Comments by "Roger Dodger" (@rogerdodger8415) on "CNBC"
channel.
-
1
-
Four points:
One, California was admitted to the Union in 1850 as a free state. Its moral insistence 170 years ago that slavery be outlawed precipitated a crisis—and almost sparked the Civil War 10 years before it actually began. Despite the efforts of some slave-owning arrivals into California, there was never legal slavery in the state.
Two, about 27% of California residents were not born in the United States. Most of the naturalized citizens and undocumented immigrants arrived in the state after the Civil Rights Act was passed in 1964.
How, then, do California residents from Asia, Latin America, or Europe owe reparations to the current 6.5% of the state’s population that is African American?
Are we to establish a precedent that those who never owned slaves in a society that has no memory of slavery are to redistribute billions of their dollars to those whose grandparents were never slaves?
Three, in a multiethnic, multiracial California—where those identifying as white are a minority, and those of mixed ancestries number in the millions–how does the state adjudicate who owes what to whom?
Is an arriving Mexican immigrant a victim of institutionalized racism in Mexico, or was he part of a Mexican establishment notorious for its racism? In a multiracial state, will we adopt ancient “one drop” Confederate race laws to determine whose DNA qualifies someone for state money?
Should the state pay reparations to the descendants of Jews who fled the Holocaust, of Cambodians who fled Pol Pot’s reign of death, of Armenians who escaped Ottoman barbarity, or of Irish and Chinese who were worked to death on the Transcontinental Railroad?
Four, how will borrowing money to pay some 2 million to 3 million of the state’s 40 million residents make things easier for the African American population? And are multimillionaire state residents such as LeBron James, Oprah Winfrey, Kayne West, Jay-Z, and Beyonce eligible?
Did it mean nothing that trillions of dollars have been spent over the last half-century on anti-poverty programs, state entitlements, and diversity and inclusion programs?
If per-capita economic parity for the black population is truly the state’s concern, then why not allow more charter schools in California’s inner cities? Or deregulate the state’s cumbersome bureaucracy to ensure small businesses more opportunity and less resistance to building low-income housing?
It is said that California fails because its wealthy elites virtue-signal their caring to square the circle of their own impotence to solve the problems in their midst. Californians who live in gated homes often damn walls on the border. Those who depend on imported water damn water transference for agriculture. Those who put their children in private academies damn public charter schools. And those who raise taxes on the middle class have tax experts to find ways of avoiding taxes.
Stand in the sun? Comon man! You can't possibly be that dumb now can you? What do you pick cotton for a living? Stand in the sun?? Where? On my Caribbean vacation where I get waited on by.... ahem... We won't go there. Just let's have you Google "diseases that only black people get" and get back to me. Then we'll talk about the TRILLIONS of dollars sent to the motherland to feed the dark hordes. You know you can't last a month without feeding off the white teat!!
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Yo Momma WHEEEEEE..... Once elected, this President wasted no time fulfilling his pledge to nominate judges who put impartiality and independence above activism from the bench. On day one, the Trump Administration went to work with the Senate to fill crucial vacancies. Fast forward to now, and the result is nothing less than a historic transformation of the judiciary.
The American Founding was built on the idea of separation of powers, President Trump said today. “This system was designed to protect citizens against the unjust concentration of governmental power . . . [but] when judges assume the role of a legislature, the rights of all citizens are threatened.”
What that means today: “The impartial and objective judge, who is a faithful servant of the law, is essential to the survival of American liberty.”
In just three years, President Trump has nominated and had confirmed two Supreme Court justices, 44 Circuit Court judges, and 112 District Court judges. Today, that historic pace is only accelerating: The President is set to have more judges confirmed this year alone than in all of 2017 and 2018 combined.
The average age of these new circuit judges is less than 50 years old—a full 10 years younger than the average age of former President Obama’s circuit nominees. That fact is important. President Trump understands that appointing good, fair judges is one of the most important legacies a President can leave. And thanks to the extraordinary number of young, talented judges he’s selected, that legacy is likely to last for decades to come.
Even more important than how long judges serve, of course, is what they do once they get on the bench. President Trump has always nominated judges who have a proven track record of standing up for the rule of law as written, not as imagined.
This quote from President Trump’s speech today may be the most important: When judges write policy instead of applying the law, they impose sweeping changes on millions of Americans without the benefit of legislative debate, public rulemaking, or the consent of the governed. As a result, these highly political rulings inflict painful damage on our security, society, and economy—imposing unworkable edicts on businesses, workers, families, and law enforcement.
His promise: “I will do everything in my power to halt judicial activism, and to ensure the law is upheld equally, fairly, and without political prejudice for all of our citizens.” Did you get that "decades" part?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Bolshevik Bernie is finished even before he gets started...... Once elected, this President wasted no time fulfilling his pledge to nominate judges who put impartiality and independence above activism from the bench. On day one, the Trump Administration went to work with the Senate to fill crucial vacancies. Fast forward to now, and the result is nothing less than a historic transformation of the judiciary.
The American Founding was built on the idea of separation of powers, President Trump said today. “This system was designed to protect citizens against the unjust concentration of governmental power . . . [but] when judges assume the role of a legislature, the rights of all citizens are threatened.”
What that means today: “The impartial and objective judge, who is a faithful servant of the law, is essential to the survival of American liberty.”
In just three years, President Trump has nominated and had confirmed two Supreme Court justices, 44 Circuit Court judges, and 112 District Court judges. Today, that historic pace is only accelerating: The President is set to have more judges confirmed this year alone than in all of 2017 and 2018 combined.
The average age of these new circuit judges is less than 50 years old—a full 10 years younger than the average age of former President Obama’s circuit nominees. That fact is important. President Trump understands that appointing good, fair judges is one of the most important legacies a President can leave. And thanks to the extraordinary number of young, talented judges he’s selected, that legacy is likely to last for decades to come.
Even more important than how long judges serve, of course, is what they do once they get on the bench. President Trump has always nominated judges who have a proven track record of standing up for the rule of law as written, not as imagined.
This quote from President Trump’s speech today may be the most important: When judges write policy instead of applying the law, they impose sweeping changes on millions of Americans without the benefit of legislative debate, public rulemaking, or the consent of the governed. As a result, these highly political rulings inflict painful damage on our security, society, and economy—imposing unworkable edicts on businesses, workers, families, and law enforcement.
His promise: “I will do everything in my power to halt judicial activism, and to ensure the law is upheld equally, fairly, and without political prejudice for all of our citizens.”
1