• Swordsmyth's Avatar
    Today, 01:49 AM
    The monarch doesn't reap 100% of economic output unless he is taxing his people at 100% which would be an extreme of tyranny rarely seen in history.
    112 replies | 2755 view(s)
  • Swordsmyth's Avatar
    Today, 01:11 AM
    The judges must choose between the interpretation chosen by the private party and the one chosen by the government agency and SCOTUS just told them to side with the private party in more cases.
    9 replies | 114 view(s)
  • Swordsmyth's Avatar
    Today, 01:02 AM
    The monarch doesn't reap all or even most of the rewards unless he is excessively tyrannical and the temptation to increase his slice of the pie at the expense of total pie size is just as strong or stronger because he has much more power and much less opposition.
    112 replies | 2755 view(s)
  • Swordsmyth's Avatar
    Today, 12:56 AM
    The new limits on Auer deference could constrict administrative agencies from issuing or maintaining certain policies and rules. The Supreme Court threw out a lower court's ruling denying retired U.S. Marine James Kisor, 75, benefits dating back to 1982 arising from battle-related post-traumatic stress disorder. The justices sent the case back to the lower court to reconsider Kisor's claim on the meaning of a regulation that the VA had said was unfavorable to Kisor. Kagan was joined by the three other liberal justices and conservative Chief Justice John Roberts in deciding that the court should uphold Auer deference because of its longstanding tradition of adhering to prior decisions, a principle known as stare decisis. Gorsuch and fellow conservative Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Brett Kavanaugh said Auer deference should have been formally eliminated since it is already on "life support." Kisor's attorney, Paul Hughes, said the ruling significantly narrows agency authority and "delivers a significant victory, not only for our client James Kisor, but also for regulated parties across the spectrum." More at: https://news.yahoo.com/supreme-court-applies-limits-federal-143524356.html
    9 replies | 114 view(s)
  • Swordsmyth's Avatar
    Today, 12:52 AM
    For the second time in three days, conservative U.S. Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch on Wednesday sided with his four liberal colleagues in a 5-4 ruling in favor of a criminal defendant, on this occasion an Oklahoma man convicted of possessing child pornography.The court ruled that the right of Andre Haymond to face a jury trial under the U.S. Constitution's Sixth Amendment was violated when a judge unilaterally imposed an additional prison sentence after Haymond violated the terms of his supervised release. Haymond originally was sentenced to just over three years in prison and 10 years of supervised release after being convicted by a jury in 2010 of possessing pornographic images involving children. He was arrested in 2007 after an undercover agent caught him sharing images online. After completing his sentence, Haymond was found in 2015 in possession of 59 additional images. A judge then imposed a new five-year sentence without a jury's participation. Gorsuch, appointed to the court by President Donald Trump in 2017, found that the federal sentencing law under which the judge acted - which required the judge to send Haymond to prison without a jury's involvement or the requirement that the government prove his guilt - ran afoul of the Constitution as applied in Haymond's case. "Only a jury, acting on proof beyond reasonable doubt, may take a person's liberty. That promise stands as one of the Constitution's most vital protections against arbitrary government," Gorsuch wrote. Justice Stephen Breyer, one of the liberal justices, did not join Gorsuch's opinion, but agreed with the outcome. In dissent, conservative Justice Samuel Alito appeared alarmed that the court might in a future case endanger the entire concept of supervised release. Federal judges in 2018 handled almost 17,000 cases involving revocation of supervised release, Alito said, citing court statistics. If Gorsuch's opinion were to be applied more broadly in the future, "the whole system of supervised release would be like a 40-ton truck speeding down a steep mountain road with no brakes," Alito wrote. More at: https://news.yahoo.com/conservative-u-justice-gorsuch-again-184736262.html
    0 replies | 38 view(s)
  • Swordsmyth's Avatar
    Today, 12:46 AM
    Not if his society is irretrievably harmed, it doesn't matter if you get a 10% larger piece of the pie if the pie shrinks 30%. And as I said, he opens himself up to being pillaged far more than he is able to pillage, especially since the more he acquires wealth the larger a target he makes of himself. But the monarch is just as susceptible to the forces you cite while being far less restrained in his ability to kill the golden goose to get an extra egg.
    112 replies | 2755 view(s)
  • Swordsmyth's Avatar
    Today, 12:41 AM
    The cases I am thinking about are not between two private parties, they are between a government agency and a citizen or business. When a government agency and a private entity disagree on the interpretation of the wording of a law or regulation then the private entity should be given all the benefit of doubt about the meaning.
    9 replies | 114 view(s)
  • Swordsmyth's Avatar
    Today, 12:35 AM
    China said on Tuesday it wants the Canadian government to temporarily stop allowing meat shipments to China after bogus pork export certificates were discovered. The move disrupts a lucrative pork trade for Canada, the world's third-biggest shipper, and comes as China turns to meat imports after African swine fever killed millions of its pigs. Canada and China are also embroiled in a dispute after the chief financial officer of Huawei Technologies Co was detained in Vancouver on a U.S. arrest warrant. "It's a big loss, a huge market," said Martin Lavoie, CEO of Canada Pork International, an export marketing group. "You have alternative markets but (replacing) the volume of China, that's the challenge." China bought C$310 million ($236.32 million) worth of Canadian pork from January through April, making it Canada's third-largest market by value. It is Canada's largest pork market by volume. Canadian pork exporters are likely to find other buyers, such as Mexico, the United States and the Philippines, but may have to accept lower prices, Lavoie said. Canadian pork processors include Olymel, HyLife and Maple Leaf Foods. Buyers for specialty products such as pig feet may be hard to find, Lavoie said. China's move also applies to beef, but Canadian sales to China amounted to less than 3% of Canada's beef exports last year.
    51 replies | 1575 view(s)
  • Swordsmyth's Avatar
    Today, 12:29 AM
    The idea is to force them to give deference to citizens and businesses making reasonable interpretations.
    9 replies | 114 view(s)
  • Swordsmyth's Avatar
    Today, 12:26 AM
    He is more likely to realize that his actions may harm his own interests in the long run or by setting a precedent that allows other to vote themselves free stuff from his bank account and if he thinks far enough ahead to care about his children and grandchildren he is even more likely to come to better conclusions. It's funny because although I admit that the mechanism is not perfect (I even insist on that because of what I am about to point out) this is the entire basis you have for your flawed theory that monarchy is the best route to liberty and you are now undermining it in order to serve your globalist cultural-equivalency position.
    112 replies | 2755 view(s)
  • Swordsmyth's Avatar
    Today, 12:07 AM
    The Supreme Court denied the conservative legal movement something it has long sought Wednesday, refusing to strip federal agencies of the power to interpret ambiguous regulations. The decision was unanimous because while upholding agencies' authority, the justices defined new limits. Deference "is sometimes appropriate and sometimes not," Associate Justice Elena Kagan said in her opinion. "Deference can apply only when a regulation is genuinely ambiguous," Kagan said, and "the agency's construction of its rule must still be reasonable." But when those and other conditions are met, she said, courts must accept agency interpretations. Associate Justice Neil Gorsuch went further in a 42-page concurrence, labeling the decision "more of a stay of execution than a pardon." He and Associate Justices Clarence Thomas and Brett Kavanaugh said they would have overruled the high court's precedent on agency deference. "The doctrine emerges maimed and enfeebled – in truth, zombified," Gorsuch said. And Chief Justice John Roberts warned that the court's refusal to overrule its precedent does not signal the same treatment for another target of conservatives: so-called "Chevron deference," in which courts are supposed to bend to agency interpretations of laws enacted by Congress. That precedent, therefore, remains on the ropes. The ruling is important because agencies run by unelected bureaucrats make decisions all the time about regulations on the environment, the workplace, food and drugs, and other matters affecting millions of Americans. Challengers wanted that power left to federal trial judges when regulations get challenged in court. Under Supreme court precedents from 1945 and 1997, courts are encouraged to defer to administrative agencies with expertise the judges lack.
    9 replies | 114 view(s)
  • Swordsmyth's Avatar
    Today, 12:03 AM
    I disagree with the priority that you give to material self-interest but it is an important factor and stupid people are much more likely to be short-sighted about it and endorse bad policy.
    112 replies | 2755 view(s)
  • ATruepatriot's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:59 PM
    And men who think they are women of course. Not sure how they are going to work that one to get free stuff though, but they will try.
    173 replies | 1162 view(s)
  • Swordsmyth's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:52 PM
    Or an intelligent man might come to the conclusion that equality is good and that meritocracy and liberty are the true equality.
    112 replies | 2755 view(s)
  • Swordsmyth's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:47 PM
    The Orwellian censorship by the Big Tech monopolists is spiraling out of control. After YouTube booted Project Veritas’ video that exposed the electoral interference and thought control of Google off of their platform, their competitor Vimeo has now followed suit. ������ BREAKING @Vimeo has REMOVED Project Veritas saying: "You cannot upload videos that are hateful, defamatory, or discriminatory." Perhaps we embarrassed @Google but NOTHING we said was hateful, defamatory, or discriminatory. They're trying to erase us from the internet. pic.twitter.com/mBfmeHo4i0 — Project Veritas (@Project_Veritas) June 26, 2019 Vimeo could gain market share from exposing the truth about Google’s machinations to undermine the democratic process in the United States. Considering they are one of YouTube’s top competitors, this would be a way for them to gain much-needed market share in a competitive industry. However, Vimeo is doing the opposite. They are in effect harming their own business and protecting their competition. This action shows that Big Tech corporations are enforcing an agenda of social control, where dissent is to be stomped out by any means necessary. Project Veritas pointed out the nature of this sinister cartel that works in tandem to enforce Big Brother: 1. @YouTube bans @Pinterest investigation 2. @Twitter suspends Veritas for Pinterest story
    13 replies | 280 view(s)
  • Swordsmyth's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:45 PM
    The more intelligent they are the more likely they are to do so, stupid people are much more likely to take positions based on blind emotion and then refuse to change them when confronted with logic. That's part of why stupid people are more likely to wind up with a tyrannical society.
    112 replies | 2755 view(s)
  • Swordsmyth's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:36 PM
    The National Rifle Association has ended production of NRATV, the live broadcasting media arm it launched in 2016, the New York Times reported Tuesday. The organization has also formally severed ties with Ackerman McQueen, the Oklahoma-based advertising agency that operated NRATV and has represented the NRA since the 1980s, according to the Times. NRATV may continue to air previously recorded content on its website, but all live broadcasting will cease, and on-air personalities like Dana Loesch, who were technically employees of Ackerman McQueen, will no longer represent the NRA publicly, the Times reports. The Times said Tuesday that LaPierre will announce the decision in an email to members Wednesday morning. “Many members expressed concern about the messaging on NRATV becoming too far removed from our core mission: defending the Second Amendment,” reads the email, obtained by the Times. “So, after careful consideration, I am announcing that starting today, we are undergoing a significant change in our communications strategy. We are no longer airing ‘live TV’ programming.” In a statement provided to the Times, an Ackerman McQueen spokesperson said it is “not surprised that the N.R.A. is unwilling to honor its agreement to end our contract and our long-standing relationship in an orderly and amicable manner. When given the opportunity to do the right thing, the N.R.A. once again has taken action that we believe is intended to harm our company even at the expense of the N.R.A. itself.” More at: https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/nra-kills-off-nratv-report-040910096.html
    26 replies | 729 view(s)
  • Swordsmyth's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:34 PM
    Intelligent people CAN embrace bad ideologies but stupid people are much more likely to, whether it comes from logical errors they make due to their own stupidity or from being hoodwinked.
    112 replies | 2755 view(s)
  • Swordsmyth's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:11 PM
    But insufficient intelligence will always result in tyranny, either because the culture embraces obviously bad ideas easier or because they are too dumb to successfully resist attempts to enslave them.
    112 replies | 2755 view(s)
  • Swordsmyth's Avatar
    Yesterday, 10:42 PM
    If you are going to make a practical argument that we can't get there from here I am willing to say that temporarily we might need to ban all foreign weapons sales, just as I argue for temporary practical "bandages" for other problems. But we must not create the precedent that the government should make moral judgements about who can buy things, at least a ban on all foreigners can be made on national security grounds as opposed to moral grounds. Too many libertarians turn into leftist interventionists when it comes to weapons sales and it feeds the anti-gun crowd.
    12 replies | 256 view(s)
More Activity
About ATruepatriot

Basic Information

Signature


“The ultimate test of a moral society is the kind of world it leaves to its children.” ~ Dietrich Bonhoeffer

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
2,026
Posts Per Day
0.58
General Information
Last Activity
Today 12:01 AM
Join Date
12-16-2009
Referrals
0

2 Friends

  1. Schifference Schifference is offline

    Member

    Schifference
  2. Swordsmyth Swordsmyth is offline

    Member

    Swordsmyth
Showing Friends 1 to 2 of 2

06-24-2019


05-11-2019


05-09-2019


04-06-2019


No results to display...
Page 1 of 53 1231151 ... LastLast

06-26-2019


06-24-2019



Page 1 of 53 1231151 ... LastLast