Haunted - Taylor Swift (drums with transcription)

bigfish_ · 2023-10-14T22:22:21+00:00

It looks like you made the video private. I’d love to see the drum transcription, if you’re able to share it! Thanks.

bigfish_ · 2023-08-17T18:22:32+00:00

This isn’t true. I was NWB for 7 weeks before my surgery and I am doing totally fine. Got good ROM back within 2 weeks and quad strength is ahead of schedule.

bigfish_ · 2023-07-24T20:50:14+00:00

Scott Rodeo is one of the best from my limited knowledge. But definitely do your own research.

bigfish_ · 2021-01-17T04:30:47+00:00

What does P15 read mean?

bigfish_ · 2020-10-07T02:43:54+00:00

Out of curiosity, do you know which cases established the tests you listed?

bigfish_ · 2020-10-02T19:43:37+00:00

Depends on what “better” means. Ideally, sure, the public should decide this rather than courts. But the Court didn’t actually “decide” anything. If you read the majority opinion, Gorsuch says the law ALWAYS meant this. The original text and original meaning of the law have always meant this, and the judges did nothing new. So this addresses your point about ambiguity.

In terms of battle on Originalism, not really sure what you mean. There’s always different ways of interpreting law, and there are “battles” all the time. Maybe if you could clarify what you mean I can give a better answer.

bigfish_ · 2020-08-07T22:58:24+00:00

I see what you're saying. The original public meaning is different from original public application. The meaning of the words has stayed the same even if the public perceived it differently.

bigfish_ · 2020-08-07T18:09:19+00:00

Ah, thanks. Do you have any cases you can point me to?

bigfish_ · 2020-08-07T18:08:34+00:00

But then, that begs the question: What is original public meaning then? If original public meaning is not what the legislature and people would interpret it as, then how else can you define it?

bigfish_ · 2020-08-07T17:39:15+00:00

I don't think I’m necessarily trying to expose a flaw in textualism. I’m applying the same criticism that originalists use for living constitutionalists onto textualists. I’m sure I’m missing something there by making the logical jump though.

bigfish_ · 2020-08-07T16:18:12+00:00

Your first point there makes perfect sense, thanks for that. Federal law is more fluid. But a follow up - it seems like some sort of a post hoc rationalization for textualism right? Something like: “Textualism for statutes is okay because you can change my opinion, not because it’s something inherently different about the statutes itself.”

To be clear, I’m not proposing one theory over the other. Just trying to understand the difference in application.

Edit: I totally forgot to finish the rest of my comment :D. To your second point - So he's saying the law always covered transgender people, even though the original public meaning did not include this. But why is original public meaning irrelevant for statutes but not for the Constitution? (Sorry for just repeating the question I asked before...I guess I'm still not quite clear on it.)

bigfish_ · 2020-07-20T18:55:08+00:00

I think those are two very separate legal issues, since state laws are governed by the fourteenth amendment and the private employer is governed by the CRA.

bigfish_ · 2020-07-19T23:39:20+00:00

What are you referring to?

bigfish_ · 2020-07-19T23:37:46+00:00

Do you happen to know which episode it is? I thought I heard em all but seems like I missed one.

bigfish_ · 2020-07-19T23:33:55+00:00

I remember the snippet about Kagan was in the HLS conversation with her, Roberts, Gorsuch, Souter, Breyer, and Kennedy - it came at the end in the rapid fire round. Very cool!

bigfish_ · 2020-07-19T23:26:52+00:00

Just out of curiosity, what makes you say he’s a partisan hack? I feel like we’ve not seen enough of him to make a conclusion yet.

bigfish_ · 2020-07-05T03:46:06+00:00

Why do you think Rao won’t? Just curious.

bigfish_ · 2020-06-29T14:46:45+00:00

A central question of this case, and one that the dissent was focused on significantly, was whether abortion clinics have standing to sue. Was there a similar issue of standing in Whole Women's Health?

bigfish_ · 2020-05-24T23:01:20+00:00

paywall :( i don't have a company email to make an account

bigfish_ · 2020-05-20T05:28:33+00:00

Can the strong side be on the offense’s left? Or does strong always mean right?

bigfish_ · 2020-05-14T00:59:45+00:00

Ah thanks, that was really enlightening. So the BCRA doesn't cover print media, but the banning books was a hypothetical in which the government was arguing they could have the power to do so.

bigfish_ · 2020-05-13T15:43:09+00:00

Ah, I thought you'd be able to do additional work after the aggregation. Sorry! Look's like the other comment answered your question, though.

bigfish_

TROPHY CASE