The Courts (not specific to either party)

[sho]

 

[sho]

 

[funhusker]

10 minutes ago, sho said:

 

Weren’t  the PPP loans approved by Congress?  I think that’s the unconstitutional part of the student loan forgiveness program.

[Decked]

2 hours ago, commando said:

if i understand the ruling.....the supreme court has ruled that i can deny service to MAGA since i don't approve of their life choices

As you should be able to. It is yours. Government interference is not necessary. Those who may deny service to others based off of political reasons who own businesses may face social & societal backlash. It will even out. And those who are employed likely face termination.

[teachercd]

11 hours ago, Decked said:

As you should be able to. It is yours. Government interference is not necessary. Those who may deny service to others based off of political reasons who own businesses may face social & societal backlash. It will even out. And those who are employed likely face termination.

Amen

[JJ Husker]

14 hours ago, Decked said:

As you should be able to. It is yours. Government interference is not necessary. Those who may deny service to others based off of political reasons who own businesses may face social & societal backlash. It will even out. And those who are employed likely face termination.

I agree. I’ve never straight up refused to do something for a customer based on their politics or being any sort of a protected class but I have priced some jobs exorbitantly high for some pushy pricks. There is an absolute a-hole multimillionaire in town who had me come look at a job. He was a self important condescending prick while I was there, so I multiplied my estimate by 10x and then just shrugged when he said it was too much. Told him he couldn’t afford us and he could probably find someone else cheaper 

[BigRedBuster]

 

 

[nic]

https://www.cnn.com/2023/07/02/politics/backlash-supreme-court-affirmative-action-student-loans/index.html

Unlike last year, when the Supreme Court greatly upset liberals by overturning Roe v. Wade, this year’s big rulings by the justices are unlikely to spark a major backlash from the public at large.

 

[teachercd]

On 7/1/2023 at 10:54 AM, JJ Husker said:

I agree. I’ve never straight up refused to do something for a customer based on their politics or being any sort of a protected class but I have priced some jobs exorbitantly high for some pushy pricks. There is an absolute a-hole multimillionaire in town who had me come look at a job. He was a self important condescending prick while I was there, so I multiplied my estimate by 10x and then just shrugged when he said it was too much. Told him he couldn’t afford us and he could probably find someone else cheaper 

Dude...think about it, there are very few multimillionaires in the world, basically they are the most marginalized group of people in the world only represented by 2-3% of the population.  Those people NEED to be here, understood and helped.  

 

What you did to that rich person was wrong.  So very wrong.  

 

Do better.  Before long, there will be even less of them around.

[BigRedBuster]

7 hours ago, nic said:

https://www.cnn.com/2023/07/02/politics/backlash-supreme-court-affirmative-action-student-loans/index.html

Unlike last year, when the Supreme Court greatly upset liberals by overturning Roe v. Wade, this year’s big rulings by the justices are unlikely to spark a major backlash from the public at large.

 

There should be backlash if they are based on fake cases.  

[JJ Husker]

3 hours ago, teachercd said:

Dude...think about it, there are very few multimillionaires in the world, basically they are the most marginalized group of people in the world only represented by 2-3% of the population.  Those people NEED to be here, understood and helped.  

 

What you did to that rich person was wrong.  So very wrong.  

 

Do better.  Before long, there will be even less of them around.

[Archy1221]

On 7/3/2023 at 7:54 AM, BigRedBuster said:

 

 

 

[BigRedBuster]

14 minutes ago, Archy1221 said:

 

 

Well, it's going to be interesting seeing how this plays out.  

I have a hard time believing the person in your tweet when one of the parties in the court case says they weren't involved the way the case claimed they were.

[Archy1221]

1 hour ago, BigRedBuster said:

 

Well, it's going to be interesting seeing how this plays out.  

I have a hard time believing the person in your tweet when one of the parties in the court case says they weren't involved the way the case claimed they were.

I believe what he is trying to say is the person you reference isn’t actually a party to the court case.  The case was between Colorado and the web designer is what he’s saying.  

[BigRedBuster]

1 hour ago, Archy1221 said:

I believe what he is trying to say is the person you reference isn’t actually a party to the court case.  The case was between Colorado and the web designer is what he’s saying.  

 Then why is he mentioned?