralized government.
But don't these progressive democrat buzzwords and clauses simply mean that you find money for centralized programs by shaking it down on working people? So how w do you generate revenue from a border policy without tagging the caravans? You will just put more obligations to regular border crossing traffic, when people are already losing money on everything. I don't see how this would ever work.
There must be a capital way.
Ellis Island could process tens of thousands per day. Having this unnecessary and improper pressure on our southern border is simply right wing mismanagement and misapplication of the law.
this is the federal power that is actually delegated to Congress: To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization.Dude we don't want them here so processing more isn['t the answer. We don[t need anymore unskilled workers or welfare recipients.there is no common defense issue on our border; lack of faithful execution of this express and supreme law of the land, is the problem: To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;automated smg's.We end our illegal problem on a permanent basis via Commerce, well regulated.FDIC underwriting can be a good thing. The Point is, Prohibition doesn't work, and is unnecessary and improper with our welfare clause, General instead of Common. We should be generating revenue from our border policy.
But don't these progressive democrat buzzwords and clauses simply mean that you find money for centralized programs by shaking it down on working people? So how w do you generate revenue from a border policy without tagging the caravans? You will just put more obligations to regular border crossing traffic, when people are already losing money on everything. I don't see how this would ever work.
There must be a capital way.
Ellis Island could process tens of thousands per day. Having this unnecessary and improper pressure on our southern border is simply right wing mismanagement and misapplication of the law.
You're pissing into the wind.this is the federal power that is actually delegated to Congress: To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization.Dude we don't want them here so processing more isn['t the answer. We don[t need anymore unskilled workers or welfare recipients.there is no common defense issue on our border; lack of faithful execution of this express and supreme law of the land, is the problem: To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;automated smg's.We end our illegal problem on a permanent basis via Commerce, well regulated.But don't these progressive democrat buzzwords and clauses simply mean that you find money for centralized programs by shaking it down on working people? So how w do you generate revenue from a border policy without tagging the caravans? You will just put more obligations to regular border crossing traffic, when people are already losing money on everything. I don't see how this would ever work.
There must be a capital way.
Ellis Island could process tens of thousands per day. Having this unnecessary and improper pressure on our southern border is simply right wing mismanagement and misapplication of the law.
our wars on crime, drugs, and terror merely create a refugee problem.
thank Goodness for our doctrine of separation of powers.You're pissing into the wind.this is the federal power that is actually delegated to Congress: To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization.Dude we don't want them here so processing more isn['t the answer. We don[t need anymore unskilled workers or welfare recipients.there is no common defense issue on our border; lack of faithful execution of this express and supreme law of the land, is the problem: To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;automated smg's.We end our illegal problem on a permanent basis via Commerce, well regulated.
There must be a capital way.
Ellis Island could process tens of thousands per day. Having this unnecessary and improper pressure on our southern border is simply right wing mismanagement and misapplication of the law.
our wars on crime, drugs, and terror merely create a refugee problem.
Capitalism; What is that, sayeth the Right Wing.We end our illegal problem on a permanent basis via Commerce, well regulated.FDIC underwriting can be a good thing. The Point is, Prohibition doesn't work, and is unnecessary and improper with our welfare clause, General instead of Common. We should be generating revenue from our border policy.The supply demand model works in 2 party systems, where negotiations run between suppliers and buyers. That produces a statistical price balance.
IN the modern economy this is not true.
In the modern economy, it is not the supplier and the buyer that negotiate about prices, but 3rd party payers, usually insurance conglomerates and various payment guarantor banking formations, all underwritten by a centralized government.
But don't these progressive democrat buzzwords and clauses simply mean that you find money for centralized programs by shaking it down on working people? So how w do you generate revenue from a border policy without tagging the caravans? You will just put more obligations to regular border crossing traffic, when people are already losing money on everything. I don't see how this would ever work.
There must be a capital way.
You mean soviet style again? That has never worked. But yes it would end the immigration problem, because it would make the USA poorer than Honduras.
We should be promoting the general welfare every time we have any problems. We have a general welfare clause and a commerce clause. We should be generating revenue from public policies whenever possible.Capitalism; What is that, sayeth the Right Wing.We end our illegal problem on a permanent basis via Commerce, well regulated.FDIC underwriting can be a good thing. The Point is, Prohibition doesn't work, and is unnecessary and improper with our welfare clause, General instead of Common. We should be generating revenue from our border policy.
But don't these progressive democrat buzzwords and clauses simply mean that you find money for centralized programs by shaking it down on working people? So how w do you generate revenue from a border policy without tagging the caravans? You will just put more obligations to regular border crossing traffic, when people are already losing money on everything. I don't see how this would ever work.
There must be a capital way.
You mean soviet style again? That has never worked. But yes it would end the immigration problem, because it would make the USA poorer than Honduras.
I don't usually use the word capitalism. I think most people use it as the opposite of socialism.
