3
FatBrando300 3 points ago +3 / -0

Anyone else think that Hochul is the love child of Ed Grimley and Gretchen Whitmer?

1
FatBrando300 1 point ago +1 / -0

1776 harbor=2022 California rail yards.

1
FatBrando300 1 point ago +1 / -0

What does that say for you? You don't even use simple punctuation and grammar. And yes, it did. It was stated two times: first, in the per curiam; the second is the quote I pasted. Reading too hard for you?

1
FatBrando300 1 point ago +1 / -0

So he voted to lift the sanctions? Or for no sanctions? He voted with the Dems...

1
FatBrando300 1 point ago +1 / -0

So I was apparently correct: From SCOTUS "But employers are not required to offer this option, and the emergency regulation purports to pre-empt state laws to the contrary"

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/21a244_hgci.pdf

0
FatBrando300 0 points ago +1 / -1

So I was apparently correct: From SCOTUS "But employers are not required to offer this option, and the emergency regulation purports to pre-empt state laws to the contrary"

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/21a244_hgci.pdf

0
FatBrando300 0 points ago +1 / -1

So I was apparently correct: From SCOTUS "But employers are not required to offer this option, and the emergency regulation purports to pre-empt state laws to the contrary"

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/21a244_hgci.pdf

2
FatBrando300 2 points ago +2 / -0

This photo from Dan Scavino was what got me banned from Twitter, lol!

1
FatBrando300 1 point ago +1 / -0

Thanks, I could have sworn I read it in there earlier this week, before I got sent home for refusing to comply with the mandate.

1
FatBrando300 1 point ago +1 / -0

I agree with that. Supposedly Whitmer backed down on mandates for the state and I hardly think she'd put up a stink with the Fed.

0
FatBrando300 0 points ago +1 / -1

If I read the first commenter, Schultz, surely you did too.

No need for redundancy. And no need to be an asshole.

0
FatBrando300 0 points ago +1 / -1

I could have sworn I read it in there... because commerce clause.

0
FatBrando300 0 points ago +1 / -1

According to the ETS, the ETS supercedes any state law. In my situation, if you refuse to provide information, you're considered to be unvaccinated. Unvaccinated will be segregated, and forced to wear masks, get tested weekly, or ultimately get vaccinated.

It's crushing my husband and I, we're both low wage workers and refuse to comply.

13
FatBrando300 13 points ago +13 / -0

Does it make me evil when I laugh at people dying from compliance?

2
FatBrando300 2 points ago +2 / -0

Johnny Carson didn't die! It's now Jeanette Carson??

1
FatBrando300 1 point ago +1 / -0

What insurers? I don't have health insurance.

16
FatBrando300 16 points ago +16 / -0

So that's why Hilldawg carries her bottle of hot sauce around...

2
FatBrando300 2 points ago +2 / -0

I set up a givesendgo, for a little bit of help, but I also read the ToS to the left, and it says "no fundraising".. so I didn't post any link.

view more: Next ›