ATLANTIC CENTRALBut it seems unfair that AMAZON can continue to sell EVERYTHING they sell, but the state of PA will not let Bowser Trains and its retail/mailorder divisions do business? Even my internet/mail order? Sheldon
Sheldon
States Rights. What PA thinks is the way to go, is not the way Maryland is going and vice versa.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
BaltACD ATLANTIC CENTRAL But it seems unfair that AMAZON can continue to sell EVERYTHING they sell, but the state of PA will not let Bowser Trains and its retail/mailorder divisions do business? Even my internet/mail order? Sheldon States Rights. What PA thinks is the way to go, is not the way Maryland is going and vice versa.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL But it seems unfair that AMAZON can continue to sell EVERYTHING they sell, but the state of PA will not let Bowser Trains and its retail/mailorder divisions do business? Even my internet/mail order? Sheldon
Again, not agreeing or disagreeing.
But this thing might well be the next test of that three way tug of war outlined in the 10th amendment.
Governments get their just power from the consent of the governed. Historically it only takes 20-30% discontent to be a catalyst for change. Sometimes successful and for the good, sometimes a catastrophe of epic proportion.....
The current President was largely elected by a block of voters who historically voted for other party, but felt they had been disenfranchised by ever more extreem positions in that party.
In places like rural Pennsylvania........
I'm a conservative constitutionalist, I support states rights, but I also support the rights reserved to the people........
We tried a loose confederation initially, where each state was supreme. It didn't work. That's why the USA is a federal nation according to the Constitution.
Historically, "State's Rights" is the euphemism for the traitorous confederate states to ignore the 14th, 15th and 16th amendments as well as the Civil Rights Acts and Voting Rights Act to maintain racist policies. So when people invoke that phrase, we all know what that is about.
It will be interesting to see how quickly this dies down and people go back to work. My guess is that it will not be any time soon. I do not expect any restarting for at least 3-5 months.
A lot of people expecting to go back to work will find that their job is gone due to companies going out of business or just delaying start up on their own. Right now it seems like it is only the governors who are enforcing the shut down. But a lot of companies may even be more cautious than the governors in restarting. This is because companies have to worry about the liability of restarting and having virus deaths result. A lot of companies will not take that chance.
A leader that disavows any responsibility has therefore abdicated authority. Responsibility and Authority work together.
charlie hebdo So when people invoke that phrase, we all know what that is about.
Apophenia
Well do the states have the right to decide when to end their lockdowns or not? The general assumption seems to be that they do have that right, and the President does not have it.
EuclidOkay, I see that. I would always do that if someone says something that don't fully understand, or especially if I can see more than one interpretation possible. But I do recall the instance that you mentioned. In the case you mentioned, I did think I understood what you were getting at, but I wanted you to say it. It seemed to me that you were trying to introduce it by dropping a hint. The hint was that you were referencing past injustices to the indignenous people by the non-indigenous settlers. And that that was a reason why the indigenous people today would be uwilling to trust a new treaty of any sort. But I thought that if I were to take issue with that, I should get beyond your hint and make sure I understood what you were getting at before going further. So I did not want to jump in and and sort of take the bait, and then prove to be wrong about what you meant. So I said I did not understand what you were getting at for the purpose of getting you to tell me rather than me jumping to a conclusion. It certainly was not meant as a deception of any kind. It was true that I did not fully understand what you were getting at. By you introducing that issue as a hint, it and me assuming I new where you were going, it almost felt to me as a kind of setup or ambush. My actual position on that subject is that I agree the there were past injustices. But they can become perpetual greivances where no amends can be enough. I definitely get that impression of the situation in Canada as well as the demand for reparations in this country. So, I did indeed see it as a kind of loaded hint.
I think Fred Astaire would be amazed to see the dancing that you have just done here.
EuclidWell do the states have the right to decide when to end their lockdowns or not?
I think it's been established that they do (and the President can declare a separate national emergency and override the effect of their decision, but not countermand it directly).
Now it may be a third-rail issue whether a given governor cuts down restrictions, then has to deal with lawsuits from those made sick or killed "as a result" of lifting restrictions ... and these could reach far greater than Malbone proportions if there is an acceleration of any outbreak into local pandemic without ARDS testing and treatments in place... or whether they become heroes to 'the great middle class' by getting folks back to work and spinning up the economy ... and progressively discovering that it has problems, perhaps already lethal problems, sustainably restarting in many areas or for many groups.
Get out your popcorn butter and salt for what happens a la medical marijuana, when the states mandate one thing and national government policy mandates something different. Prepare to pay cash-only for your serological testing, or your two-week course of Avigan?
Electroliner 1935I think Fred Astaire would be amazed to see the dancing that you have just done here.
charlie hebdo We tried a loose confederation initially, where each state was supreme. It didn't work. That's why the USA is a federal nation according to the Constitution. Historically, "State's Rights" is the euphemism for the traitorous confederate states to ignore the 14th, 15th and 16th amendments as well as the Civil Rights Acts and Voting Rights Act to maintain racist policies. So when people invoke that phrase, we all know what that is about.
I take considerable offense to your assumptions, considering you know nothing of my race, my cultural background, or the ethnicity of my family.
I am a firm supporter of the Constitution and all its Amendments, including the 2nd and the 10th, as well as those you mentioned. The articles of confederation were woefully inadiquite.
The Constitution is a well written, easy to understand document. What I take offense to is those who want to read into it things not said, and clearly not intended based on the other writings of the authors, and the back and forth process of its creation.
My parents firmly instilled in me the idea that people should be judged by the content of their character.
And Adam Smith suggested that a society could not properly function without a core set of common values.
I do believe in those two ideas.
The idea of states rights is about the simple fact that in a land this vast, and this diverse in culture, geography, and background, "onesize" does not fit all on every issue.
On some issues it is imperative that one size fit all, on other issues, not so much.
And, the other foundation of states rights is that power is better distributed than concentrated.
You accuse me of something with no facts, just your own assumed bias, but of course that is what liberals do when they feel threatened, conduct personal attacks with no basis.
My great, great grandmother was a full blooded Cherokee Princess, and there are people of many colors both before me and after me in my family.
You sir are one trying to use that for divisiveness.
PS - I will be working tomorrow, so don't expect to hear much from me.
As brief as possible, from the jpost.com website, latest figures from Israel:
13,654 Israelis have been confirmed as infected with the coronavirus as of Monday morning, 150 people in serious condition, and a total of 3,872 patients have recovered to date.
Charlie, Sheldon has a good point. Did you not make assumptions and even one accusation aganst me that you know now were wrong? Become better able to listen to people you think you always disagree with. You might find they support you in the things that are most important to you.
Also from jpost.com website:
From Wikapedia, modified to what I believe is the local dialect and my usual photo correction or enhancement
Sheldon: If you are ignorant of the nasty historical context of the term "states'rights" trying looking it up, although you are old enough to recall the 1960s. Perhaps you will say it does not apply to you. Fine. But don't try to weasel out by playing the liberal card. Decent Americans know not to use the term. And David K: there was nothing I said about your views that was erroneous.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL charlie hebdo We tried a loose confederation initially, where each state was supreme. It didn't work. That's why the USA is a federal nation according to the Constitution. Historically, "State's Rights" is the euphemism for the traitorous confederate states to ignore the 14th, 15th and 16th amendments as well as the Civil Rights Acts and Voting Rights Act to maintain racist policies. So when people invoke that phrase, we all know what that is about. I take considerable offense to your assumptions, considering you know nothing of my race, my cultural background, or the ethnicity of my family. I am a firm supporter of the Constitution and all its Amendments, including the 2nd and the 10th, as well as those you mentioned. The articles of confederation were woefully inadiquite. The Constitution is a well written, easy to understand document. What I take offense to is those who want to read into it things not said, and clearly not intended based on the other writings of the authors, and the back and forth process of its creation. My parents firmly instilled in me the idea that people should be judged by the content of their character. And Adam Smith suggested that a society could not properly function without a core set of common values. I do believe in those two ideas. The idea of states rights is about the simple fact that in a land this vast, and this diverse in culture, geography, and background, "onesize" does not fit all on every issue. On some issues it is imperative that one size fit all, on other issues, not so much. And, the other foundation of states rights is that power is better distributed than concentrated. You accuse me of something with no facts, just your own assumed bias, but of course that is what liberals do when they feel threatened, conduct personal attacks with no basis. My great, great grandmother was a full blooded Cherokee Princess, and there are people of many colors both before me and after me in my family. You sir are one trying to use that for divisiveness. Sheldon PS - I will be working tomorrow, so don't expect to hear much from me.
Sheldon,
I agree with your points. Regarding what I highlighted in red from Charlie Hebdo: He says, "We know what that is about." Who is "We" ? It sounds like he is willing to accuse you of invoking what he refers to as a euphemism of racist code language that he assumes indicates your own beliefs along such lines. In my opinion, the accusation alone made by Mr. Hebdo is racisim on his part.
Charlie: Did not you accuse me of being a right-winger and bringing up China's hiding the truth about Coronavirus to divert attention from Trump's delay in recognizing the Coronavaris threat? You know perfectly well now that I woiuld never ever do something like that.
Sheldon has a point. For example, while Nazis showed up at the Charlottesvile horror story, there also were decent people who felt simply that Jefferson Davis was a decent human being and did not wish to destroy human history, This did not make them segregationist or people who thought the Confederacy should have triumped. When I look at your friends at J-Street, I don't see basically evil people. I am too aware of the deep and long-lasting history of a Jewish "Enlightenment" philosophy that says most of the evils of the world are from nationalism, includling anti-Semtism and racial prejudice, and that Jews should be in the forefront of eshiwing natinalism, and Zionism is of course a form of nationalism unltss it is converted into a state for all peoples and not primarily for Jews.
You wish Sheldon to face the segrefationist use of States' Rights in the 1960s. I can ask you to face the well-documented, if occasionally wrong on a few specific people, history of the North American Reform Movement's anti-Zionism with consequent failure to do anything really effective to prevent the Holocaust. But that does not stop me from listening to what J-Street has to say and to support them when I think they are right, like supporting the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society.
Stop labeling people with adjectives and deal with ideas. You will get far moire respect from other readers.
States rights concerning Coronavirus is not the same as States Rights regarding segregation.
charlie hebdo Sheldon: If you are ignorant of the nasty historical context of the term "states'rights" trying looking it up, although you are old enough to recall the 1960s. Perhaps you will say it does not apply to you. Fine. But don't try to weasel out by playing the liberal card. Decent Americans know not to use the term. And David K: there was nothing I said about your views that was erroneous.
First, I did not bring up the term, I simply agreed with the concept in regard to the question of the state governors vs the president regarding the current crisis.
Secondly, you are welcome to walk on egg shells and be "politically correct" by worring about every distorted meaning others read into things.
I don't have the time or the temperament for that non sense.
Beyond my varied personal cultural background, my four mixed race grandchildren would laugh at you and call you stupid if you called me a racest, so would the other six "mostly white" grandchildren.
The racists are the ones who keep bring up the subject of race, no matter their color or politics.
Any man who judges by the group is a pea wit.
I will be judged as I deserve, not as my father deserved.
ATLANTIC CENTRALFirst, I did not bring up the term, I simply agreed with the concept in regard to the question of the state governors vs the president regarding the current crisis.
Seems like people are only for state's rights when those rights agree with them politically. You don't hear the normal "state's rights" chants from the usual crowds in my state lately. Probably because the Governor has the wrong letter following his name.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.
As for Dave's comments related to the removal of Confederate monuments, people who forget, hide or rewrite history are doomed to repeat it in some fashion.
In my first post that started this, I eluded to desent that turned out badly, I was refering to the War between the States. And while I believe slavery to be the most reprehensible of human behavior, the north was by no means "innocent" in that conflict.
To erase the exsistance of the Confederacy, or Nazi Germany is to deny the truth of their wrongs.
Off to work now....
ATLANTIC CENTRALAs for Dave's comments related to the removal of Confederate monuments, people who forget, hide or rewrite history are doomed to repeat it in some fashion.
Some of the first participation trophies.
The term States’ Rights is widely used to suggest a diffusion of rights away from an all-powerful central government. In my opinion, that principle is offensive to liberals who oppose such diffusion. So they cloak the term in the implication of it being racist in order to make the idea of power diffusion toxic for discussion. It amounts to using a charge of racism as a weapon to oppose other ideas.
Sheldon: Words are important. People are judged by the language they use, fair or not.
Monuments: I wonder if you think statues of Nazi and Soviet leaders should have remained?
Euclid The term States’ Rights is widely used to suggest a diffusion of rights away from an all-powerful central government. In my opinion, that principle is offensive to liberals who oppose such diffusion. So they cloak the term in the implication of it being racist in order to make the idea of power diffusion toxic for discussion. It amounts to using a charge of racism as a weapon to oppose other ideas.
Nonsense. The term was used by confederates and segregationists throughout our history.
There you have it.
EuclidThe term States’ Rights is widely used to suggest a diffusion of rights away from an all-powerful central government. In my opinion, that principle is offensive to liberals who oppose such diffusion. So they cloak the term in the implication of it being racist in order to make the idea of power diffusion toxic for discussion. It amounts to using a charge of racism as a weapon to oppose other ideas.
The 10th and 14th amendments have been used against each other several times. Plessy v. Ferguson, for example. So there have been historical incidents that do have a racial component.
It isn't just "liberals" as you so simply put it.
charlie hebdo Sheldon: Words are important. People are judged by the language they use, fair or not. Monuments: I wonder if you think statues of Nazi and Soviet leaders should have remained?
I'm not suggesting that Confederate statues should still be in front of the court house or the state house. But I believe they belong at places like Gettysburg, Antietam, Fredricksburg.....
As for those other countries, I don't live there, it's not my call.
You and your political group associate the term with oppression, those who hold my view associate it with freedom, for all people.
The government big enough to give you everything you need, is strong enough to take everything you have.
ATLANTIC CENTRALThe government big enough to give you everything you need, is strong enough to take everything you have.
10 word answers.
charlie hebdoHistorically, "State's Rights" is the euphemism for the traitorous confederate states to ignore the 14th, 15th and 16th amendments as well as the Civil Rights Acts and Voting Rights Act to maintain racist policies. So when people invoke that phrase, we all know what that is about.
Wow! I didn't realize Governor Cuomo of New York was secretly invoking a racist phrase. From January, 2019:
"I have no doubt that this Supreme Court, which was packed by this president, and was passed by his political litmus test, will do everything they can to strike down gun laws. Now, they’re going to have to trample states’ rights to do that..."
https://www.facebook.com/KFDMNews/videos/625247571245202/
York1 John
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.