And when volunteers/donors want to push an issue important to them that doesn't fit within the strategic choice of bigger political institutions but is nonetheless correct, they shouldn't be shunned. They may be able to open doors others cannot.

There is room for moral clarity and a strategic choice in messaging in politics. I greatly prefer spending limited political capital on issues identified by the public as important for engagement and political relevance. Yet when asked for the correct position on any topic, political bravery is impt

All social media has a toxic quality. Toxic to balance and decency. That isn't an argument for regulation or limitation of speech, but a caution to those using it. People will express opinions publicly they'd never utter in person, in front of their targets, but tell the world how unwise they can be

To the extent it is a zoning case, it sounds like a RLUIPA case. Though I view its constitutionality with suspicion, it is the essence of what that statute was designed to achieve.

In today's other news... 🤑

www.baltimoresun.com/2024/11/12/h...

That's a video game spin move. 😂

I fear their sub-par pass defense will have them as one and done in the playoffs, reinforcing Lamar's poor playoff win/loss record (and if that's the reason, it won't be his fault).

Material support for terrorist organizations is already prohibited and that definition doesn't include First Amendment protected speech (at least in the statutory language--I'm not familiar with any judicial or agency interpretations to the contrary). How exactly does this impact free speech?