Discussion about hot topics trending today

[jelgate]

For the same reason. Perfect lawn is step 1, perfect driveway is step 2 to to becoming America's next suburban dad.

What are you doing on your driveway that it needs to be constantly washed?

[Annoyed]

I can understand it the lawn even it I don't agree with it. I picture one of those suburban people who need a perfect house. I can't comprehend why someone would need to wash a driveway

Depends upon what is spilled on or stuck to it. I have to wash portions of mine several times a year; lawn clippings tend to dry out and stick, for example. Leaves can stain it...

[Annoyed]

It is a matter of societal choices and that's the line folks on the right use all the time to justify their actions. Are you sincerely telling me that a first world developed country could not feed EVERYBODY, including the homeless, for free if they chose to? Only one or two billion taken out from the defense budget could do a huge difference. I call BS on that, tanks and planes are much more expensive than loafs of bread.

Now it comes down to what you, as a citizen, wants your government to spend your money on. Replicants for instance like to give corporations tax reliefs and decentralize the administration, leaving people to fend for themselves.

Thing you don't seem to understand is that whatever a government gives to someone, it has to forcibly take away from someone else first. There are no free rides.

[Chaka-Z0]

Depends upon what is spilled on or stuck to it. I have to wash portions of mine several times a year; lawn clippings tend to dry out and stick, for example. Leaves can stain it...

I thought you were kidding at first... you're one of them! *pukes a bit in my mouth*

What the hell do you need a clean driveway for? There is no valid, logical reason for it.

[Gatefan1976]

Only once. But by someone who is authoritative on the subject. Perhaps the SCOTUS. That particular judge seemed to think it was unconstitutional as well, so you may not be right.

What do you think is unconstitutional?
Obama did not change the law, he changed how it was applied to certain people. He did not overstep the boundaries by declaring DACA recipients legal (which WOULD be an overreach) at all.
If a JUDGE thought they could craft a legal argument to stop DACA, they would have, and that's not based on my reasoning, but yours, given how often you complain about "lefty 9th circuit".
2 options present themselves.
1: "Your" judge backed off because he could not craft a legal case
2: "My" Judges don't because they can, and you don't like that.

[Annoyed]

What do you think is unconstitutional?
Obama did not change the law, he changed how it was applied to certain people. He did not overstep the boundaries by declaring DACA recipients legal (which WOULD be an overreach) at all.
If a JUDGE thought they could craft a legal argument to stop DACA, they would have, and that's not based on my reasoning, but yours, given how often you complain about "lefty 9th circuit".
2 options present themselves.
1: "Your" judge backed off because he could not craft a legal case
2: "My" Judges don't because they can, and you don't like that.

From the article I posted:

But the order from Federal District Judge Andrew Hanen, issued Friday afternoon, may be only a temporary reprieve for DACA recipients: Hanen held that the plaintiffs are likely to succeed in their argument that the program is unlawful because it oversteps the authority of the executive branch.

"If the nation truly wants a DACA program," Hanen wrote, "it is up to Congress to say so."

Still, Hanen declined to put even a temporary halt to DACA because he found that Texas and the other states waited too long to bring their case.

As I've been saying all along; the LSoS did not have the authority to do this in the first place, according to that particular judge.

We will have to see what SCOTUS rules when it gets there.

[Annoyed]

I thought you were kidding at first... you're one of them! *pukes a bit in my mouth*

What the hell do you need a clean driveway for? There is no valid, logical reason for it.

Maintaining the value of my property?

[jelgate]

Maintaining the value of my property?

Being wasteful

[Gatefan1976]

From the article I posted:


As I've been saying all along; the LSoS did not have the authority to do this in the first place, according to that particular judge.

YES, he does. He cannot craft policy, nor can he contravene the constitutional right of the House to do so. What he CAN do is set sentencing guidelines which is a function of the DOJ, NOT the courts. Why do you think the Muslim ban got shot down so many times?

We will have to see what SCOTUS rules when it gets there.

The SCOTUS has nothing to argue. Trump could direct the DOJ to impose lifetime sentences for illegal immigrants and that too would be within his power, much like separating kids for an indeterminate amount of time is ALSO within his power.
Have you noticed anyone claiming the separation of children from their families is unconstitutional?
Mean, heartless and bastardly YES.
Unconstitutional?
No.
Illegal?
No.

[Chaka-Z0]

Maintaining the value of my property?

The rain does it for you? The leaf ''stains'' don't damage your driveway, unless yours is made of silk?

[Annoyed]

The rain does it for you? The leaf ''stains'' don't damage your driveway, unless yours is made of silk?

Leave them there long enough and they will stain, some sort of chemical reaction, as I recall.

I've got a few stains on there that will be there till next resealing, even a pressure washer won't take 'em out without using enough force to dig into the asphalt itself.

[Annoyed]

YES, he does. He cannot craft policy, nor can he contravene the constitutional right of the House to do so. What he CAN do is set sentencing guidelines which is a function of the DOJ, NOT the courts. Why do you think the Muslim ban got shot down so many times?

The SCOTUS has nothing to argue. Trump could direct the DOJ to impose lifetime sentences for illegal immigrants and that too would be within his power, much like separating kids for an indeterminate amount of time is ALSO within his power.
Have you noticed anyone claiming the separation of children from their families is unconstitutional?
Mean, heartless and bastardly YES.
Unconstitutional?
No.
Illegal?
No.

No offense, but I think I'll take the interpretation of a federal district judge over yours.

[jelgate]

Unless its a federal judge who disagrees with your side

[mad_gater]

The water is potable, even if you get it from your external outlet. Why do you think I'm mad at these clowns for washing their driveways?

Our city council created the "water police" a few years back to fine people that water their lawn / wash driveway during the summer, but there's like 2-3 officers for the whole town.

I think what he's talking about is the fact that we don't get the luxury of switching to waste water for use in such applications as watering the lawn and/or garden...at least not in urban and suburban areas anyway. In urban and suburban areas here in the US our waste water goes thru a sewer system to travel to a waste water treatment plant where it gets re-made into drinkable water and reintroduced into the common water supply lines. Now in rural areas where most dwellings are likely to make use of septic tanks for containing waste water, which is then treated by the dwelling owner regularly flushing some Rid-X down a toilet to provide enzymes for breaking down the waste, it could be possible to hook up an irrigation system to the septic tank and use the waste water to water the lawn.

[aretood2]

No offense, but I think I'll take the interpretation of a federal district judge over yours.

Now if GF and the Judge's arguments were flipped you'd be nodding your head in agreement with GF so hard it would fall off.