Judge blocks construction of the wall to protect butterfly sanctuary

Corruption of intellect?

 

Jersey, rather than drop this and run away, why don't you explain why you think the judge was wrong? I'm really curious.

 

True ... generally, anything recognized as a "sanctuary" would be given some sort of protection, not just get bulldozed without so much as a hearing.

 

Also, keep in mind that the sanctuary is located on privately-owned land. I remember that at one time conservatives believed in the sanctity of private property.

Just curious, @JerseyGator01 how would you feel if one day you found surveyor's stakes and construction workers with heavy equipment on you property?

 

That was back in a long ago time, roughly coincides with when national review wasn’t a biased tabloid.

 

Good. Monarchs are amazing creatures and terribly endangered. I applaud the decision.

Again with your ridiculous mantra. Man up and come back on the thread to discuss the topic. It would be a refreshing change.

 

I don’t know Jersey, these awful humans on the other side of the aisle are rather fond of protecting the environment. You’d probably make just as much sense arguing the opposite way:

Man, I bet those leftists would have never let a gun range bulldoze that natural habitat, but of course they allow a planned parenthood to do it!

 

So a private group is trying to build a private wall on someone else’s private property, and it’s somehow corrupt for a judge to stop that from happening?

Sounds about right.

 

Sometimes that is all I can think of as a response. Seems useless to try to make any rational, non-sarcastic argument.

 

There's only one Monarch that Trump supporters have any interest in protecting. No matter how criminal or traitorous his behavior is.