HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » steve2470 » Journal
Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ... 181 Next »

steve2470

Profile Information

Name: Steve
Gender: Male
Hometown: Florida
Home country: US
Current location: US
Member since: Sat Oct 16, 2004, 01:04 PM
Number of posts: 26,260

Journal Archives

I heard the singing of animals (crickets ? ) that you only hear during hot weather last night

I can't remember hearing the singing in March before. It's usually May before I hear the singing.

Is it crickets I'm hearing ? I live near a small pond. Thanks.

1895 SCOTUS: United States v. E.C. Knight Company, antitrust law cannot be enforced

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._E._C._Knight_Co.

The court's 8-1 decision, handed down on January 21, 1895 and written by Chief Justice Melville Weston Fuller, went against the government. Justice John Marshall Harlan dissented.

The court held "that the result of the transaction was the creation of a monopoly in the manufacture of a necessary of life" but ruled that it "could not be suppressed under the provisions of the act". The court ruled that manufacturing—in this case, refining—was a local activity not subject to congressional regulation of interstate commerce. Fuller wrote:

That which belongs to commerce is within the jurisdiction of the United States, but that which does not belong to commerce is within the jurisdiction of the police power of the State. . . . Doubtless the power to control the manufacture of a given thing involves in a certain sense the control of its disposition, but . . . affects it only incidentally and indirectly.

Under the Knight decision, any action against manufacturing monopolies would need to be taken by individual states, making such regulation extremely difficult with regards to out-of-state monopolies because states are prohibited from discriminating against out-of-state goods by, among other things, the Dormant Commerce Clause and Article I section 10 of the U.S. Constitution. The ruling prevailed until the end of the 1930s, when the court took a different position on the national government's power to regulate the economy.


The horrible decision here: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/156/1/case.html

Need help with sim card and Blu Win Jr W410A phone

Hi all, I'm a bit of a klutz with phones, so bear with me here.

I got this phone: http://www.bluproducts.com/index.php/win-jr

This is not a critical situation, since it's a second phone.

Anyway, it's unlocked and you have to insert your own mini-sim card from your carrier. I checked on the carrier's website and they say the line is activated. The phone has two slots for sim cards and one slot for an SD card. Here's the problem: With my last phone, it was super easy to insert the card and take it out. You simply put the sim card in with the electrical contacts face down, gently tap it in to make sure it was a good connection and close the case.

With this phone, you have to push the card into the slot, then slide it UNDERNEATH a plastic covering to make contact with the electronics. When I went to turn the phone on, it keeps telling me invalid sim card. I've tried to extract the damn sim card but it's so far up into the housing that it's going to take special surgery to get it out. Talk about poor design!

Anyway, I wanted to get feedback before I contact the phone manufacturer so I know what to say and what to ask.

Thanks!

eta: I figured out where I really messed up. The sim card my carrier sent me had the "Standard Sim" card (also known as a mini-sim card), with the "Micro Sim" card within it. You can push out the Micro-Sim card and use it alone if the Standard Sim card is too large. I should have used the larger Standard Sim card.

eta2: I think I've found the perfect tool to extract the inaccesible sim card

PELCO Slim Fine (tweezers)

Listerine mouthwash made bad breath a social no-no in the 1920's....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Listerine

Listerine, for instance, was invented in the nineteenth century as powerful surgical antiseptic. It was later sold, in distilled form, as both a floor cleaner and a cure for gonorrhea. But it wasn't a runaway success until the 1920s, when it was pitched as a solution for "chronic halitosis"— a then obscure medical term for bad breath. Listerine's new ads featured forlorn young women and men, eager for marriage but turned off by their mate's rotten breath. "Can I be happy with him in spite of that?" one maiden asked herself. Until that time, bad breath was not conventionally considered such a catastrophe. But Listerine changed that. As the advertising scholar James B. Twitchell writes, "Listerine did not make mouthwash as much as it made halitosis." In just seven years, the company's revenues rose from $115,000 to more than $8 million.


If that's true, the things you learn on Wiki.

What song immediately puts you in a better mood ?

For me, right now, it's this one:

1883 SCOTUS racism: Civil Rights Cases 109 U.S. 3, African-Americans are second-class citizens

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Cases

The Civil Rights Cases, 109 U.S. 3 (1883), were a group of five similar cases consolidated into one issue for the United States Supreme Court to review. The Court held that Congress lacked the constitutional authority under the enforcement provisions of the Fourteenth Amendment to outlaw racial discrimination by private individuals and organizations, rather than state and local governments.

More particularly, the Court held that the Civil Rights Act of 1875, which provided that "all persons within the jurisdiction of the United States shall be entitled to the full and equal enjoyment of the accommodations, advantages, facilities, and privileges of inns, public conveyances on land or water, theaters, and other places of public amusement; subject only to the conditions and limitations established by law, and applicable alike to citizens of every race and color, regardless of any previous condition of servitude" was unconstitutional.


The Court, in an 8-1 decision by Justice Joseph P. Bradley, held that the language of the 14th Amendment, which prohibited denial of equal protection by a state, did not give Congress power to regulate these private acts, because it was the result of conduct by private individuals, not state law or action, that blacks were suffering. Section five empowers Congress only to enforce the prohibition on state action. Legislation by Congress on subjects which are within the domain of the state are not authorized by the 14th Amendment. Private acts of racial discrimination were simply private wrongs that the national government was powerless to correct. Bradley commented that “individual invasion of individual rights is not the subject-matter of the Amendment. It has a deeper and broader scope. It nullifies and makes void all state legislation, and state action of every kind, which impairs the privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States, or which injures them in life, liberty or property without due process of law, or which denies to any of them the equal protection of the laws.”

The Court also acknowledged that the 13th Amendment does apply to private actors, but only to the extent that it prohibits people from owning slaves, not exhibiting discriminatory behavior. The Court said that "it would be running the slavery argument into the ground to make it apply to every act of discrimination which a person may see fit to make as to guests he will entertain, or as to the people he will take into his coach or cab or car; or admit to his concert or theatre, or deal with in other matters of intercourse or business."


The racist decision here: http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=CASE&court=US&vol=109&page=3

1884 SCOTUS: Elk v. Wilkins 112 U.S. 94, Native Americans are not citizens by birth

John Elk, a Winnebago Indian born on an Indian reservation and later resided among whites in the non-reservation U.S. territory in Omaha, Nebraska, where he renounced his former tribal allegiance and claimed citizenship by virtue of the Citizenship Clause. The case came about after Elk tried to register to vote on April 5, 1880, and was denied by Charles Wilkins, the named defendant, who was registrar of voters of the Fifth Ward of the City of Omaha.

The question then was, whether an Indian, born a member of one of the Indian tribes within the United States, is, merely by reason of his or her birth within the United States, and of his afterward voluntarily separating him or herself from the tribe and taking up residence among white citizens, a citizen of the United States, within the meaning of the first section of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution.


Although “Indian tribes, being within the territorial limits of the United States, were not, strictly speaking, foreign states,” “they were alien nations, distinct political communities,” with whom the United States dealt with through treaties and acts of Congress. Thus, born a member of an Indian tribe, even on American soil, Elk could not meet the allegiance test of the jurisdictional phrase because he “owed immediate allegiance to” his tribe, a vassal or quasi-nation, and not to the United States. The Court held Elk was not “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States at birth. “The evident meaning of these last words is, not merely subject in some respect or degree to the jurisdiction of the United States, but completely subject to their political jurisdiction, and owing them direct and immediate allegiance.”

The exclusion of Native Americans from citizenship was eventually eliminated by the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924. At the time, two-thirds of Native Americans had already achieved citizenship.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elk_v._Wilkins

Actual decision here: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/112/94/case.html

It's March. It's 92.7 F in Florida. WTF.

http://www.wunderground.com/cgi-bin/findweather/getForecast?query=28.23049927,-81.31227875&sp=KFLSTCLO2

Can I vent about how much I disdain Governor Rick Scott aka Lord Voldemort ?

The man, aka evil alien SOB, strongly discouraged the discussion of global climate change in Florida. Of course he denies it and there is no paper trail. Of course.

We (the voters of Florida, NOT me and NOT anyone I know) re-elected this criminal rat bastard alien. Lawdamercy.

love it!

And Floridians RE-ELECTED this evil alien SOB

Go to Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ... 181 Next »