Don’t look for just one tree. You’ll run out of branches too quickly.
Funniest story of the day Eh everyone.
I can’t wait for even the NY supreme Court to rule this turd sandwich a “stretch too far”.
Get your popcorn here, nice and hot,get you popcorn!
March is when it goes into effect if what I read is correct so they do have time I guess,Time for the Courts to toss this turd in the dustbin that is.
Speaking of Fascism, check this out :
You can be certain that the latest from the IRS will boost our employment situation immediately:
The IRS said it would soon issue “anti-abuse rules” to discourage employers from taking advantage of any regulatory loopholes.
“The Treasury Department and the IRS are aware of various structures being considered under which employers might use temporary staffing agencies (or other staffing agencies)… to evade application of section 4980H [the employer insurance mandate],” the IRS said in a proposed regulatory announcement issued December 28.
The IRS said it would issue a so-called “anti-abuse rule” in an attempt to prevent employers from using temp agencies to circumvent the mandate, essentially writing into law that even though an employer hires temporary workers and therefore is not technically under the mandate’s jurisdiction, the IRS would fine them anyway for not providing health insurance.
“ Gives me a warm felling all over, how about all of you?”
#4: Atlas Shrugged in widescreen HD. They make petty little rules to force you to do what they want, when you find a way through the rules to avoid doing what they want, they’ll make up another even pettier rule to punish you anyway.
Mr Evilwrench - the 1994 AWB was exactly that, and the left is still pouting about it. And still doing the same thing.
Hey lefties: if you’ve got the balls, just write laws that say: such and such is now illegal. No list of features like a Chinese take out menu, no 6000 exemptions for your political cronies; none of that. And hey, no pork riders either. Just a bill that turns a certain object or activity into a crime.
And then when it gets thumbs down in the legislature, shut up. Because people don’t want it.
And I wish to high heaven there was a no-repeat Bill law, so that once an idea failed it couldn’t be brought forward again next session ... not for 4 years or something. Fail, and your bill goes away in any shape and form for 4 years. And any other bill that tries to sneak in part of your dead bill as a rider or a sub-section is automatically flushed down the crapper as well.
I read that yesterday and wondered - “Does this also mean the M-16s, etc, used by the SWAT team?”
Why do police need an exemption for larger magazines? Does it take them more than 7 rounds to kill a deer?
Recall the incident in NYC where Police hit 9 innocent bystanders trying to take out one person. Seems to me NYC police don’t need more than 7 rounds - for the safety of the citizens of NYC.
I begin to think the cops should only be allowed to carry one round… kept in their shirt pocket.
jackal40 - NYC cops often need 40 shots or more to kill one black guy in an alley or doorway.