Kind of like how the bottom 60% are treated by the top 1%?
‘Cause there were ZERO republicans at the time. I never investigated the extent of slaveowning among the Whigs, ‘cause they dried up and blew away.And literally 0 republicans in office did... hmmmmm.
You repeat yourself....“badfishy1” said:Not too sure what the problem w being a muh nationalist is. Ironically neither do NPCs.
Kind of like how the bottom 60% are treated by the top 1%?
I hate to agree, but I have to. After a strong opening, they have turned out to be the epitome of least-common-denominator reporting. They have had good people, decent investigators, but they should buy Wolf Blitzer a ticket to wherever Geraldo Rivera is hanging out these days...and they should consider turning the company into a news organization.Well, this goon did get ONE thing correct.
CNN *DOES* Suck.
-cap
Gotta say I fundamentally disagree with you on this one: IMO the states had neither the right or a compelling interest in passing laws governing cannabis before the federal government took cannabis prohibition under its law-enforcement wing.
This was never a local or state ‘problem’ until the DoJ decided to make it a national issue, so it *can’t* be thrown *back* on the states. Prohibition started at the top. It needs to be ended from the top, for the nation as a whole.
The entire southern economy was built on slavery from the first: it was brought over from Barbados to Charleston, and Africans slaves were most definitely an essential part of the plan. Consequently, as a slave society from birth, and with the convenience of having the servants color-coded, the entirety of life in the Slaver-dominated South was built on and by slaves, depended on slaves for virtually all work and therefore most economic activity, and by virtue of the eventual “3/5” decision, gained the slave states *extra* representation in Congress.i read that a lot about only a few actually owning and profiting from slaves, in the end the other 90% facilitated slavery, they agreed that slaves were property and should be given to their owner if they escape. they also didnt protest the idea, at the time it was considered the norm. so it really doesn't matter much about only 10% owning slaves at the time, the other 90% made it possible for someone to own saves by letting it legally happen.
Even though all but 1 are dead, and medical privacy laws don't govern the med. records of dead people.
Gosh, you are SO *edgy*....Cool story... do you even read brah?
...says the student at the Limbaugh Institute.... sorry, I was raised by racists. I know better.“badfishy1” said:Had more to do with rights of individual state representation in national government.
That, we agree on......wouldn’t expect an NPC to do anything other than spout the bullshit
Yes, HIPAA covers the dead.
"The HIPAA Privacy Rule protects the individually identifiable health information about a decedent for 50 years following the date of death of the individual."
https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-profe...nformation-of-deceased-individuals/index.html
If I were to go rives on rives I would point out the law expires after fifty years so that means after fifty years it doesn't apply....
But I would probably do it a condescendingly toned admonishment.
Gotta say I fundamentally disagree with you on this one: IMO the states had neither the right or a compelling interest in passing laws governing cannabis before the federal government took cannabis prohibition under its law-enforcement wing.
This was never a local or state ‘problem’ until the DoJ decided to make it a national issue, so it *can’t* be thrown *back* on the states. Prohibition started at the top. It needs to be ended from the top, for the nation as a whole.
Wipe the slate clean, across the board. Then, if some state(s) want to undertake a law to prohibit cannabis again, they’re certainly allowed to try.
so back to thread topic
Sayoc seems to have been part of spook - drug smuggling operation...
interesting connections again with Sheriff Israel's dirty south...
also eerily similar to Las Vegas Casino shooter, that was readily swept under the rug
so back to thread topic
Sayoc seems to have been part of spook - drug smuggling operation...
interesting connections again with Sheriff Israel's dirty south...
also eerily similar to Las Vegas Casino shooter, that was readily swept under the rug
so back to thread topic
Sayoc seems to have been part of spook - drug smuggling operation...
interesting connections again with Sheriff Israel's dirty south...
also eerily similar to Las Vegas Casino shooter, that was readily swept under the rug
so back to thread topic
Sayoc seems to have been part of spook - drug smuggling operation...
interesting connections again with Sheriff Israel's dirty south...
also eerily similar to Las Vegas Casino shooter, that was readily swept under the rug
Sayoc looks like he's wearing makeup.
I wonder if he had more than one hero...