The Right To Bear Arms

[P@triot]

You simply don't understand the usage of words; the general badfare is all the right wing has.

You're attacking your own position...

It is in the "General Welfare" of the United States to stop the manufacturing, sales, and consumption of narcotics!



Why do lefties lose their shit when we finally give in to what they want?

 

[danielpalos]

You simply don't understand the usage of words; the general badfare is all the right wing has.

You're attacking your own position...

It is in the "General Welfare" of the United States to stop the manufacturing, sales, and consumption of narcotics!



Why do lefties lose their shit when we finally give in to what they want?

The general welfare does not mean the general badfare; the common offense and the general warfare, does that.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

A Conflict of Laws, you claim.

Not at all. A conflict between your feeling of what the law should be and the reality of the actual law.

Should I ask California for an, Order to Show Cause; on why unequal protection of the law should be tolerated?

By all means. Be sure to post their mocking response to you.

The law is, employment at will. that means, employment at the will of either party. there can be no attainder to that legal concept.

The law is, employment at will.

Exactly. The law isn't UE benefits at will.

There is no basis to deny or disparage benefits on an at-will basis, but for, "right wing, political hate on the poor."

There is no basis to deny or disparage benefits on an at-will basis

Sure there is. UE isn't for quitters or never workers.

You have no state law or regulation that says it is, or you'd have posted it already.

Employment at will is defined by federal Doctrine in American law.

And that's why you aren't eligible for UE benefits.

 

[danielpalos]

The law is, employment at will. that means, employment at the will of either party. there can be no attainder to that legal concept.

The law is, employment at will.

Exactly. The law isn't UE benefits at will.

There is no basis to deny or disparage benefits on an at-will basis, but for, "right wing, political hate on the poor."

There is no basis to deny or disparage benefits on an at-will basis

Sure there is. UE isn't for quitters or never workers.

You have no state law or regulation that says it is, or you'd have posted it already.

Employment at will is defined by federal Doctrine in American law.

And that's why you aren't eligible for UE benefits.

for-cause criteria in our at-will employment States?

 

[Dr Grump]

I think you'll find as you go through this board engaging with the likes of Patriot, he/she doesn't know much about anything...

Says the dimwit Aussie who thinks the number of states won by a presidential candidate is "irrelevant".

I'm not Australian. And I never said that My Little Fake News Petal...

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The law is, employment at will.

Exactly. The law isn't UE benefits at will.

There is no basis to deny or disparage benefits on an at-will basis, but for, "right wing, political hate on the poor."

There is no basis to deny or disparage benefits on an at-will basis

Sure there is. UE isn't for quitters or never workers.

You have no state law or regulation that says it is, or you'd have posted it already.

Employment at will is defined by federal Doctrine in American law.

And that's why you aren't eligible for UE benefits.

for-cause criteria in our at-will employment States?

UE isn't for quitters or never workers.

You have no state law or regulation that says it is, or you'd have posted it already.

 

[danielpalos]

There is no basis to deny or disparage benefits on an at-will basis, but for, "right wing, political hate on the poor."

There is no basis to deny or disparage benefits on an at-will basis

Sure there is. UE isn't for quitters or never workers.

You have no state law or regulation that says it is, or you'd have posted it already.

Employment at will is defined by federal Doctrine in American law.

And that's why you aren't eligible for UE benefits.

for-cause criteria in our at-will employment States?

UE isn't for quitters or never workers.

You have no state law or regulation that says it is, or you'd have posted it already.

It is a social safety net and more cost effective than welfare; stop whining about taxes for social spending, right wingers.

 

[hadit]

Robin Hood was a crook

A rich guy can "purchase" public office and "make himself richer while making the poor, poorer, is better?"

That sounds like an excuse, taking money from someone else never improves one's life. You don't need to take from the successful, make your own wealth.

Republicans plan massive cuts to programs for the poor

Handouts have never made anyone's life better… Just visit an Indian reservation sometime. It makes life much worse

Private charity only covers multitudes of sins, not simple poverty. You confuse the issue. That is why I never take the right wing seriously about economics, but for, "twice a day".

And once again, you've been painted into a corner and have resorted to flailing around, spouting inane, meaningless slogans.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

There is no basis to deny or disparage benefits on an at-will basis

Sure there is. UE isn't for quitters or never workers.

You have no state law or regulation that says it is, or you'd have posted it already.

Employment at will is defined by federal Doctrine in American law.

And that's why you aren't eligible for UE benefits.

for-cause criteria in our at-will employment States?

UE isn't for quitters or never workers.

You have no state law or regulation that says it is, or you'd have posted it already.

It is a social safety net and more cost effective than welfare; stop whining about taxes for social spending, right wingers.

It is a social safety net

But it's not for quitters or never workers.

 

[danielpalos]

A rich guy can "purchase" public office and "make himself richer while making the poor, poorer, is better?"

That sounds like an excuse, taking money from someone else never improves one's life. You don't need to take from the successful, make your own wealth.

Republicans plan massive cuts to programs for the poor

Handouts have never made anyone's life better… Just visit an Indian reservation sometime. It makes life much worse

Private charity only covers multitudes of sins, not simple poverty. You confuse the issue. That is why I never take the right wing seriously about economics, but for, "twice a day".

And once again, you've been painted into a corner and have resorted to flailing around, spouting inane, meaningless slogans.

Solving simple poverty, promotes the general welfare; that is the bottom line.

 

[danielpalos]

Employment at will is defined by federal Doctrine in American law.

And that's why you aren't eligible for UE benefits.

for-cause criteria in our at-will employment States?

UE isn't for quitters or never workers.

You have no state law or regulation that says it is, or you'd have posted it already.

It is a social safety net and more cost effective than welfare; stop whining about taxes for social spending, right wingers.

It is a social safety net

But it's not for quitters or never workers.

The bottom line is, solving simple poverty; it is termed and styled, a solution. No wonder the right wing, never gets it.

 

[hadit]

That sounds like an excuse, taking money from someone else never improves one's life. You don't need to take from the successful, make your own wealth.

Republicans plan massive cuts to programs for the poor

Handouts have never made anyone's life better… Just visit an Indian reservation sometime. It makes life much worse

Private charity only covers multitudes of sins, not simple poverty. You confuse the issue. That is why I never take the right wing seriously about economics, but for, "twice a day".

And once again, you've been painted into a corner and have resorted to flailing around, spouting inane, meaningless slogans.

Solving simple poverty, promotes the general welfare; that is the bottom line.

And you haven't stopped. When you're in a deep hole, the best advice is to stop digging.

 

[hadit]

And that's why you aren't eligible for UE benefits.

for-cause criteria in our at-will employment States?

UE isn't for quitters or never workers.

You have no state law or regulation that says it is, or you'd have posted it already.

It is a social safety net and more cost effective than welfare; stop whining about taxes for social spending, right wingers.

It is a social safety net

But it's not for quitters or never workers.

The bottom line is, solving simple poverty; it is termed and styled, a solution. No wonder the right wing, never gets it.

Nonsense.

 

[danielpalos]

Republicans plan massive cuts to programs for the poor

Handouts have never made anyone's life better… Just visit an Indian reservation sometime. It makes life much worse

Private charity only covers multitudes of sins, not simple poverty. You confuse the issue. That is why I never take the right wing seriously about economics, but for, "twice a day".

And once again, you've been painted into a corner and have resorted to flailing around, spouting inane, meaningless slogans.

Solving simple poverty, promotes the general welfare; that is the bottom line.

And you haven't stopped. When you're in a deep hole, the best advice is to stop digging.

Yes, it does; You have to Prove it doesn't. lol. the right wing is merely, too inferior to do any such Thing.

 

[danielpalos]

for-cause criteria in our at-will employment States?

UE isn't for quitters or never workers.

You have no state law or regulation that says it is, or you'd have posted it already.

It is a social safety net and more cost effective than welfare; stop whining about taxes for social spending, right wingers.

It is a social safety net

But it's not for quitters or never workers.

The bottom line is, solving simple poverty; it is termed and styled, a solution. No wonder the right wing, never gets it.

Nonsense.

It is the bottom line; you have nothing but fallacy, and prove it in every argument.

 

[hadit]

Handouts have never made anyone's life better… Just visit an Indian reservation sometime. It makes life much worse

Private charity only covers multitudes of sins, not simple poverty. You confuse the issue. That is why I never take the right wing seriously about economics, but for, "twice a day".

And once again, you've been painted into a corner and have resorted to flailing around, spouting inane, meaningless slogans.

Solving simple poverty, promotes the general welfare; that is the bottom line.

And you haven't stopped. When you're in a deep hole, the best advice is to stop digging.

Yes, it does; You have to Prove it doesn't. lol. the right wing is merely, too inferior to do any such Thing.

Nonsense.

 

[hadit]

UE isn't for quitters or never workers.

You have no state law or regulation that says it is, or you'd have posted it already.

It is a social safety net and more cost effective than welfare; stop whining about taxes for social spending, right wingers.

It is a social safety net

But it's not for quitters or never workers.

The bottom line is, solving simple poverty; it is termed and styled, a solution. No wonder the right wing, never gets it.

Nonsense.

It is the bottom line; you have nothing but fallacy, and prove it in every argument.

Nonsense.

 

[danielpalos]

Thank you for ceding the argument and the point, with your, nothing but, "nonsense" instead of a valid argument.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

And that's why you aren't eligible for UE benefits.

for-cause criteria in our at-will employment States?

UE isn't for quitters or never workers.

You have no state law or regulation that says it is, or you'd have posted it already.

It is a social safety net and more cost effective than welfare; stop whining about taxes for social spending, right wingers.

It is a social safety net

But it's not for quitters or never workers.

The bottom line is, solving simple poverty; it is termed and styled, a solution. No wonder the right wing, never gets it.

Paying people who quit or never worked will increase poverty.

 

[hadit]

Thank you for ceding the argument and the point, with your, nothing but, "nonsense" instead of a valid argument.

Nonsense is all that your posts deserve when you get to the flailing uselessly, spouting meaningless slogans point. Make a cogent argument and you might get a more substantive response. Until then, nonsense.