Wrestleknownothing

That is from 1898 when the question was settled definitively. The Court has had no reason to answer the question again that they had already answered.

pick almost any number. They are very volatile.

You need to be able to decipher whatever blockchain they are on to do that, so pretty much no.

I know I hurt your feelings by saying you were dumb. Sorry about that. But now you are acting like it is two weeks from now. Read beyond Eastman. Read original source material. For example, read the actual Supreme Court statements. "The Fourteen Amendment affirms the ancient and fundamental rule of citizenship by birth within the territory, in the allegiance and under the protection of the country, including all children here born of resident aliens, with the exceptions or qualifications (as old as the rule itself) of children of foreign sovereigns or their ministers, or born on foreign public ships, or of enemies within and during a hostile occupation of part of our territory . . . . The Amendment, in clear words and in manifest intent, includes the children born, within the territory of the United States, of all other persons, of whatever race or color, domiciled within the United States. Every citizen or subject of another country, while domiciled here, is within the allegiance and the protection, and consequently subject to the jurisdiction, of the United States. His allegiance to the United States is direct and immediate [while in the United States and] . . . 'strong enough to make a natural subject, for if he hath issue here, that issue is a natural-born subject;' and his child . . . 'is as much a citizen as the natural-born child of a citizen, and by operation of the same principle.'" And "To hold that the Fourteen Amendment of the Constitution excludes from citizenship the children, born in the United States, of citizens or subjects of other countries, would be to deny citizenship to thousands of persons of English, Scotch, Irish, German or other European parentage, who have always been considered and treated as citizens of the United States." And "Congress having no power to abridge the rights conferred by the Constitution upon those who have become naturalized citizens by virtue of acts of Congress, a fortiori no act or omission of Congress, as to providing for the naturalization of parents or children of a particular race, can affect citizenship acquired as a birthright, by virtue of the Constitution itself, without any aid of legislation. The Fourteenth Amendment, while it leaves the power, where it was before, in Congress, to regulate naturalization, has conferred no authority upon Congress to restrict the effect of birth, declared by the Constitution to constitute a sufficient and complete right to citizenship." My logic is based on Supreme Court rulings.

The most concerning thing I heard was the original plan was to be thoughtful about who got a pardon (non-violent offenses) and who did not (violent offenses like the guy using a cattle prod on a cop or pepper spray), but it was decided that would be too much work.

But if it is the best team it is the hardest to walk on to. That said, I voted for the AA.

Ramos (125), Mendez (141), Henson (149), Kasak (157), Mesenbrink (165), O'Toole (174), and Kerkvliet (285) all unanimous. Ayala (133) likely had 6 first place and 8 second place votes. That is the lowest consensus. Starocci (184) and Buchanan (197) likely had 12 first place and 2 second place votes.

It was -5 in suburban Chicago on Tuesday without the wind chill, so yeah.

Funny story. Years ago my wife and I bought a cabin as a fixer upper project. We closed in February. There was a heavy snow the next day. On our way to the cabin we stopped and bought a couple of snow shovels. Mind you the driveway is 110 yards long, so my plan was to just shovel the end where the plows leave a mound and then take the four wheel drive SUV, build up a head of steam, and ram my way up the driveway. Well, about half way up there was a big drift and it was a wet snow. Long story short, my SUV wound up on top of the drift with all four wheels off the ground. Turns out four wheel drive is irrelevant with four wheels off the ground. So I decided to shovel under the SUV to lower the vehicle, but it also turns out that a snow shovel is particularly ill-suited to that purpose. The curve of the blade made it impossible to extend the shovel under something while also keeping the blade on the ground. Fortunately I found a coal shovel left behind in the garage by the previous owner. A shovel not unlike the one in Bassett's hand. 110 yards of shoveling later, about 5 of it on my knees, I cannot remember ever being as tired. So maybe they just got done shoveling under Brands' car?

And lived to tell the tale. I am impressed. You have an iron constitution.

That is one of the least appetizing things I have ever seen

1. Please someone explain how these two meme coins issued by the Trumps are not a massive grift. 2. Please also explain how they are not a national security risk in that they create an open avenue to bribe and influence the President.

He has his jus wrong. And his logic wrong as a result. The Colonies rejected jus sanguinis in favor of jus soli. The British Crown, along with most of Europe, practiced, and still practice, jus sanguinis where citizenship flows from blood not location. That way as they colonized the world (note the reference to "these United Colonies" above) any progeny of British citizens would remain British citizens subject to the laws of Britain, not the locality.

Except there is precedence. In 2017 when the tax cut was originally passed one of the proposals to pay for the tax cut was to remove the tax-exemption for advance refunding of munis. At the time the industry also argued that would never happen. It happened. The industry was caught off guard then. Do not get caught off guard now.

Sure seemed that way. I was just commenting on the mechanics of rankings rather than whether they are right.

I like the idea of national duals (even though I do not think it constitutes a better definition of best team), but November is a problem if you want to claim this as any form of championship. Championships happen at the end of the season. Anything at the start of the season would be illegitimate in most fans, and certainly all casual fans, opinions. Imagine having the college football playoffs and then having the regular season.

No consensus. But his mom is very unhappy with a couple of posters, so who knows.

Not really sure what the thought process is, but it would not surprise me if he is trying to put on weight but it is going slowly. On HR they also speculate that 265 is the right football weight if he wants to be a hand-on-the-ground, rush-that-passer, get-the-man-paid type linebacker. If he can do that and maintain explosiveness it seems like that would be a problem for other heavyweights to handle too.

I would ask a follow up question, but your response makes it painfully obvious that you do not know what you are talking about either.

Can we talk about another EO that has my attention? All Presidents over reach and play to their base (Biden's 162 EOs, and pre-pardoning, Trump's 26ish so far with the promise of many more to go along with the 220 he issued last time around). I get that. I do not agree with it more often that not in both directions, but I get it. But there is one EO in particular I am interested in. I am interested because of it's precedence and boldness. With "Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship" Trump is attempting to over ride the Constitution. That has to be the single most dictatorial move ever attempted by a President. And in his attempt to justify, there are a few notable lies. "But the Fourteenth Amendment has never been interpreted to extend citizenship universally to everyone born within the United States." That is just plain false. 'The Fourteenth Amendment has always excluded from birthright citizenship persons who were born in the United States but not “subject to the jurisdiction thereof.”' This one is more insidious. It ignores the fact that the "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" was in reference to Native Americans whose land we had not yet taken, but would, and who were not subject to the jurisdiction thereof. There were no plans to grant Native Americans citizenship. That only changed with the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924. Every person now born in the US, hell every person who is in the US, legally or illegally, is subject to the jurisdiction thereof. To claim otherwise is dumb. https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/protecting-the-meaning-and-value-of-american-citizenship/

238 per HR

I love me some Mahomes, but I think I am pulling for Buffalo in this one. Washington, too. But you buried the lede. Somehow the Bears were able to see what no one else could see. They have identified Ben Johnson as the worst coaching hire of the decade. I know this to be true because the Bears hired him. How could everyone else think Johnson was the "IT" hire this season? Time for some talent evaluation departments to get evaluated.

I do not know what this means in the above context.

I looked at them too. Their total is 48 (1, 4, 1, 12, 6, 1, 1, 12, 5, 5). The 2020 Iowa team had a lower total, 45 (1, 6, 7, 1, 8, 1, 2, 11, 5, 3)