Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Deep In the Heart of Texas


Recommended Posts

21 minutes ago, LuckyDan said:

I'm down. 

Texas is a terrible place to be a prog. Hate-filled and crooked. Best to just, as the Veep Lady says, don't come.

Unless you are white and male, Texas is a horrible hate-filled place to be.  Despite the burgeoning progressive urban population, and of the statewide non-white population, the small town white male yahoo descendants of the KayKayKay, if not current members, think they should regulate everything for everybody but themselves.  These racist, sexist, xenophobic, homophobic small-minded bigots cannot abide by mask mandates or vaccinations, but they are quick to impose all sorts of restrictions against everybody else.  And they have enacted the worst set if voting restrictions, to disenfranchise the ascendant progressive majority, to continue to keep their waning power indefinitely.  

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, and what about the anti-s o d o m y laws that prohibit the practice even between married heterosexual couples?    And how did they ever think about how to enforce such intrusive government restriction?  

I actually liked Texas despite the way too hot climate, but my stay was short and limited to my wife's family and old birthplace in Laredo.  A quick stop on the way in San Antonio where me and a nephew joked about going to visit the basement of The Alamo.  ;)   But that was back in '91 and my biggest disappointment  was that the gasoline prices were much higher(at the time) than in the Detroit area, and couldn't find a decent steakhouse to save my life. 

Sepiatone

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Sepiatone said:

Oh, and what about the anti-s o d o m y laws that prohibit the practice even between married heterosexual couples?    And how did they ever think about how to enforce such intrusive government restriction?  

 

All states used to have laws such as this.   In Connecticut, there was a law prohibiting married couples from using contraceptives (Griswold v. Connecticut) until the Supreme Court struck it down in 1965!  This was one of the precedents for the Roe v. Wade decision.

There were arrests for offenses committed under the Texas law.  One of the arrests resulted in a Supreme Court case (Lawrence v. Texas) that overturned the law  in 2003.

That decision struck down the law in TX and similar laws in these states: Michigan, Alabama, Florida, Idaho, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Utah, Virginia, Kansas, Oklahoma, Missouri (the last 3 plus TX banned it for same-sex acts only)

The Texas arrest resulted from a police visit to an apartment on another matter (someone had called in a false report of a threat of gun violence).  Once the sheriff's deputies entered the apartment, they arrested two men under the Texas law.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Arturo said:

Unless you are white and male, Texas is a horrible hate-filled place to be.  Despite the burgeoning progressive urban population, and of the statewide non-white population, the small town white male yahoo descendants of the KayKayKay, if not current members, think they should regulate everything for everybody but themselves.  These racist, sexist, xenophobic, homophobic small-minded bigots cannot abide by mask mandates or vaccinations, but they are quick to impose all sorts of restrictions against everybody else.  And they have enacted the worst set if voting restrictions, to disenfranchise the ascendant progressive majority, to continue to keep their waning power indefinitely.  

Gosh Arturo have you ever even BEEN to Texas? Or did you just read this on DailyKos. I saw an animated map of where people moved during the pandemic and the two biggest paths were from LA and San Francisco into DFW and Austin, and also from NYC into Florida. So for these two states to be so awful, apparently the foot traffic  from distinctly liberal areas disagrees with you. I'm a native Texan by the way. I lived there for the first 35 years of my life. When I am completely retired I can't wait to go back home. As for the "voting restrictions", I personally don't see the problem with 24 hour voting or drive through voting. It's not like anybody in your car is going to be somebody you don't want there.  Unless you are voting while being carjacked, which I think would make the nightly news. But why is it so much to ask to provide voter ID? I think this is a reasonable requirement. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, txfilmfan said:

All states used to have laws such as this.   In Connecticut, there was a law prohibiting married couples from using contraceptives (Griswold v. Connecticut) until the Supreme Court struck it down in 1965!  This was one of the precedents for the Roe v. Wade decision.

There were arrests for offenses committed under the Texas law.  One of the arrests resulted in a Supreme Court case (Lawrence v. Texas) that overturned the law  in 2003.

That decision struck down the law in TX and similar laws in these states: Michigan, Alabama, Florida, Idaho, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Utah, Virginia, Kansas, Oklahoma, Missouri (the last 3 plus TX banned it for same-sex acts only)

The Texas arrest resulted from a police visit to an apartment on another matter (someone had called in a false report of a threat of gun violence).  Once the sheriff's deputies entered the apartment, they arrested two men under the Texas law.

All these cases were essentially made-up test cases. Meaning, in Griswold, the Connecticut statute had never been enforced. Robert Bork wrote in The Tempting of America, "If any Connecticut official had been mad enough to attempt enforcement, the law would at one have been removed from the books and the official from his office."

Norma McCorvey aka "Jane Roe" had not been gang raped by black men, as she initially claimed when she first sought an abortion, and had only visited one clinic to find it closed before she was solicited by attorneys to be a plaintiff. 

In Lawrence, no sexual activity had occurred between the two men arrested, but activists convinced them to plead no contest to create a case. 

All examples of playing games with the law. Legal manipulation. 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Arturo said:

Unless you are white and male, Texas is a horrible hate-filled place to be.  Despite the burgeoning progressive urban population, and of the statewide non-white population, the small town white male yahoo descendants of the KayKayKay, if not current members, think they should regulate everything for everybody but themselves.  These racist, sexist, xenophobic, homophobic small-minded bigots cannot abide by mask mandates or vaccinations, but they are quick to impose all sorts of restrictions against everybody else.  And they have enacted the worst set if voting restrictions, to disenfranchise the ascendant progressive majority, to continue to keep their waning power indefinitely.  

I tell ya what. 

Mmm hmm. 

Yep.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Haha 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/8/2021 at 11:02 AM, LuckyDan said:

I'm down. 

Texas is a terrible place to be a prog. Hate-filled and crooked. Best to just, as the Veep Lady says, don't come.

since when has she gone anywhere lately?

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, NipkowDisc said:

since when has she gone anywhere lately?

:D

She's been home in Cal trying to save Newsom. I just saw a headline saying she was confronted during a speech by people waving Afghanistan flags. She needs to be working with a civics tutor on how our government works and taking some assertiveness training. She will likely be called upon soon to work the oval.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, LuckyDan said:

She's been home in Cal trying to save Newsom. I just saw a headline saying she was confronted during a speech by people waving Afghanistan flags. She needs to be working with a civics tutor on how our government works and taking some assertiveness training. She will likely be called upon soon to work the oval.

Now that CA is getting close to recall,  there are adds with Bernie,  Liz,  and Obama.      No ads with Biden or Harris but they have come to show their support.

I'm voting to recall Newsom,   my wife isn't.     One reason I'm doing so is that Newsom and the CA Dem party demanded that no other qualified Dem run as  a "back-up".   Newsom has  always been a elitist and this selfish punk move showed he hasn't learned a thing.    Thus I hoping he is  out and the former Mayor of San Diego takes his place  (I don't want the no experienced,  empty shell Elder to replace Newsom).

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

 (I don't want the no experienced,  empty shell Elder to replace Newsom).

All I know about Elder is that he was the guy Salem radio brought in to fill Michael Medved's time slot after Salem kicked Medved to the curb for not supporting trump. So he's maga. Can't imagine that flies in California. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, LuckyDan said:

All I know about Elder is that he was the guy Salem radio brought in to fill Michael Medved's time slot after Salem kicked Medved to the curb for not supporting trump. So he's maga. Can't imagine that flies in California. 

No but with the way CA conducts recalls if over 50% of those that vote,  vote for the recall,  the candidate with the most votes is governor.   Thus 48% could vote NO on the recall but NOT select an alterative (which is what that puck Newsom advised voters to do),  and someone with only 20% (which is  around what Elder is polling),   becomes Governor. 

(the governor being recalled can't be an alternative candidate).

 

  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

No but with the way CA conducts recalls if over 50% of those that vote,  vote for the recall,  the candidate with the most votes is governor.   Thus 48% could vote NO on the recall but NOT select an alterative (which is what that puck Newsom advised voters to do),  and someone with only 20% (which is  around what Elder is polling),   becomes Governor. 

(the governor being recalled can't be an alternative candidate).

 

Hmm. Interesting. But with a deep blue legislature, how much maga- republicany stuff could Elder do? Does California allow for a strong executive? Can he do much through EO's? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, LuckyDan said:

Hmm. Interesting. But with a deep blue legislature, how much maga- republicany stuff could Elder do? Does California allow for a strong executive? Can he do much through EO's? 

No but according to the ads Newsom and company are running if a republican becomes governor,   millions  will die of Covid,  illegal immigrants will be deported,   abortion on demand will end,   etc....   CA will become Texas in less than a year!  

The legislature has a super Dem majority so if the governor vetoes a bill they can override that veto.     Of course the governor does  have executive powers so he can mess with in-place Dem programs,  but those powers are limited.      

The former SD mayor,  Faulconer,   is fairly intelligent and he doesn't wish to be governor for only a short term;  thus I don't think he would play games with the Dems.    He would play-it-cool so that he has support for the next election in 2022.  

IMO, one party rule,  especially when one party has a super majority,  leads to a lot of nonsense,  regards of if the party with the power is  the GOP or the Dems.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

No but according to the ads Newsom and company are running if a republican becomes governor,   millions  will die of Covid,  illegal immigrants will be deported,   abortion on demand will end,   etc....   CA will become Texas in less than a year!  

That is funny. And so on brand. But do they actually say "illegal immigrants?" The term on that side is usually "undocumented." 

Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, LuckyDan said:

That is funny. And so on brand. But do they actually say "illegal immigrants?" The term on that side is usually "undocumented." 

CA Dems tried to make saying illegal immigrant illegal,  this is how out-there they are on certain topics.     Thus making reading the L.A. Times a  chore since they don't even wish to use the term undocumented.   In other words they didn't wish to use any term that would single out what I call illegal immigrants.

E.g.  CA is considering a law that would allow non-citizen,  legal residences to run for School Board.   I.e. those with Green Cards and visas  allowing them to be in the USA.     Well the Times article on this just used the term immigrants.   It wasn't until much later in their article that they said that this was only those that have documentation.   (when they could have just said at the start of the article;  doesn't apply to the undocumented.

While I support most left-learning social causes (pro-choice,  making pot legal,  SSM),  illegal immigration is something I can't get behind.   My wife's has many family members in Italy that wish to come to the USA to work and live,  but since they play by the rules can't get in.     That just isn't right when millions just don't follow the rules,  giving the USA the finger.

  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

CA Dems tried to make saying illegal immigrant illegal,  this is how out-there they are on certain topics.     Thus making reading the L.A. Times a  chore since they don't even wish to use the term undocumented.   In other words they didn't wish to use any term that would single out what I call illegal immigrants.

E.g.  CA is considering a law that would allow non-citizen,  legal residences to run for School Board.   I.e. those with Green Cards and visas  allowing them to be in the USA.     Well the Times article on this just used the term immigrants.   It wasn't until much later in their article that they said that this was only those that have documentation.   (when they could have just said at the start of the article;  doesn't apply to the undocumented.

While I support most left-learning social causes (pro-choice,  making pot legal,  SSM),  illegal immigration is something I can't get behind.   My wife's has many family members in Italy that wish to come to the USA to work and live,  but since they play by the rules can't get in.     That just isn't right when millions just don't follow the rules,  giving the USA the finger.

  

When employers stop hiring them, they'll stop coming - to some extent.  Have had a lot of work done to my property in past year due to storm damage and other things.  Probably 70% of the workers were Hispanic.  Same for work being done at neighbors houses.  Of course the bosses were all older white guys.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
© 2021 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...