Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Posted by OK2A, please read
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Shadowrider" data-source="post: 3333267" data-attributes="member: 3099"><p>OK I'll settle in to eat some crow. A couple of bites anyway. I was under the impression that a legislative resolution was just an "opinion" on an issue in that given session and wasn't binding on future sessions. That it was <em>SUPPOSED</em> to be considered by future legislative bodies and courts but we all know how that goes. <img src="/images/smilies/rolleyes.png" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":rolleyes:" title="Roll Eyes (Sarcastic) :rolleyes:" data-shortname=":rolleyes:" /></p><p></p><p>I'm happy to say that that is not the case with joint resolutions in Oklahoma and probably the .fed too. I just looked this up and here's what I found (emphasis mine):</p><p></p><p></p><p>I would only echo what GTG stated and say that I don't trust the likes of Rep. Lowe to not take the great explanation provided by [USER=41034]@sturgisrun[/USER] and twist and worm his way around basically ALL of it. The only way to get around that nonsense is to define that scrutiny in a concrete unquestionable fashion. That's my only issue. I get the baby step part, but it's very frustrating to have to do that dance...</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Shadowrider, post: 3333267, member: 3099"] OK I'll settle in to eat some crow. A couple of bites anyway. I was under the impression that a legislative resolution was just an "opinion" on an issue in that given session and wasn't binding on future sessions. That it was [I]SUPPOSED[/I] to be considered by future legislative bodies and courts but we all know how that goes. :rolleyes: I'm happy to say that that is not the case with joint resolutions in Oklahoma and probably the .fed too. I just looked this up and here's what I found (emphasis mine): I would only echo what GTG stated and say that I don't trust the likes of Rep. Lowe to not take the great explanation provided by [USER=41034]@sturgisrun[/USER] and twist and worm his way around basically ALL of it. The only way to get around that nonsense is to define that scrutiny in a concrete unquestionable fashion. That's my only issue. I get the baby step part, but it's very frustrating to have to do that dance... [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Posted by OK2A, please read
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom