Skip to comments.Word for the Day - Lugubrious
Posted on 06/29/2012 5:44:33 AM PDT by tioga
In order that we might all raise the level of discourse and expand our language abilities, here is the daily post of Word for the Day.
[From Latin lgubris, from lgre, to mourn.]
Rules: Everyone must leave a post using the Word for the Day in a sentence.
The sentence must, in some way, relate to the news of the day.
The Review threads are linked for your edification. ;-)
Practice makes perfect.....post on....
Review Thread One: Word For The Day, Thursday 11/14/02: Raffish (Be SURE to check out posts #92 and #111 on this thread!)
Review Thread Two: Word For The Day, Tuesday 1/14/03: Roister
Review Thread Three: Word For The Day, Tuesday 1/28/03: Obdurate
We are paying for the sins of the past. More precisely for electing the last two Progressive Republicans. And we’ll pay for generations.
I’ve certainly seen a lot of Gowdy lately.
My plan is elliptical in am and AC. Swimming in afternoon/evening. Walk my hill at dusk. All cardio, the elliptical has settings for resistance and hill, so my knees get a good workout. I feel it if I skip the elliptical for more than a day. My back is holding up with the inversion table. All I have to do is stop and hang for a few minutes, and it's back to normal.
A member of the squirrel mafia had the effrontery to step onto the deck in full view of these two in the kitchen, by way of the French doors. Holy hell just broke loose as they tore out to secure their perimeter and vocally threaten said mafia member.
I can take it.
And my brother takes anti siezure meds too. He’s a great guy. He has a full life. He’s not a supreme court justice, but there are only 9 of those.
You think they could find nine people in extra good health all who are married and have produced children, but no.....instead we get Souter(s)
Less than 60 wasn't it?
Did you think we'd have gotten Janice Rogers Brown on the court?
'President George W. Bush nominated her to her current position on the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in 2003. However, her nomination was stalled in the U.S. Senate for almost two years because of Democratic opposition. She began serving as a federal appellate court judge on June 8, 2005.'
Ann's very talented, but sometimes she tends to spew invective while ignoring the facts on the Ground.
At that time and place we were LUCKY to get Alito, for Sandra Dee.
At that time and place we were LUCKY to get Alito, for Sandra Dee.
That wasn't luck. That was the result of an uprising. An uprising against Bush. And it showed that the Dems couldn't get 41 for a filibuster on a SCOTUS judge. That's the proof.
Typical GOP, even with a majority they don't know how to use it. The Dems have no such problem.
Did I tell you about the squirrel at my bird feeder who panicked when the dogs came roaring out at him and fell into the pool? He was a good swimmer. I had to fish a swimming mouse out this morning. I put peanuts out for the squirrels and they still raid my sunflower seeds, obnoxious rodents.
14 years between seizures, no indication he went with medication to prevent them, that should not disqualify him from sitting, nor mitigate in favor of his removal.
While most on the right are lugubrious
Others are hopeful, though dubious
That our voters unload
And make this whole mess explode
With an eruption reminiscent of Vesuvius
Is that one of those Jacobin squirrels?
Actually Janice Rogers Brown is a fantasy pic. Really any established conservative would have done from Alice Batchelder (6th Circuit) to J. Michael Luttig.
aw, that is cute. did you notice the difference in their muscles from a gym rat? these three look more natural and fit.
2006 was an uprising against Iraq, and Party Corruption.
And I thought it was sweet that they gave credit this AM to their little sister who took the videos. I think they are adorable, and they have good manners too.
Yes. That was 2006.
I meant the conservative uprising against the President when he said “trust me” on Ms. Miers which resulted in Justice Alito.
And isn’t it nice to have an appointee you don’t have to worry about?
I’m glad to hear there is an upside, potentially, to the announcement yesterday. I was just not able to even talk about it yesterday
The club left in the bag.
Yet we stayed in Iraq, and that gave us Barack.
Dammit, Barry's right as to whos fault it all is, just not the way he means it :)
Yes, the HHS abortaficient mandate will be tossed at leasat 5-4 if not better.
Actually Romney could just rescind that on day one as that’s regulation and not legislation. And I believe he will.
I have no hope, this is step 1 in our conversion to full socialized medicine and the left is right to celebrate. BFD indeed.
Construing the Commerce Clause to permit Congress to regulate individuals precisely because they are doing nothing would open a new and potentially vast domain to congressional authority. Congress already possesses expansive power to regulate what people do. Upholding the Affordable Care Act under the Commerce Clause would give Congress the same license to regulate what people do not do. The Framers knew the difference between doing something and doing nothing. They gave Congress the power to regulate commerce, not to compel it. Ignoring that distinction would undermine the principle that the Federal Government is a government of limited and enumerated powers. The individual mandate thus cannot be sustained under Congresss power to regulate Commerce.
The business about "new and potentially vast" authority is a fig leaf. This is a substantial rollback of Congress' regulatory powers, and the chief justice knows it. It is what Roberts has been pursuing ever since he signed up with the Federalist Society.,b. In 2005, Sen. Barack Obama spoke in opposition to Roberts' nomination, saying he did not trust his political philosophy on tough questions such as "whether the Commerce Clause empowers Congress to speak on those issues of broad national concern that may be only tangentially related to what is easily defined as interstate commerce." Today, Roberts did what Obama predicted he would do.
There is a far more sophisticated game being played here..
I know about inside baseball - now we have inside SCOTUS? Heaven help us.
I didn’t laugh yesterday until quarter to midnight. I turned on Craig Furguson’s show and he was doing his monologue about DeathCare. He became a US citizen just a few years ago. I think he knows the degree of tyranny we were bludgeoned with yesterday.
“If I want to use the word lugubrious, will Obama tax me for using it, or tax me for not using it?”
I think my dog is smarter than obama, so I don’t think Roberts was outdone intellectually by any means.
that’s just plain awesome!
So, you win by being smarter.
In my post to you on yesterdays thread, Roberts walked away from the store with the Cashbox, and left Obama holding the Baloney.....
Heres another.... <
What point is a limited commerce clause when the end-around of the power to tax is now affirmed?
The Commerce Clause abuse has emanations an penumbras that hide in the dark.
Using the Power to Tax, is already nearly unlimited, except as a Political question, Roberts made that point.
Of the two, would you rather have Congress readily passing you hidden costs, or Politicians having to tax you?
That video keeps locking up my computer and it won’t play sound. It must have overloaded their server.
It’s cute. “I’m a farmer and I grow it!”
My auto mechanic is the father of a friend, he’s cheap and reliable AND he’s moving to Tennessee as soon as his house sells. Dang, I am going to miss him.
Let us not turn lugubrious
Over what we already knew
Could easily go either way
And embolden either crew
Now that it is another tax
It becomes a new ox to gore-
Of the words you can think of
Is there one that is hated more?
With all the endless legal bits
To be refused and rejected
It is time for us to cowboy up
And get someone sensible elected
So Obamacare doesn’t have massive new bureacracies and regulation that will cost Americans tons of money? If all that is OK because Congress has the power to tax, then we’re done for.
It’s not an either/or question.
It was amazing how the attitude went from salubrious to lugubrious in a matter of moments, as it was announced that the mandate was “struck down” and then not really
The level of ugliness being displayed by the ‘rats in their rhetoric (it is constitutional, MF, etc...) has most of the rest of us boiling, and that is not good for them, any more than it was in 2010-my fangs are out, and so are those of everyone I’ve talked to-locked and loaded, and praying that this will not make what little work we have go away.
Just say no.
I had one like that and I searched a different source. Try this:
I think it is getting a lot of hits. But, I just played this one smoothly 30 secs ago.
Craig Ferguson...Wasn’t he the one that did the sketch about Sarah Palin when she was governor and called her “sexy librarian”? That was hilarious.
Perry and Abbot have made it pretty clear that they aren’t going to rush to give more people medicaid benefits, since they are not obligated to do so-I hope lots of people who wanted that will leave Texas and go to states that have more free stuff, and good riddance.
Thats exactly the point, Roberts is saying beware who you elect to tax you. He saved us from the commerce clause which your rank and file American doesn’t know from a hill of beans. Congress is going to screw us, we can better deal with the open and obvious screwing, at the ballot box.
As a legal beagle friend of mine said "Note the juxtaposition of the strict reading of I:8 enumerated powers in the Arizona case on Monday, then the broad reading of I:8 enumerated powers yesterday..."
The good news, if there is any is we can just treat it all like the fraud of a game that it is.
And more importantly becareful who you elect to appoint Supreme Court Justices.
And “it’s a tax” is now a punchline, to excuse anything.
I think John Roberts is likely every bit as conservative as you are, and infinitely more knowledgeable about the Constitution. Do your part, elect the right politicians.
I know what Roberts is saying about elections having consequences, and beds having been made we need to lie in them.
But if absolutely anything can be done by the gov’t as long as a “penalty” is associated with it, we have been “saved” from nothing.
This “tax” empowers the secretary of HHS to intrude into every decision that a doctor makes with his patients.
That’s not at all like saying “you buy tires, you pay a federal tax.”
Maybe he closed the door on future expansion of the commerce clause, but he ripped the roof off of the entire structure if this 2,000 page grant of power to HHS is a “tax.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.