GOP2020: What Becomes Of The Collaborators Post-Trump?
ml1 said:
gerritn said:The problem is that we now have data that renders that depiction inaccurate. The political divide isn't state vs. state, it's urban and suburban vs. rural. We'd be leaving about 20 or 30 million like-minded people behind in the cities of Armed Christian Land
GL2 said:I could live with that. Not sure the armed christian will agree though, once they realize they are all living off our taxes
An oldie but still relevant:
The map also leaves Colorado and New Mexico behind. And brings along a lot of red areas of NY and Pennsylvania.
I spend a fair amount of time in Virginia for work now. I've spent time in Roanoke as well as Fairfax. It's quite a divide.
RealityForAll said:
gerritn said:What percentage of the "takers" are social security recipients originally (or formerly) from the northeast, midatlantic or left coast who have moved to a low-tax paradise for retirement (such as Florida or S. Carolina)?
ml1 said:Political divide yes, but I was talking about which states are net "takers" or "payers" (see below).
gerritn said:The problem is that we now have data that renders that depiction inaccurate. The political divide isn't state vs. state, it's urban and suburban vs. rural. We'd be leaving about 20 or 30 million like-minded people behind in the cities of Armed Christian Land
GL2 said:I could live with that. Not sure the armed christian will agree though, once they realize they are all living off our taxes
An oldie but still relevant:
And, should social security recipients be considered "takers" after paying payroll taxes for a lifetime (essentially, premiums paid for a retirement annuity in addition to permanent disability coverage, etc.)?
In my book, when someone pays for something ahead of time and then gets that something later on that person is not my definition of a "taker". Finally, a hypothetical NJ payer of social security is free to choose where they go to retire including low tax states (describing popular retirement states states as takers when the individual states have no control over who moves to their state for retirement is disingenuous at best).
that's not really the issue. Even assuming that all federal spending goes to deserving recipients, it's being funded disproportionately by the taxes of people living in a handful of states. The federal budget for better or worse (I'd say generally for better, but not everyone would agree) is a big income redistribution engine.
So it wouldn't hurt if the people living in the states on the receiving end would recognize this and stop voting the way they do because they enjoy stigginit.
ml1 said:
RealityForAll said:that's not really the issue. Even assuming that all federal spending goes to deserving recipients, it's being funded disproportionately by the taxes of people living in a handful of states. The federal budget for better or worse (I'd say generally for better, but not everyone would agree) is a big income redistribution engine.
gerritn said:What percentage of the "takers" are social security recipients originally (or formerly) from the northeast, midatlantic or left coast who have moved to a low-tax paradise for retirement (such as Florida or S. Carolina)?
ml1 said:Political divide yes, but I was talking about which states are net "takers" or "payers" (see below).
gerritn said:The problem is that we now have data that renders that depiction inaccurate. The political divide isn't state vs. state, it's urban and suburban vs. rural. We'd be leaving about 20 or 30 million like-minded people behind in the cities of Armed Christian Land
GL2 said:I could live with that. Not sure the armed christian will agree though, once they realize they are all living off our taxes
An oldie but still relevant:
And, should social security recipients be considered "takers" after paying payroll taxes for a lifetime (essentially, premiums paid for a retirement annuity in addition to permanent disability coverage, etc.)?
In my book, when someone pays for something ahead of time and then gets that something later on that person is not my definition of a "taker". Finally, a hypothetical NJ payer of social security is free to choose where they go to retire including low tax states (describing popular retirement states states as takers when the individual states have no control over who moves to their state for retirement is disingenuous at best).
So it wouldn't hurt if the people living in the states on the receiving end would recognize this and stop voting the way they do because they enjoy stigginit.
HypotheticalNJWorker1 pays funds into social security ("SS") during his/her lifetime of work in NJ. And, then upon retiring hypotheticalNJWorker1 moves to FL (or SC) where hypotheticalNJWorker1 collects social security in FL (or SC). A portion of HypotheticalNJWorker1's SS monthly benefit is paid from funds of active worker, HypotheticalNJWorker2, who during his/her working lifetime works in NJ. And then, more or less contemporaneously, HypotheticalNJWorker1 dies and HypotheticalNJWorker2 retires and moves to FL to collect SS. A portion of HypotheticalNJWorker2's SS monthly benefit is paid from funds of active worker, HypotheticalNJWorker3, who during his/her working lifetime works in NJ. And then, more or less contemporaneously, HypotheticalNJWorker2 dies and HypotheticalNJWorker3 retires and moves to FL to collect SS. And so on.
Do you see a pattern here?
There is quite a bit of caselaw that pensions are sourced from where they are earned not from where they are paid. In other words, a NJ worker who earns a pension from the State of NJ could (operative word is "could" - under current law, NJ is NOT taxing recipients of NJ pensions, inside or outside of NJ) be taxed on this pension by NJ after moving to FL (because the source of the income is deemed to be NJ). A similar analysis could be also applied to SS sourcing. In my mind where you earned the income to pay the SS premiums is the relevant issue (not where you moved to collect the SS).
Large numbers of US retirees collect SS while living in the following countries: Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Chile, Costa Rica, Croatia, Denmark, the Dominican Republic, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hong Kong, Ireland, Iceland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Korea, Japan, Mexico, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, the Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, and Yemen. See https://www.elderlawanswers.com/getting-social-security-while-living-overseas-8301
Are US taxpayers (or northeastern US taxpayers) underwriting the above countries because SS recipients desire to collect benefits while living outside the US in those countries?
our taxes aren't underwriting other states. The money is being used to pay people who live in those states, wherever they may have lived before. People who, we are being told to believe, hate us and our "values."
You seem to be missing the point entirely, either purposely or because you aren't getting it.
ml1 said:
and fwiw, SS is only about a quarter of the federal budget.
And what percentage of health care costs represents Medicare for SS recipients?
Currently, healthcare represents 26% while SS represents 24%. IOW healthcare and SS represent half of the federal budget.
I have tried multiple times to understand your point. But it escapes me. Please connect the dots for me.
ml1 said:So it wouldn't hurt if the people living in the states on the receiving end would recognize this and stop voting the way they do because they enjoy stigginit.
"Stigginit" is all a lot of voters have left and unless Democrats can figure out how to help the rural hinterland, voting patterns won't change. It would be nice to cease and desist with the self-congratulatory circle jerk were the "progressives" console themselves by finding all the reasons why Trump supporters are just bad people and figure out how to get back some votes. In more than a few states, Democrats don't need to win back very many votes to make a difference.
tjohn said:
"Stigginit" is all a lot of voters have left and unless Democrats can figure out how to help the rural hinterland, voting patterns won't change.
And how can we or are we expected to help them?
Throw more money at them? We're doing a lot of that already and more so considering BLUE state residents will be hit with that max 10,000 local deductions.
Give them progress such as better and cheaper govt mandated health care, environmental changes, job retraining? Kind of hard to do considering they oppose these programs as socialism, govt interference, get that govt out of my life, and so forth, while electing representatives that oppose progressive change.
Its difficult trying to help those who whine and oppose change while spitting on those trying to help.
BG9 said:
tjohn said:And how can we or are we expected to help them?
"Stigginit" is all a lot of voters have left and unless Democrats can figure out how to help the rural hinterland, voting patterns won't change.
Throw more money at them? We're doing a lot of that already and more so considering BLUE state residents will be hit with that max 10,000 local deductions.
Give them progress such as better and cheaper govt mandated health care, environmental changes, job retraining? Kind of hard to do considering they oppose these programs as socialism, govt interference, get that govt out of my life, and so forth, while electing representatives that oppose progressive change.
Its difficult trying to help those who whine and oppose change while spitting on those trying to help.
Step 1: Let's stop complaining about how awful Trump voters are unless they are explicitly Nazis or white supremacists.
JACKSON, MISSISSIPPI (The Borowitz Report)—Celebrating her election victory on Tuesday night, U.S. Senator Cindy Hyde-Smith said that, despite predictions that her state was ready to turn the page on its shameful past, “I never lost faith in Mississippi’s racists.”
“For weeks, we’ve been hearing national pundits say that Mississippi was ready to enter the twenty-first century,” Hyde-Smith told a crowd of supporters at her victory rally. “Tonight, with your help, we proved them wrong.”
Hyde-Smith said that, despite the media’s unearthing of a cavalcade of embarrassing comments and actions from her past, “I never doubted that, at the end of the day, the people of Mississippi would listen to the racist voices in their heads.”
Choking back tears, Hyde-Smith thanked her supporters for honoring Mississippi’s storied heritage of hatred and cruelty.
“Mississippi voters do not want to tear down the relics of our Confederate past,” she said. “As such a relic, I am eternally grateful.”
Exit polls showed that Hyde-Smith performed extremely well with voters who described themselves as bigots, and dominated among those who could not correctly spell “Mississippi.”
tjohn said:
BG9 said:Step 1: Let's stop complaining about how awful Trump voters are unless they are explicitly Nazis or white supremacists.
tjohn said:And how can we or are we expected to help them?
"Stigginit" is all a lot of voters have left and unless Democrats can figure out how to help the rural hinterland, voting patterns won't change.
Throw more money at them? We're doing a lot of that already and more so considering BLUE state residents will be hit with that max 10,000 local deductions.
Give them progress such as better and cheaper govt mandated health care, environmental changes, job retraining? Kind of hard to do considering they oppose these programs as socialism, govt interference, get that govt out of my life, and so forth, while electing representatives that oppose progressive change.
Its difficult trying to help those who whine and oppose change while spitting on those trying to help.
Many who voted for him were not awful. Considering Trump's history they should have been aware, but they were not. They were fooled.
Now, its obvious what Trump is considering his constant lies, his racist and xenophobic statements. To support him now is inexcusable. They may as well be Nazis and white supremacists.
And I don't want to hear any crap that some current supporters are really nice. That they have nice families, are nice to their kids, treat their pets well, support the community. So what? If you know any history you will find that many death camp officers were also very nice, had nice kids, had nice Christmas parties to invite all, went to Church, gave to local the charities, had pets. And in 1944 when meat was lacking the local commander did take care of his pet dog, Schatzi, bringing home the occasional arm or leg. But still, he was nice. After all, he loved his family, his pets, his neighbors, gaving to the community.
The banality of evil. When you enable evildoers by excusing them, then you're part of the problem. To support Trump is evil.
GL2 said:
JACKSON, MISSISSIPPI (The Borowitz Report)—Celebrating her election victory on Tuesday night, U.S. Senator Cindy Hyde-Smith said that, despite predictions that her state was ready to turn the page on its shameful past, “I never lost faith in Mississippi’s racists.”
“For weeks, we’ve been hearing national pundits say that Mississippi was ready to enter the twenty-first century,” Hyde-Smith told a crowd of supporters at her victory rally. “Tonight, with your help, we proved them wrong.”
Hyde-Smith said that, despite the media’s unearthing of a cavalcade of embarrassing comments and actions from her past, “I never doubted that, at the end of the day, the people of Mississippi would listen to the racist voices in their heads.”
Choking back tears, Hyde-Smith thanked her supporters for honoring Mississippi’s storied heritage of hatred and cruelty.
“Mississippi voters do not want to tear down the relics of our Confederate past,” she said. “As such a relic, I am eternally grateful.”
Exit polls showed that Hyde-Smith performed extremely well with voters who described themselves as bigots, and dominated among those who could not correctly spell “Mississippi.”
Do you realize that the author, Andy Borowitz, is a comedian and satirist? Your quoted article is from a satirical New Yorker article. See https://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/cindy-hyde-smith-says-she-never-lost-faith-in-mississippis-racists
Please confirm that you are NOT providing the New Yorker article (set forth above from your posting) as proof of Hyde-Smith's racism. And, instead are merely passing it on as satire.
BG9 said:
tjohn said:Many who voted for him were not awful. Considering Trump's history they should have been aware, but they were not. They were fooled.
BG9 said:Step 1: Let's stop complaining about how awful Trump voters are unless they are explicitly Nazis or white supremacists.
tjohn said:And how can we or are we expected to help them?
"Stigginit" is all a lot of voters have left and unless Democrats can figure out how to help the rural hinterland, voting patterns won't change.
Throw more money at them? We're doing a lot of that already and more so considering BLUE state residents will be hit with that max 10,000 local deductions.
Give them progress such as better and cheaper govt mandated health care, environmental changes, job retraining? Kind of hard to do considering they oppose these programs as socialism, govt interference, get that govt out of my life, and so forth, while electing representatives that oppose progressive change.
Its difficult trying to help those who whine and oppose change while spitting on those trying to help.
Now, its obvious what Trump is considering his constant lies, his racist and xenophobic statements. To support him now is inexcusable. They may as well be Nazis and white supremacists.
And I don't want to hear any crap that some current supporters are really nice. That they have nice families, are nice to their kids, treat their pets well, support the community. So what? If you know any history you will find that many death camp officers were also very nice, had nice kids, had nice Christmas parties to invite all, went to Church, gave to local the charities, had pets. And in 1944 when meat was lacking the local commander did take care of his pet dog, Schatzi, bringing home the occasional arm or leg. But still, he was nice. After all, he loved his family, his pets, his neighbors, gaving to the community.
The banality of evil. When you enable evildoers by excusing them, then you're part of the problem. To support Trump is evil.
I detest DJT and agree that he is a bad fellow. However, invoking Nazi and death camp officers is IMHO over the top. BHO embraced drone strikes against innocents and guilty alike (yet I heard no references to Nazi for BHO here on MOL).
BHO approved more than 500 drone strikes during his presidency (Bush 43 approved about 50 drone strikes). Some BHO drone strikes targeted US citizens (without any due process). Additionally, not one financial executive was prosecuted under BHO as a result of the 2008 financial melt-down. Lehman Brothers repo 105 participants should have been prime candidates. See https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2010/03/repo_105_lehmans_accounting_gi.html
BHO's cabinet was picked by Citibank apparently. See https://www.rt.com/usa/362836-emails-citigroup-obama-cabinet/ and also see: https://www.commonsenseevaluation.com/2016/11/18/obama-didnt-even-pick-cabinet-citibank/
BHO was a better president and a decent man (better than DJT ever could be). However, there were many BHO policy decisions that BHO made that I disagreed with vigorously. DJT is a pig on his best day. However, cranking up the partisanship (namely, references to Nazis, death camp officers and white supremacists) will not help to heal this country.
I, too, try to avoid hyperbole and understand where we are in the context of where we were. But there are moments when we go through the Looking Glass, such as Sinclair Broadcasting expanding its local news hold throughout the country while being nothing but an arm of the Trump administration. (Scripts are written centrally and distributed, often demonizing immigrants and such.)
Then there are instances like Pompeo on Twitter today: "Iran’s regime has no interest in easing Yemeni suffering; the mullahs don’t even care for ordinary Iranians. Saudi Arabia has invested billions to relieve suffering in #Yemen. Iran has invested zero."
As others have pointed out, that is a genuinely Orwellian message.
RealityForAll said:
I have tried multiple times to understand your point. But it escapes me. Please connect the dots for me.
I've put it pretty simply. If it's still escaping you I can't help you.
tjohn said:
BG9 said:Step 1: Let's stop complaining about how awful Trump voters are unless they are explicitly Nazis or white supremacists.
tjohn said:And how can we or are we expected to help them?
"Stigginit" is all a lot of voters have left and unless Democrats can figure out how to help the rural hinterland, voting patterns won't change.
Throw more money at them? We're doing a lot of that already and more so considering BLUE state residents will be hit with that max 10,000 local deductions.
Give them progress such as better and cheaper govt mandated health care, environmental changes, job retraining? Kind of hard to do considering they oppose these programs as socialism, govt interference, get that govt out of my life, and so forth, while electing representatives that oppose progressive change.
Its difficult trying to help those who whine and oppose change while spitting on those trying to help.
you've really bought into this right wing drivel of the poor, aggrieved Trump voter. Screw the average Trump voter. Presidential elections are won by winning among the "independent swing vote" and by increasing turnout. If there truly are voters who voted for Trump because us liberal elites thing they're stupid, then, well - guess what? They're too stupid to appeal to in any rational way and that's just a fact. Forget about them and use your energies on people that might actually listen to you..
RealityForAll said:
I detest DJT and agree that he is a bad fellow. However, invoking Nazi and death camp officers is IMHO over the top. BHO embraced drone strikes against innocents and guilty alike (yet I heard no references to Nazi for BHO here on MOL).
BHO approved more than 500 drone strikes during his presidency (Bush 43 approved about 50 drone strikes). Some BHO drone strikes targeted US citizens (without any due process). Additionally, not one financial executive was prosecuted under BHO as a result of the 2008 financial melt-down. Lehman Brothers repo 105 participants should have been prime candidates. See https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2010/03/repo_105_lehmans_accounting_gi.html
BHO's cabinet was picked by Citibank apparently. See https://www.rt.com/usa/362836-emails-citigroup-obama-cabinet/ and also see: https://www.commonsenseevaluation.com/2016/11/18/obama-didnt-even-pick-cabinet-citibank/
BHO was a better president and a decent man (better than DJT ever could be). However, there were many BHO policy decisions that BHO made that I disagreed with vigorously. DJT is a pig on his best day. However, cranking up the partisanship (namely, references to Nazis, death camp officers and white supremacists) will not help to heal this country.
I agree with all of your criticisms of Obama.
But healing this country isn't going to be about ceasing criticism of neo-Nazis and white supremacists. Healing won't come until people stop BEING neo-Nazis and white supremacists and/or sympathizing with them.
RealityForAll said:
Do you realize that the author, Andy Borowitz, is a comedian and satirist? Your quoted article is from a satirical New Yorker article. See https://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/cindy-hyde-smith-says-she-never-lost-faith-in-mississippis-racists
Please confirm that you are NOT providing the New Yorker article (set forth above from your posting) as proof of Hyde-Smith's racism. And, instead are merely passing it on as satire.
MAPLEWOOD, N.J. (MOL) -- The Sherlock Prize was awarded Wednesday to RealityForAll, a regular contributor to Maplewood Online, for detecting the satire in a Borowitz Report that a fellow contributor, GL2, posted in his own thread.
The prize was announced by Wossamotta U., which has presented it annually since 1959.
RealityForAll's discovery led other regulars to scour GL2's thread for signs of satire in all the previous Borowitz Reports he has quoted. Asked for comment, GL2 said, "I had no idea."
Thanks, @DaveSchmidt. I wonder if @RealityForAll really believes we are incapable of detecting satire.
RealityForAll said:
GL2 said:Do you realize that the author, Andy Borowitz, is a comedian and satirist? Your quoted article is from a satirical New Yorker article. See https://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/cindy-hyde-smith-says-she-never-lost-faith-in-mississippis-racists
JACKSON, MISSISSIPPI (The Borowitz Report)—Celebrating her election victory on Tuesday night, U.S. Senator Cindy Hyde-Smith said that, despite predictions that her state was ready to turn the page on its shameful past, “I never lost faith in Mississippi’s racists.”
“For weeks, we’ve been hearing national pundits say that Mississippi was ready to enter the twenty-first century,” Hyde-Smith told a crowd of supporters at her victory rally. “Tonight, with your help, we proved them wrong.”
Hyde-Smith said that, despite the media’s unearthing of a cavalcade of embarrassing comments and actions from her past, “I never doubted that, at the end of the day, the people of Mississippi would listen to the racist voices in their heads.”
Choking back tears, Hyde-Smith thanked her supporters for honoring Mississippi’s storied heritage of hatred and cruelty.
“Mississippi voters do not want to tear down the relics of our Confederate past,” she said. “As such a relic, I am eternally grateful.”
Exit polls showed that Hyde-Smith performed extremely well with voters who described themselves as bigots, and dominated among those who could not correctly spell “Mississippi.”
Please confirm that you are NOT providing the New Yorker article (set forth above from your posting) as proof of Hyde-Smith's racism. And, instead are merely passing it on as satire.
Puhleeze...my assumption is that everyone knows the Borowitz Report. Hopefully, the satire is enough to explain itself. However, maybe I'll offer a "trigger warning" next time I post one of his pieces.
BTW, no one should need further proof of her overt racism beyond her words and actions.
Geez, now I need to go back and fact check those articles from "America's Finest News Source," the Onion. Damn fake news! Now I know what Trump is talking about.
One of the many sad aspects of the times in which we live is that satire is often uncomfortably close to the truth.
Tom_Reingold said:
Thanks, @DaveSchmidt. I wonder if @RealityForAll really believes we are incapable of detecting satire.
I think he's projecting.
Lemmee make up for that fake news post with this piece about the Trump sons and their preparation:
About lumping all Trump voters in with the (undisputed) white nationalists etc., below is one Rasmussen estimate of the number of people who voted for Obama in 2012 and Trump in 2016.
"the ANES data suggest that about 8.4 million 2012 Obama voters backed Trump in 2016 and 2.5 million Romney voters supported Clinton." http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/political_commentary/commentary_by_geoffrey_skelley/just_how_many_obama_2012_trump_2016_voters_were_there
Other studies they cite came up with 6.7 million to 9.2 million.
Isn't it just possible that some/many Trump voters have legitimate gripes about the way the country has gone, shall we say since GWB? Or Clinton? Or maybe back to Reagan? They were looking for change when they voted for Obama, and again when they voted for T. Trump was making promises about jobs, healthcare, etc. during the campaign that seemed pretty transparently eyewash at the time, but some believed him and were willing to compromise on his character etc. issues to get his promised (never delivered, and now mostly forgotten) action on their problems.
Any given voter (possibly excepting one-issue anti-abortion people) has a number of opinions and ideas about where the country should be going. Shouldn't the Dems be appealing to the decent aspects of Trump voters by offering (and campaigning hard on) some solutions to obvious national problems?? Note that i'm NOT suggesting going along with any "bad" Trumpian ideas. The same kind of platform that appeals to most Dem voters, along with pointing out how T has turned out not to be a friend to many of those who voted for him, can also appeal to many T voters.
/end rant, and i'll try not to go back to this (too many times) again, but i don't think the Dems do themselves any favors, either tactically or philosophically, by simply writing off every T voter, without regard for individual voters' motivations.
Let me be the first one to admit to not knowing this Borowitz Report — but then I only jump into this thread occasionally. My problem is I often don’t “get” insider stuff and references on this thread. My bad.
Satire is a dangerous weapon, especially in online discussions. Actually, satire is fake news by cognizant liberals. Dangerous, rather than funny, to see “quotes” attributed falsely.
Liberal New Jersey just elected a nincompoop for governor and re-elected Menendez for the umteenth time — even in the age of #MeToo!
While I am on a roll here, I found this statement posted earlier very disturbing :
Ml1....”that's not really the issue. Even assuming that all federal spending goes to deserving recipients, it's being funded disproportionately by the taxes of people living in a handful of states. The federal budget for better or worse (I'd say generally for better, but not everyone would agree) is a big income redistribution engine.
“So it wouldn't hurt if the people living in the states on the receiving end would recognize this and stop voting the way they do because they enjoy stigginit.”
Good grief!
mtierney said:
Actually, satire is fake news by cognizant liberals. Dangerous, rather than funny, to see “quotes” attributed falsely.
Liberal New Jersey just elected a nincompoop for governor and re-elected Menendez for the umteenth time — even in the age of #MeToo!
Satire is fake news by cognizant liberals? Conservatives don't do satire?
It was easy for me to vote for Menendez - nothing he has done or is even accused of having done is even close to the threat that Trump poses to democracy in America.
As far as Phil Murphy is concerned, why do you think he is a nincompoop?
tjohn said:
One of the many sad aspects of the times in which we live is that satire is often uncomfortably close to the truth.
If you were to send a WH press release or the transcript of a presidential interview back in time to 2008 or so, and tell people this was the GOP of 2018, you'd be dismissed as putting forth a cartoonish, mean-spirited satire of conservatism.
Employment Wanted
Latest Jobs
Employment Wanted
-
May 21, 2024 at 2:29pm
-
American Council on Exercise (ACE) Certified Personal Trainer available!
May 21, 2024 at 9:34am
-
American Council on Exercise (ACE) Certified Personal Trainer available!
May 21, 2024 at 9:27am
-
May 20, 2024 at 12:28pm
-
Brazilian cleaning 973 776 2481
May 20, 2024 at 3:17am
-
AMAZING HOUSE CLEANING AVAILABLE!!
May 19, 2024 at 2:01pm
Help Wanted
-
RF513 FT Live in or Live Out Nanny for Infant (June 10th Start)
May 21, 2024 at 3:52pm
-
SF5004 PT Afternoon Nanny for 2 (Late August Start)
May 21, 2024 at 11:18am
-
WF752 PT School Year Nanny for Infant (Late Aug Start)
May 20, 2024 at 9:35pm
-
May 19, 2024 at 7:48pm
Lessons/Instruction
Rentals
Advertisement
The Tinker case appears to be on point. The WI situation is even more unlikely for the school board to control or regulate because the activity apparently took place off school grounds and outside of school hours.