Search results

Stand back and stand by.

There are fine people on both sides.

They had her in a situation that no answer was a good answer politically. I describe an either/or situation. Her non-answer was the best choice although I do agree that it doesn't read well to the average Joe, and a series of muddled statements supporting cultural sensitivity will be...

It turns out Trump used the photos of Whit House Photographer after asking her to delay her own book. She gets no royalties for Trumps book. Unlike previous Presidents, Trump was reluctant to allow candid shots of himself to be taken.

Similar pictures and news stories cab be assembled about the NeoNazi's in the United States. Should Canada invade the US because of it?

Seems like a vague phrase used a lot in team sports.

I'm not sure why you would limit someone who barely posts in the forum as it is.

Seems like a way to ask where the deity comes from?

Oh - is trying to be gender neutral, in respect to a deity, blasphemous? I thought that was just being respectful to women.

Yeah - I missed that.

What post was considered blasphemous?

I think it is fine for a judge while not on the bench, but not fine for a politician or citizen.

Fact Free analysis is your specialty. Label and pivot, Label and Pivot. You will pull a muscle doing that repeatedly.

People become more left when they study higher level science.

A biologist will tell you there are three kinds of differences typically seen between genders including genital, genetic, and brain differences. Many individuals do not have all three differences! Most with less typical constellation do not consider themselves trans per se. But, the concept...

Blackburn and others were hoping to get either that or a quote to use back against trans supporters. Even Judge Jackson said "a woman is not a male who thinks he is a woman".

In the context of particular statutes the definition of the term can vary. Any question for the judge is best taken in a legal context, not just informal semantics. The Judge had other reasons to answer the question with more caution.

Dumb politically charged questions worthy of some dodging.

Here there is a personal interest of spouse, not just a political one. His wife had an interest that the records not be made public. Justice Thomas did what he could to make that happen.

The juror was biased; that does not mean that the judge was. Thus there is no legitimate reason to recuse. Do you see the difference between a wife's interests and a juror biases? Judges can sit on cases of clients of a former law firm as long as they were not a part of the firm during the...