As Ricky Ricardo said, Paul Ryan has a lot of 'splainin to do! Not only did he drink $700 worth of wine with Hedgefund Rich Business Guy Asness (who attacked a female Professor screaming "Fxxk Her!" but backed off when her husband approached), but Ryan has yet to explain WHY he was having such a grandiose dinner while advocating the END to Medicare as we know it (feed granny cat food) while Asness -- who is infamous for screaming (via letters to the Editor) to President Obama for DARING to even suggest an end to the MANY loopholes the Hedgefund Managers are enjoying while Ryan's bill attempts to SLASH Medicare!WE at Immigration Talk with a Mexican American DEMAND that Ryan EXPLAIN why he had such a dinner with such an unscrupulous guy while he continues to demand an END to Medicare and EXTEND even MORE Tax Cuts for the Rich (like Asness)!
Ryan should be ASHAMED of himself! WE THE PEOPLE should DEMAND Ryan's resignation!
Dear Dee :
ReplyDeleteThis is one of several very long and excellent articles on SB 1070 before the Supreme Court ... Even the professors that believe in "constitutionality" see a lot of political problems, political fights and possible reversals of SC decisions in the future.
Many Law Professors believe that the court will return SB 1070 to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
***************
Will Justice Kennedy side with Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Scalia, Alito, and Thomas ( S.B. 1070 ) ?? - My sense is that Justice Kennedy will at least agree with Judge Bea on the invalidation of two sections and possibly with the Ninth Circuit majority on the other two
University of California at Davis -
School of Law -
S.B. 1070: Federal preemption and why the Court won’t address civil rights issues -
Faculty Blog -
Arizona v. United States. -
By Professor Kevin Johnson -
July 18, 2011
http://facultyblog.law.ucdavis.edu/post/For-SCOTUSblog-SB-1070-Federal-preemption-and-why-the-Court-wone28099t-address-civil-rights-issues.aspx
Some excerpts :
How might Chamber of Commerce v. Whiting affect the Court’s decision [A2] in United States v. Arizona (assuming, of course, that the Court grants review in the latter)? Both cases involve the question of federal preemption of state efforts to regulate immigration. However, in my estimation, the Court’s decision in Whiting to uphold the constitutionality of the Legal Arizona Workers Act does not necessarily mean that the Court will uphold S.B. 1070.
................
Well, this is extremely long but Superb Quality ( Wonderful California Universities ! )
.