This. The “let voters decide” argument is bullshit. “Sure he broke the rules but it should be up to the people if they care about that kind of thing”. Since when do courts care about what the general public think?
The law is open to interpretation since language is imprecise. Thinking that the law is some kind of rigid holy truth is extremely naive at best. Or at worst is fascist.
I’m not disagreeing with that. I’m disagreeing with your assertion that courts should care about what the people think. If anything, when the law is ambiguous the courts look at the legislative session notes, speeches, drafts…etc to try and figure out what the original intent was (or throw it back to legislature to rework). I never said it’s some kind of rigid holy truth.
Well the original intent of the insurrection clause was to prevent the same senators/congressmen who seceded and started the civil war from being eligible for federal office. This obviously doesn’t apply in Trumps case since there was no civil war and Trump was the lawfully elected president of the US at the time.
The courts are intended to be neutral arbiters of law itself
Which in Trumps case has nothing to do with the original intent of the law (insurrection clause, since no insurrection has taken place.)
As for my original assertion. The General Public is absolutely the folks the justice system should be accountable to, after-all government is supposed to be FOR the people. And if The People want to vote for someone who wants to overthrow the government, the courts have no business saying they can’t.
So if you think the court shouldn’t care about the general public, then the insurrection clause doesn’t apply. If you think the court should care about the general public, then they have to let the voters decide.
In either case Trump belongs on the ballot.
This. We tried that last election cycle and be wasn’t happy with the results from the people and attempted to falsify and overthrow them. NO SECOND CHANCES.
So does Clapton still agree with what he said? “My feeling about this hasn’t changed, really,” he insists. “Years later, when I played at the Mandela concert, one of the promoters said: ‘You know that this is your chance to apologise formally for what you said.’ And I thought: ‘You must be fucking joking.’ I was so insulted.”
~ Clapton, 2004 interview regarding a 1988 concert for Nelson Mandela
Oh.my.god. He was insulted? This literally made me say "oh my god" out loud. I didn't even know about all this growing up in the 80's and then listening to him later on in the 90's.
The original article this quote was taken from for Snopes continues:
This sound of heels being firmly dug in is typical Clapton. Though he is clearly not a racist, he is amazingly stubborn. The remark caused huge offence, but he still cannot bring himself to apologise.
Super hard to establish a base for unions in places that often need them the most due to self-reinforcing high turnover due to poor conditions, wages and benefits and job quality. Makes the work the unions have accomplished in the last 4 years laudable.
I found this a bit confusing, but I think the core of this is really that Waffle House staff don’t get a choice on whether or not they buy a meal during their shift. Is that right?
I kind of got that gist from the article, but nothing super clear. It said that employees pay for the meal whether they eat it or not, which if you ordered food and didn’t eat it, that’s kinda on you. I think it should be saying that they are charged for the meal whether they ordered it or not, if that’s what is happening.
Basically, yes. They’re forcing you to purchase food, whether you want it, intend to consume it, or get to consume it.
And FWIW in the restaurant industry meal breaks are usually not a thing, so it is very common to order food and just have to scarf it down whenever you’re not using your hands or in front of guests. I used to unwrap, consume, and dispose of the packaging for a sandwich in the time it took me to walk from the door to dry storage.
Edit: also IIRC wage deductions are usually illegal unless for uniforms or ordered by a court. This is probably an easy case.
If you’re not eating hour old food above a trash can after mistiming making a meal what even are you doing (I don’t cook professionally, was married to a chef/baker and got to hear all about the nonsense)
I'd love to see Wal-Mart also get a union blitz. Just so many locations all at once that Wal-Mart would basically tank their stocks and value if they tried to close all those stores at once
huffpost.com
Top