Incredibly insightful response there, Nick.

Great to see you are staying on point and still still relying on thoughtful, fact-based arguments to support your positions, as stated.

Here's another suggestion: think about what tactics folks often use when they've run out of real, intelligent ideas to actually say...


Does your Black's Law Dictionary REALLY say that the use of the word "may" - as in, "may require" - means "must?"

Please send me the link or post an image of the page where it says that.

The word "may" means exactly what it says. May. As in "possibly."

"I may go the ball game, tonight. I'm not sure."

"I may require you to write an opinion for me."

-vs.-

I shall go to the ball game tonight. I have no choice."

"I shall require you to write an opinion for me."

?????

You don't think there's a difference???

The founding fathers had BOTH the words "may" and "shall" at their disposal. The word "shall" appears often in the Constitution - ALWAYS indicating a course of action that MUST be taken, with no exceptions. The word "may" appears ONLY when an action is elective or not entirely necessary to a process.

Have you ever ACTUALLY read or thought about the U.S. Constitution? Ever studied Constitutional history?

Frankly, it doesn't seem so.

You really should read it, and REALLY think about it - if not study it - before you go on to post these ill-advised rants about things that just aren't so.

Much more to the point, in any event:

Followed by:

DOH!!!!

Squirm all you want around tortured attempts to redefine the word "may." The fact remains, you made a simple, direct challenge - and you were directly and simply proven wrong.

Bitter pill, I know, but don't go all Batzdorf on us about it.

Just admit you've been proven wrong and let's move on.


And FWIW, if you are inclined to keep challenging me on this stuff, I don't "look it up." I know it.

Trust me on this.