As a Kansan Glickman made his reputation by being honest, dull and hardworking. How else does a Democrat Jew get elected by a bunch rightwing Kansan farmers?
As a Kansan I always thought it was funny that the Sec of Ag was a Jew from Kansas. Now things are moving closer to equilibrium as he's going to work in Hollywood.
Where in the Constitution does it say that we have to interpret it as some of the founding fathers said?
Also note that many of the founding fathers passed the Alien and Sedition acts.
Take a law class some time. Flexible interpretation has been the case since the begining of time. The reason we have human judges is to allow for human judgement. Everyone that's ever begged a judge to make their speeding ticket a non-moving violation understands the value of having human judgement involoved in jurisprudence.
Why don't you just look out the window? The weatherman has never made the weather any better, so I don't understand the fascination with being up to date on their predictions. If looking out the window doesn't suit you then watch the local news tonight. What's the big deal?
The notion of a living constion that you find distatseful has generaly been used in conjunction with the expansion of protected rights, so I'm not sure what your objection is. (e.g. right to privacy , Grisworld)
Anyway, regulating the trade of rocket engines clearly falls within Congress power to regulate interstate commerce. So this discussion has been moot.
The Constitution doesn't contain language about any inalienable right.
With Constitutional law the SC balances the interests of the state versus those of he individual. Depending on the nature of the issue the threshold for permissibility varies. It is referred to as the level of scrutiny. Generaly there has been standard, intermediate, and strict scrutiny. These are by no means set in stone and justices are happy to pervert them when it suits their intellectual bias.
The moral of the story is that in the real world absolutes like your "inalienable right" aren't paticularly practical and aren't protected without exception.
You post makes no sense. The Gitmo situation is a topic of worldwide interest, and has been a massive headache for the Administration.
One might wish to consider that the Administration is utilizing Gitmo is because interrogating terrorists and not sending terrorists back home is a no brainer, and any responsible leader would do the same.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm guessing that Black Metal is a subspecies of Metal that is totaly free of any melody?
Yeah. They're the good guys.
As a Kansan Glickman made his reputation by being honest, dull and hardworking. How else does a Democrat Jew get elected by a bunch rightwing Kansan farmers?
As a Kansan I always thought it was funny that the Sec of Ag was a Jew from Kansas. Now things are moving closer to equilibrium as he's going to work in Hollywood.
Where in the Constitution does it say that we have to interpret it as some of the founding fathers said?
Also note that many of the founding fathers passed the Alien and Sedition acts.
Take a law class some time. Flexible interpretation has been the case since the begining of time. The reason we have human judges is to allow for human judgement. Everyone that's ever begged a judge to make their speeding ticket a non-moving violation understands the value of having human judgement involoved in jurisprudence.
Why don't you just look out the window? The weatherman has never made the weather any better, so I don't understand the fascination with being up to date on their predictions. If looking out the window doesn't suit you then watch the local news tonight. What's the big deal?
The fact that scotus has seen fit to allow errosion of our rights
One side thinks the SC is eroding rights, the other thinks they are inventing them. That must mean they are pretty much down the middle.
The notion of a living constion that you find distatseful has generaly been used in conjunction with the expansion of protected rights, so I'm not sure what your objection is. (e.g. right to privacy , Grisworld)
Anyway, regulating the trade of rocket engines clearly falls within Congress power to regulate interstate commerce. So this discussion has been moot.
Just what I've been wishing for all these years.
Are the comics going to reek like my Engineering department did back in college?
The Constitution doesn't contain language about any inalienable right.
With Constitutional law the SC balances the interests of the state versus those of he individual. Depending on the nature of the issue the threshold for permissibility varies. It is referred to as the level of scrutiny. Generaly there has been standard, intermediate, and strict scrutiny. These are by no means set in stone and justices are happy to pervert them when it suits their intellectual bias.
The moral of the story is that in the real world absolutes like your "inalienable right" aren't paticularly practical and aren't protected without exception.
Read it closely and you'll see your question doesn't make any sense.
It's called the interstate commerce clause. Please pick up a textbook on Constitutional Law. It really is an interesting subject.
A1S8
This only affects the weirdo's who build rockets that they shouldn't be building anyway.
Any of the stuff we did as kids is still unregulated.
Moreover the really huge stuff hasn't even been banned, it's just a hassle to get licensed.
Cry me a river.
It appears as though you don't understand the meaning of the word 'arbitrary'.
If the government was cracking down on left handed guitars that would be arbitrary.
Regulating rockets most certainly isn't.
You've obviously never studied Constitutional law because you have no right to build rockets.
While the Euroweenies were wailing, Reagan, with the blessing of the Pope, put those ICBM's at the Russian's back door.
If Rail Guns can facilitate the fall of Islam or the ChiComs then bravo.
We're the best.
Ask any Korean. They know ALL about this.
You post makes no sense. The Gitmo situation is a topic of worldwide interest, and has been a massive headache for the Administration.
One might wish to consider that the Administration is utilizing Gitmo is because interrogating terrorists and not sending terrorists back home is a no brainer, and any responsible leader would do the same.
IBM has basically dumped RH in favor of Novell/Suse
Who let you in here anywhay?
Yet many of the same people modding my post down decry Lockheed TRW Boeing etc for getting too much corporate welfare.
Manned space exploration just doesn't make sense folks.
Perhaps you could work out, for the curious amoung us, what the probability of 2 random sets of 2GB of data have the same md5 signature?
Does this probability increase or decrease with increasing likeness of data?
Thanks