BuckyVanBuren

Yeah, stop spreading this misinformation. The Credit Act of 1974 made it illegal to discriminate in banking and credit but there was nothing preventing women from having bank accounts before 1974.

1862 California passed a law allowing women to open their own bank accounts without a male signature.

My grandmother and mother both had bank accounts in the 60s in their names, along with home mortgage and business accounts, with no other signatures other than their own.

Not according to Dodge Brothers vs Ford.

That was settled a long time ago.

I was paying $500 annually for a new prescription back in the 80s. Had to get new ones every year.

I didn’t need glasses for 40 years.

My glasses were costing $500 plus in the 1980s. They needed replacing annually.

Lasik didn’t get FDA approval until 1996.

Before that, it was radial keratotomy.

I got mine in 1986 and it was effective until 2015 when I started to need bifocals.

I consider it a success.

Ku Klu Klan.

Alliteration is fun but in this case it lessen the quality of your comment.

Federal and State are both pardonable, it is just different entities.

Federal means no parole.

Only if you have broadband in the grave with you.

The repeal would return public masking rules to their pre-pandemic form — created in 1953 to address a different issue: limiting Ku Klux Klan activity in North Carolina, according to a 2012 book by Washington University in St. Louis sociology professor David Cunningham.

Actually, Anti Klan legislation.

Yeah, got rid of all my CDs a few years ago and now I’m buying them back a bit at the time because of all the stuff that is going out of print and you can no longer stream.

Should have just stored everything.

That’s true.

But the chickens didn’t notice the difference.

The US has already dropped two nukes on South Carolina.

What more do you want?

X, the cowpunk band from Cali, would like a word with you. They were formed in 1980 and still perform.

Ask Tom Waits…

That isn’t actually Popper. That is Marcuse.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herbert_Marcuse

That crappy cartoon gets shared a lot but it does not actually represent Popper’s views.

It is, however, A very accurate description of Marcuse’s views. It even looks like him!

No, it is about people fundamentally misunderstanding the case and continuing to misuse a paraphrasing of a dictum, or non-binding statement, from Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. Incorrectly, acting as if it was a an actually point if law.

If used correctly, then it would be about protesting war. But people rarely understand what was said under Schenck v. United States, nor do they understand that it was overturned.

Brandenburg v. Ohio changed the standard to which speecg speech could be prosecuted only when it posed a danger of “imminent lawless action,” a formulation which is sometimes said to reflect Holmes reasoning as more fully explicated in his Abrams dissent, rather than the common law of attempts explained in Schenck.

Fire in a theater is meaningless and useless.

No, the case was about protesting war.

So, whenever you use this trope, you continue to support the idea that protesting war is criminal and protesters should be imprisoned.

Feinstein was on the following committees. You don’t think she pushed California’s interests in every one.

• Committee on Appropriation

• Subcommittee on Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies

• Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies

• Subcommittee on Defense

• Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development (Chairman)

• Subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies

• Subcommittee on Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies

• Committee on Rules and Administration

• Committee on the Judiciary

• Subcommittee on Criminal Justice and Counterterrorism

• Subcommittee on Federal Courts, Oversight, Agency Action, and Federal Rights

• Subcommittee on Human Rights and the Law

• Subcommittee on the Constitution (Chairman)

• Select Committee on Intelligence

You believe a freshman senator on Ways and Means, a committee of 29, welds a significant amount of influence verses Patty Murphy, Chairmain, who has been on Appropriations for 26 years?

I was referring to relative power within the Senate. How long do you think it will take for a freshman senator to gain the same amount of influence as Patty Murphy under the current system?