Here's an example of States Rights...

[Grizalltheway]

Well, Badly?

Plastic bags is a safely issue now? How many deaths were their in the last decade from "distracted plastic bag carrying"? And how would paper bags correct this epidemic? #paperlivesmatter #thinkofthechildren

Nanny stater.

[DSUrocks07]

Plastic bags is a safely issue now? How many deaths were their in the last decade from "distracted plastic bag carrying"? And how would paper bags correct this epidemic? #paperlivesmatter #thinkofthechildren

Nanny stater.

Bigot

[Baldy]

Is this thread forreal?

Did I miss where Walker REQUIRED every store purchase be placed in a plastic bag? Or banned the use of paper bags in the state of Wisconsin altogether?

Oh he didn't? Then what is everyone bitching about?

Thanks for fucking up my troll.



However, congrats for rippin the tits off this thread.

Cleetus won't have to wax his chest until July and WeeTag is prolly down to a C cup now.

[Chizzang]

Here's the Point:
Many stores in Wisconsin ONLY provide plastic bags
And some towns might want to pass legislation where the customer can choose (Paper or Plastic)

Simply passing that type of legislation is excellent for general awareness
and should never be made impossible by Lord Governor
Unless of course the Oil Industry is funding the bill

Why is government (local) required to accomplish this? You would think that a local organization would be able to generate enough clout to convince certain grocery stores to use paper bags by guaranteeing their business to them (I know I know, evil kkkapitalism and all that), that those stores would immediately begin stocking paper bags, and other stores in the area will follow suit.

Question, does 100% of the citizens of said town agree with the outright ban on plastic bags? As others have said, what about "choice"? Or is it one of those, "if you don't like it, you can move" sort of situations...which REEKS of irony to say the least.

You're inverting the argument... which is cute but dishonest

Passing a STATEWIDE ban on legislation FIRSTLY is ridiculous almost entirely - regardless
Secondly passing a statewide ban on legislation that communities vote on
to allow a paper bag option is simply a byproduct of Oil Companies FUNDING the bill



Just admit it...
This is BIG money controlling the outcome at the smallest level
just like when the Federal Government tells all states what they can and cannot do

[Grizalltheway]

Is this thread forreal?

Did I miss where Walker REQUIRED every store purchase be placed in a plastic bag? Or banned the use of paper bags in the state of Wisconsin altogether?

Oh he didn't? Then what is everyone bitching about?

Thanks for fucking up my troll.



However, congrats for rippin the tits off this thread.

Cleetus won't have to wax his chest until July and WeeTag is prolly down to a C cup now.

Nice tap out. Probably the smart thing to do before this beating lands you in the ER.

[Baldy]

Thanks for fucking up my troll.



However, congrats for rippin the tits off this thread.

Cleetus won't have to wax his chest until July and WeeTag is prolly down to a C cup now.

Nice tap out. Probably the smart thing to do before this beating lands you in the ER.

Tapout?

Says the one getting pummeled.

[kalm]

Nice tap out. Probably the smart thing to do before this beating lands you in the ER.

Tapout?

Says the one getting pummeled.

You're a pretzel. I'm surprised it took you so long to pop the "I was trolling" excuse.

[Baldy]

Tapout?

Says the one getting pummeled.

You're a pretzel. I'm surprised it took you so long to pop the "I was trolling" excuse.

My God I hope this thread lives forever.

[Grizalltheway]

Nice tap out. Probably the smart thing to do before this beating lands you in the ER.

Tapout?

Says the one getting pummeled.

Oh c'mon, it's a simple question. Why isn't Walker concerned about protecting his citizens' right to use a phone when and where they want to?

[kalm]

You're a pretzel. I'm surprised it took you so long to pop the "I was trolling" excuse.

My God I hope this thread lives forever.

Indeed! Please tell me again how Waljer is protecting local citizens from an over-bearing government...

[Baldy]

My God I hope this thread lives forever.

Indeed! Please tell me again how Waljer is protecting local citizens from an over-bearing government...

*Walker

Reread any post by DSU in this thread and you'll have your answer...again.

[kalm]

Indeed! Please tell me again how Waljer is protecting local citizens from an over-bearing government...

*Walker

Reread any post by DSU in this thread and you'll have your answer...again.

Bigot

[kalm]

Indeed! Please tell me again how Waljer is protecting local citizens from an over-bearing government...

*Walker

Reread any post by DSU in this thread and you'll have your answer...again.

Oh...perhaps you mean this one?

Why is government (local) required to accomplish this? You would think that a local organization would be able to generate enough clout to convince certain grocery stores to use paper bags by guaranteeing their business to them (I know I know, evil kkkapitalism and all that), that those stores would immediately begin stocking paper bags, and other stores in the area will follow suit.

Question, does 100% of the citizens of said town agree with the outright ban on plastic bags? As others have said, what about "choice"? Or is it one of those, "if you don't like it, you can move" sort of situations...which REEKS of irony to say the least.

It also doesn't really answer my question but I'll tackle it anyway.

1) Government is NOT required to accomplish this, but local governments pass thousands of ordinances pertaining to their jurisdiction and how they want their city/county to be run. Some of these ordinances are good, some of them are bad, but it's their choice, mandated through election of representatives, to govern how they see fit. If they feel strongly enough about a certain ordinance they can vote in a candidate who will change it. The state should only be able to step in if a certain ordinance contradicts the state constitution.

Otherwise the people of these cities suffer at the tyranny of an oppressive nanny (state) state. If you're an advocate of "state's rights" on a national level, you're in a bit of a pickle if you side with Walker, or Arizona who is passing similar legislation, or Alabama that is prohibiting cities from raising their minimum wage above the state's. I'm sure this movement is being driven by staunch federalists...

2) 100% of the citizens don't have to agree. That's not how the system is set up. I can certainly see the nanny (city) state argument in this case. It's similar to high fructose corn syrup bans and blue laws. Should the federal government be able to pass legislation that forces bible belt states to become more sane?

This is the original conundrum of the thread that DSU and you miss. Oh wait...that's right...you were trolling and were with me all along!

[Ibanez]

[Baldy]

It also doesn't really answer my question but I'll tackle it anyway.

1) Government is NOT required to accomplish this, but local governments pass thousands of ordinances pertaining to their jurisdiction and how they want their city/county to be run. Some of these ordinances are good, some of them are bad, but it's their choice, mandated through election of representatives, to govern how they see fit. If they feel strongly enough about a certain ordinance they can vote in a candidate who will change it. The state should only be able to step in if a certain ordinance contradicts the state constitution.

Otherwise the people of these cities suffer at the tyranny of an oppressive nanny (state) state. If you're an advocate of "state's rights" on a national level, you're in a bit of a pickle if you side with Walker, or Arizona who is passing similar legislation, or Alabama that is prohibiting cities from raising their minimum wage above the state's. I'm sure this movement is being driven by staunch federalists...

2) 100% of the citizens don't have to agree. That's not how the system is set up. I can certainly see the nanny (city) state argument in this case. It's similar to high fructose corn syrup bans and blue laws. Should the federal government be able to pass legislation that forces bible belt states to become more sane?

This is the original conundrum of the thread that DSU and you miss. Oh wait...that's right...you were trolling and were with me all along!

With you all along?

You just expelled a lot of hot air for no reason. We get it. Whether federal, state, or local, you love the government thumb. Government has a job to do, and even though you contradict yourself, you seem to believe it is the government's job to regulate behavior, choice, speech, etc. Granted, the extremes of those do require oversight, but when it goes to the extreme of attempting to regulate your salt intake, or how much soft drink you can purchase, or regulating the amount of trans fat in a doughnut, and yes, even the ability to use something as mundane as a plastic bag, you have fallen off the proverbial slippery slope.

It is beyond sad that it has gotten to the point where a state legislature and governor has had to step in and pull the jackboot off the throat of it's citizens for something so silly. I'm sure it seems odd to you, but maybe these towns need to worry about more important things. You know, serial jaywalkers or unleashed dogs running rampant in the city park. Not some poor guy walking home carrying groceries in a plastic bag.

Since you love to ask questions that have already been answered, try answering one that hasn't.

How much Nanny State is too much?
While we're at it...Where do you draw the line? Bodily functions? Should these governments regulate when and where the sun rises and sets? If they see it fit, should the town of Cheney WA be allowed to pass a resolution to make the sun rise in the west?

OR would you rather regale us with more tales of the Chinese plastic bag conspiracy and Scott Walker's poll numbers?

[kalm]

It also doesn't really answer my question but I'll tackle it anyway.

1) Government is NOT required to accomplish this, but local governments pass thousands of ordinances pertaining to their jurisdiction and how they want their city/county to be run. Some of these ordinances are good, some of them are bad, but it's their choice, mandated through election of representatives, to govern how they see fit. If they feel strongly enough about a certain ordinance they can vote in a candidate who will change it. The state should only be able to step in if a certain ordinance contradicts the state constitution.

Otherwise the people of these cities suffer at the tyranny of an oppressive nanny (state) state. If you're an advocate of "state's rights" on a national level, you're in a bit of a pickle if you side with Walker, or Arizona who is passing similar legislation, or Alabama that is prohibiting cities from raising their minimum wage above the state's. I'm sure this movement is being driven by staunch federalists...

2) 100% of the citizens don't have to agree. That's not how the system is set up. I can certainly see the nanny (city) state argument in this case. It's similar to high fructose corn syrup bans and blue laws. Should the federal government be able to pass legislation that forces bible belt states to become more sane?

This is the original conundrum of the thread that DSU and you miss. Oh wait...that's right...you were trolling and were with me all along!

With you all along?

You just expelled a lot of hot air for no reason. We get it. Whether federal, state, or local, you love the government thumb. Government has a job to do, and even though you contradict yourself, you seem to believe it is the government's job to regulate behavior, choice, speech, etc. Granted, the extremes of those do require oversight, but when it goes to the extreme of attempting to regulate your salt intake, or how much soft drink you can purchase, or regulating the amount of trans fat in a doughnut, and yes, even the ability to use something as mundane as a plastic bag, you have fallen off the proverbial slippery slope.

It is beyond sad that it has gotten to the point where a state legislature and governor has had to step in and pull the jackboot off the throat of it's citizens for something so silly. I'm sure it seems odd to you, but maybe these towns need to worry about more important things. You know, serial jaywalkers or unleashed dogs running rampant in the city park. Not some poor guy walking home carrying groceries in a plastic bag.

Since you love to ask questions that have already been answered, try answering one that hasn't.

How much Nanny State is too much?
While we're at it...Where do you draw the line? Bodily functions? Should these governments regulate when and where the sun rises and sets? If they see it fit, should the town of Cheney WA be allowed to pass a resolution to make the sun rise in the west?

OR would you rather regale us with more tales of the Chinese plastic bag conspiracy and Scott Walker's poll numbers?

Holy Sweet Baby Jesus in July, Baldy! I've never been a fan of nanny state regulations. I think fewer laws are better in general. I understand your mistake here, but just because your train of thought is monolithic doesn't mean everyone else is.

And no, you still haven't answered my question so I guess we'll just go with you being in favor of federalism and against the semi-autonomy of people making decisions for themselves, locally.

Or are you still trolling?

[andy7171]

JFC! You fuckers are tedious as shit!

[dbackjon]

Well, Badly?

Plastic bags is a safely issue now? How many deaths were their in the last decade from "distracted plastic bag carrying"? And how would paper bags correct this epidemic? #paperlivesmatter #thinkofthechildren

Use of #thinkofthechildren without a picture

[Baldy]

Holy Sweet Baby Jesus in July, Baldy! I've never been a fan of nanny state regulations. I think fewer laws are better in general. I understand your mistake here, but just because your train of thought is monolithic doesn't mean everyone else is.

And no, you still haven't answered my question so I guess we'll just go with you being in favor of federalism and against the semi-autonomy of people making decisions for themselves, locally.

Or are you still trolling?

Good GOD...are you trying to say something with your schizophrenic ramblings?

Fuck I wish I could throw you back, but you swallowed the hook about 20 posts ago.

One more time with clarity...
It doesn't get more "local" than in the home. Having a government authority regulate plastic bag usage is on the same level as a government authority regulating what color underwear you have to wear.
You give lip service and say fewer laws are better, "in general", but don't blink an eye when they try to regulate something as insignificant as what type of container you choose to use.

Jeezus Christ, you have nuanced yourself into a mental illness.

[kalm]

Holy Sweet Baby Jesus in July, Baldy! I've never been a fan of nanny state regulations. I think fewer laws are better in general. I understand your mistake here, but just because your train of thought is monolithic doesn't mean everyone else is.

And no, you still haven't answered my question so I guess we'll just go with you being in favor of federalism and against the semi-autonomy of people making decisions for themselves, locally.

Or are you still trolling?

Good GOD...are you trying to say something with your schizophrenic ramblings?

Fuck I wish I could throw you back, but you swallowed the hook about 20 posts ago.

One more time with clarity...
It doesn't get more "local" than in the home. Having a government authority regulate plastic bag usage is on the same level as a government authority regulating what color underwear you have to wear.
You give lip service and say fewer laws are better, "in general", but don't blink an eye when they try to regulate something as insignificant as what type of container you choose to use.

Jeezus Christ, you have nuanced yourself into a mental illness.

So you ARE trolling? You agree that what Walker is doing to local governments is similar to the federal government violating "state's rights"?

OK.

But remember...this can cut both ways. What happens when a governor you disagree with nullifies a law in your city. Like...allowing darkies to share the drinking fountain or some crazy shit like that.

Oh, and nobody is disputing the nanny state nature of regulating grocery bags. It is totally nanny state! Nanny state laws (aka "laws") can be positive and negative or both depending on how you look at it.

Retailers being forced to pull Sudafed back behind the counter and track who is purchasing it and how much?

Nanny State! Result: significant decrease in home cooking.

Spokane County Phosphate ban in dishwasher detergent causing higher incidences of stubborn stains?

Nanny State! Result: More Redband Rainbows in the Spokane River for Kalm to catch.

If a town, governed by democratically elected officials decides to pass a nanny state law (again...aka a "law") and that law does not violate the state's constitution, and is not imposed on anyone living outside of that town, why should the state pass another law prohibiting it?

The original point in this thread (hint: it's actually in the title)

...you're still missing it.

[kalm]

Your reading assignment for tonight, Baldy...

[Baldy]

So you ARE trolling? You agree that what Walker is doing to local governments is similar to the federal government violating "state's rights"?

OK.

But remember...this can cut both ways. What happens when a governor you disagree with nullifies a law in your city. Like...allowing darkies to share the drinking fountain or some crazy shit like that.

Leave it to a sweet little progressive from white bread Washington State like klam to make a comment like that. The latent racism of the progressive left rears it's ugly head once again.

I'm sure you got a little moist when you typed that, didn't you?

Of course it goes both ways, but the big difference is that the most of the Red States are actually beginning to come around and enter the 20th century finally. Hey, I can actually buy alcohol in Georgia on Sundays now.

However, the same can't be said for the Blue States. Unfortunately, many are heading in the wrong direction by regressing and enacting legislation restricting choice and free will and attempting to rewrite history.

While we're making book recommendations...

[kalm]

So you ARE trolling? You agree that what Walker is doing to local governments is similar to the federal government violating "state's rights"?

OK.

But remember...this can cut both ways. What happens when a governor you disagree with nullifies a law in your city. Like...allowing darkies to share the drinking fountain or some crazy shit like that.

Leave it to a sweet little progressive from white bread Washington State like klam to make a comment like that. The latent racism of the progressive left rears it's ugly head once again.

I'm sure you got a little moist when you typed that, didn't you?

Of course it goes both ways, but the big difference is that the most of the Red States are actually beginning to come around and enter the 20th century finally. Hey, I can actually buy alcohol in Georgia on Sundays now.

However, the same can't be said for the Blue States. Unfortunately, many are heading in the wrong direction by regressing and enacting legislation restricting choice and free will and attempting to rewrite history.

While we're making book recommendations...

Latent racism? This is about states rights. It has nothing to do with racism whatsoever!

Don't go soft on me now.

[HI54UNI]

Plastic bags is a safely issue now? How many deaths were their in the last decade from "distracted plastic bag carrying"? And how would paper bags correct this epidemic? #paperlivesmatter #thinkofthechildren

Use of #thinkofthechildren without a picture

Reppies

[Ibanez]

So you ARE trolling? You agree that what Walker is doing to local governments is similar to the federal government violating "state's rights"?

OK.

But remember...this can cut both ways. What happens when a governor you disagree with nullifies a law in your city. Like...allowing darkies to share the drinking fountain or some crazy shit like that.

Leave it to a sweet little progressive from white bread Washington State like klam to make a comment like that. The latent racism of the progressive left rears it's ugly head once again.

I'm sure you got a little moist when you typed that, didn't you?

Of course it goes both ways, but the big difference is that the most of the Red States are actually beginning to come around and enter the 20th century finally. Hey, I can actually buy alcohol in Georgia on Sundays now.

However, the same can't be said for the Blue States. Unfortunately, many are heading in the wrong direction by regressing and enacting legislation restricting choice and free will and attempting to rewrite history.

While we're making book recommendations...

It was a great day, about 11 years ago when Charleston and Horry Counties overturned those laws.

Now if only York County can follow suit.