Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If you did a drug raid in a dormitory in any State U in America, do you have any idea what type of treasure trove you would find? You'd find all types of contraband.
I would gladly take on that job. Then when kids are recommended for expulsion all you'll hear is "B, But, they are just kids!" If you think about it, being in possession of a drug like speed or ecstasy is a much more serious offense than mouthing off to a cop. But we tend to shrug off the former because "our kids do it."
Maybe not possession, but even selling small amounts of marijuana isn't shrugged off of.
There were a lot of people in the wrong that day. The teens should've followed the cop's instructions, the women should not have been fighting, the organizer shouldn't have thrown the party against the HoA, and the cop should have exhibited some restraint. However, I do expect more from adults than teenagers, and therefore, I hold the cop, the organizer, and the fighting women more at fault than the teens. As such they will face greater criticism and punishment than the teens; that's why the cop was let go.
Will someone please make a new thread about the ACA being challenged? The Supreme Court is going to make a decision about a legal matter that is before them as it relates to the ACA. It's being asked on the news what will legislators do if the law has to be changed?
Joke post of the day. I've never a mouthy white girl referred to as a hood rat in my life.
All black people look the same, according to right-wingers.
We went from "Texas Tough" and "Don't Mess With Texas" to "Please don't hurt me, 14-year old girl in a bikini". Now I know why you scary tough guys are so keen on having open-carry laws.
Why are ALL of your posts leading with "right-wingers" regardless of the topic? Many, including this one are not even politically oriented.
Why do none of your posts every contain any logic or argument, only name calling and taunting?
I will attempt to carry on an intellectual debate with you if you desire, but you will have to dig up some intellect on your side for me to work with.
Please keep the debate on topic and free of extraneous non-sequiturs and this could be very enjoyable. I look forward to reading an actual thought from you someday.
Will someone please make a new thread about the ACA being challenged? The Supreme Court is going to make a decision about a legal matter that is before them as it relates to the ACA. It's being asked on the news what will legislators do if the law has to be changed?
Here's part of the article and the link -
Note from calculator - I guess this person is the author - it wasn't made clear who wrote it.
(Michael Cannon, M.A., J.M., director of health policy at the Cato Institute, explains during a recent forum that language in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act made the law susceptible to a legal challenge.)
Here's the title and article -
Analysts: States Should Brace for Supreme Court ACA Ruling
Decision on Subsidies in Federally Run Insurance Exchanges Expected This Month
Most states have not announced contingency plans if the U.S. Supreme Court invalidates a key component of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) in a ruling expected this month, so states and Congress may have difficult decisions to make, analysts said at a recent roundtable discussion.
Michael Cannon, M.A., J.M., director of health policy at the Cato Institute, explains during a recent forum that language in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act made the law susceptible to a legal challenge.
The case, King v. Burwell, challenges the provision of subsidies for insurance premiums in states with health insurance exchanges run by the federal government rather than by the states themselves, subsidies that make the plans affordable for millions of Americans. The suit was triggered by the plaintiffs' refusal to accept subsidies because they did not want to be subject to a tax penalty tied to the individual mandate, which could reach $1,200.
Currently, the federal government is managing insurance exchanges in the 34 states that declined to establish their own. HHS has noted that if the subsidies on these exchanges are ruled invalid by the court, health insurance premiums will be too expensive for 6.4 million of the 7.3 million individuals who obtained insurance through the exchanges.
Texas officer in video let 'emotions get the better of him': lawyer
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
New thread needed
