Eric Citron, in a comment on SCOTUSblog this morning noted “Among Indian law lawyers, particularly those who represent tribes, there is a dark joke that the “real Indian canon” is that the Indians always lose. The reason is often the kinds of concerns about consequences that this opinion rejects. That might mark the real sea change that this opinion creates.”
Are you baiting me into referring to a particular sector of the population as ■■■■ holers? It seems to be a common “debate” method by some.
Try this. ■■■■ hole areas are formed by the leadership of those areas. The leadership of those areas govern with a set of standards that permit ■■■■ on the street, urination in public, rampant drug use, etc, and systemic selection of staff whose beliefs, standards, and education support the rules that lead to a ■■■■ hole area.
So ■■■■ holERS would be those who willingly allow if not actually elect or appoint such leadership to remain.
So… there are some in our nation for whom the foo ■■■■■■
I don’t bait people. I am just asking who you think deserves to be called ■■■■ holers…I was just hoping you weren’t referring to people who don’t vote the way you do.