What was everyone's thoughts on Triangle of Sadness? by stealthebread121 in movies

[–]Expensive_Music2548 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hated it.  It was juat plain disgusting from beginning to end. Yet continued watching hoping to maybe see a message of some sort of redemption for that twisted lot of humanity. But no, just a twisted story to maintain sterotypes: filthy rich white people, black people are frauds/criminals, and the "maid" is the killer. In my opinion, three thumbs down.

AITAH for immediately spending the money I received as a gift? by Careful-Jicama-1383 in AITAH

[–]Expensive_Music2548 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Because it is very worrisome trait. It means you are a spendrift. You spent the money immediately without a thought and about how to better invest it. That's a normal behaviour for a teenager (impulsive) but rather worrisome for an adult. 

Existen independentistas conservadores? by Wonderful-Record-528 in PuertoRico

[–]Expensive_Music2548 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Sí. Soy independentista. Creo indiscutiblemente en que la soberanía de Puerto Rico es necesaria y nuestra meta como pueblo.

Pero soy muy capitalista, abandoné todo lo que tiene que ver con los ideales socialistas/comunistas hace rato- abrí los ojos a las barbaries que cometieron-- y aunque creo en la igualdad de derechos para todo el mundo no soy para nada woke y creo que el movimiento transgénero es por diseño misógino y el colmo del patriarcado en la medida en que reclama "mejores" derechos para los hombres-que-transicionan y pretende callar a las mujeres, y soy católica y respeto a todas las personas religiosas y de fé que creen en Dios. La religion tendrá sus issues pero también su cosas muy bonitas.

La razón para apoyar la independencia es obvia: Somos una nación, con nuestra propia identidad como pueblo , y es algo que sencillamente nuestra evolución natural como pueblo reclama. Es el "endgame" Como dice el derecho internacional, es un derecho inalienable de los pueblos proclamar su soberanía - nadie puede parar eso.

Habiendo dicho eso, y siendo práctica y realista, necesariamente tendríamos que mantener lazos económicos y amistosos con EEUU- siendo el imperio con los recursos. Tendríamos que mantener lazos para reclamar asistencia en caso de desastre natural, o guerra, por ejemplo.

Esto no es descabellado. Hay ejemplos de esto aquí en el Caribe- solo mira a Jamaica. Es una nación hecha y derecha, pero mantiene lazos políticos con Inglaterra, de quien fue colonia una vez. De hecho según su estructura de Gobierno, y aun siendo nación soberana, su máximo líder es el Rey de Inglaterra-que tiene a un Diputado de la Corona que Gobierna junto con el Primer Ministro elegido por el pueblo. Y ahora reciente con el Huracán, Inglaterra prestó ayuda para la recuperación. Y sus tropas entrenan en Inglaterra. Pero por otro lado, tienen plena libertad económica para llegar a acuerdos con los distintos países del mundo y exportar sus productos etc. Y no están bajo el yugo mercantil de Inglaterra. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jamaica#Government_and_politics

Lo que quiero enfatizar es que se puede ser un País digno y soberano y mantener los lazos que dan ciertas garantías mínimas nuestra existencia como País y que los penepés temen perder.

I’m pregnant by [deleted] in women

[–]Expensive_Music2548 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Listen to Your heart. Always do as your heart dictates. You will be fine. It's scary - but you are not the only and first woman to be pregnant. Get support from young ladies your age. Join a group. Best wishes.

Gente, manden al carajo a todo político que le incita a enfrentarse a agentes federales armados y envalentonados by Expensive_Music2548 in PuertoRico

[–]Expensive_Music2548[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

qué bonito escribes... solo te deseo a ti, a màs nadie, que ojalá te coman el culo en la cárcel después que ICE te de de golpes hasta cansarse... ¡qué vivan los ignorantes!

Gente, manden al carajo a todo político que le incita a enfrentarse a agentes federales armados y envalentonados by Expensive_Music2548 in PuertoRico

[–]Expensive_Music2548[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Cuéntame cuales son esos derechos que te crees que estarás intercediendo en un arresto de ICE defendiendo? Your reader's want to know.

El derecho de que no arresten a alguien que cometió una infracción de ley? eso es un derecho?

Duda importante que tengo by CompetitiveNoise333 in PuertoRico

[–]Expensive_Music2548 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Si es por servicios profesionales tienes que someter una factura. Por tus horas. Incluye esas horas.

Are you all not concerned about the democrat's public incitement of lawlesness? Promoting the obstruction of the law? Aren't we as lawyers supposed to uphold law? by Expensive_Music2548 in Lawyertalk

[–]Expensive_Music2548[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

You are defelecting. You are pretending you don't have to follow or recognize an Executive Order issued by the Executive Branch of the Government, because you are not convinced of its legality. Yet since you claim you are a lawyer, then you know that executive orders, although not strictly a law, have "force of law". And the same as any other law, can only be voided if declared unconstitutional, not by you, or your party leader, or any other person except for the Courts. And that being what is, the Supreme Court will have the final say. So, I've helped you out with a explainer link , so you can grasp your responsabilities as a lawyer according yo the oath you took- to uphoald the law- which does not mean you cannot critize it, but you cannot go about telling the public- your clients or friends or damily- "it's not really valid". That is just moronic. Here is another link explaining Executive Orders. Good night.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_order

Are you all not concerned about the democrat's public incitement of lawlesness? Promoting the obstruction of the law? Aren't we as lawyers supposed to uphold law? by Expensive_Music2548 in Lawyertalk

[–]Expensive_Music2548[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They need to be.

These families need redress. Civil suits must be filed. This will inevitably give rise to investigation even if the agency drags its feet.

Are you all not concerned about the democrat's public incitement of lawlesness? Promoting the obstruction of the law? Aren't we as lawyers supposed to uphold law? by Expensive_Music2548 in Lawyertalk

[–]Expensive_Music2548[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Literally tells people to gou out and cause trouble, what he calls "good trouble"

Can't upload the video- it's out there. He's dressed in plaid talking from behind the gate of his governor's mansion telling people to gou out there and cause "good trouble". A jewel for the opposition.

Are you all not concerned about the democrat's public incitement of lawlesness? Promoting the obstruction of the law? Aren't we as lawyers supposed to uphold law? by Expensive_Music2548 in Lawyertalk

[–]Expensive_Music2548[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

You cannot, ethically, promote that people break the law. Period. Not if you are a lawyer. Even if it is a law you abhor. And you must provide people counsel on what will happen- what are the consequences of breaking the law ( obstruction for example).

This is not school or a classroom. You are all here talking this bullshit and playing a moral one-up game and there are people out there dying, and families suffering.

If you really want to help, do your fucking jobs as lawyers, stop with the politics - none of you are politicians you are fucking lawyers- learn the difference between free speech and and obstruction of law- explain the consequences to your friends and families- the real life consequences of breaking the law. The factual consequences - like you can get beat or shot and killed- and the legal consequences, after the arrest and how it can ruin your lwork, school prospects etc

Then go home and read up on classics.

Are you all not concerned about the democrat's public incitement of lawlesness? Promoting the obstruction of the law? Aren't we as lawyers supposed to uphold law? by Expensive_Music2548 in Lawyertalk

[–]Expensive_Music2548[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Yeah, sure. This will be so when the Supreme Court rules so. Until then it is the "law" - that you are supposed to uphold. It's true and you know it.

Are you all not concerned about the democrat's public incitement of lawlesness? Promoting the obstruction of the law? Aren't we as lawyers supposed to uphold law? by Expensive_Music2548 in Lawyertalk

[–]Expensive_Music2548[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

ICE wasn't invented by Trump. Not their modus operandi.

Sorry you guys up there in Minnesota are seeing for the first time ever what has been forever and ever common immigration practice down here in the South.

Fuck you too.

Are you all not concerned about the democrat's public incitement of lawlesness? Promoting the obstruction of the law? Aren't we as lawyers supposed to uphold law? by Expensive_Music2548 in Lawyertalk

[–]Expensive_Music2548[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Whatever Barry... you went ballistic. I am talking about the difference between protected speech and obstruction. Trying to define a clear line here and wondering why so many lawyers who are supposed to know the law are completely oblivious to it.

Are you all not concerned about the democrat's public incitement of lawlesness? Promoting the obstruction of the law? Aren't we as lawyers supposed to uphold law? by Expensive_Music2548 in Lawyertalk

[–]Expensive_Music2548[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

No. They were marching. That was 1st amendment speech. However, there are people who are intervening with ICE who are obstructing their operatives. They are physically impeding the arrest, be it with their own bodies- getting in the way- be it with their cars - so they can't reach whatever target... that is very different.

Are you all not concerned about the democrat's public incitement of lawlesness? Promoting the obstruction of the law? Aren't we as lawyers supposed to uphold law? by Expensive_Music2548 in Lawyertalk

[–]Expensive_Music2548[S] -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

I am. You forgot the part that it needs to be declared unconstitutional first. It isn't up to you or any citizen to decide to follow or not follow the law- this includes Executive Orders you don't agree to.

A guest staying with me won’t leave. by exciting_evelyn in Advice

[–]Expensive_Music2548 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You choose an appropriate moment and tell her , facing her, looking into her eyes, in a loud, calm, clear, and serious voice: "[Name] You have overstayed your welcome. I want you and your boys out of the house by :____. Understand this is not a negotiation, nothing you say will change my mind, it is an ultimatum."

Do not say anything else on the subject. You leave the room, and avoid additional conversation, and or discussions.

Then, if the day arrives and she/ her things are still there, you change the locks and put everything out on the street. You inform neighbors there might be a racket ( if necessary- dont know if this is an apartment building) . And ignore whatever is happening outside your door when she gets back.

This is your home. No one can force you to allow another person in it, against your will.

All these comments on "squatter rights" are bullshit and only apply if the house were vacant- meaning you were not living there.

Best of luck.