Jump to content

Texas -- a failed state

Brisketexan

By Brisketexan
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Brisketexan
Brisketexan

I think that it’s now safe to say that we Texans now live in a failed state.  30 years of GOP rule, setting our own standard, living the “Texas Dream,” which they’ve bragged about relentlessly…and let

tx 3 putt
tx 3 putt

Young voters have to rise up and take this state back …..  

'stache
'stache

We had three miscarriages between our first and second child, two of which were late and required D&Cs. Without them there's almost no chance we could have had been able to have a second. Fuck any

Posted Images

MC Fresh Breath

MC Fresh Breath 4074

Posted
Posted
14 hours ago, mchookem said:

 

so...i also hate mosquitoes, humidity, and flying tree roaches. and i like getting high. we're moving to Colorado as fast as we can. 🤘

 

Chose central Oregon for much the same reasons.  In terms of reasons for leaving, add blistering summers, a dearth of majestic scenery (there are some great spots in Texas,  yes, but not a bunch of them), and the backwards attitudes on so many things as other reasons I left.    For example, I can buy beer when the stores open on Sunday, not have to wait until Noon. The Death with Dignity act.  Everyone votes by mail.  Things that just make sense, whether right or left. The people here are friendlier by far than they were in most of Texas, honestly. 

But it was first and foremost the desire to experience a true four seasons and great outdoor activities more so than politics.  My views every day are better for me than they ever would be in Texas, and the climate suits me.  The smoke for a few weeks was pretty bad, but dealt with it OK.

Plus I get a coast w/in a four hour drive.  Colorado being land locked was a mental stopper for me.  Downsides are a real lack of diversity, for a long time by malicious design.   And the rural areas can make small town Texas look like Berkley. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mrs Whiggins

Mrs Whiggins 13050

Posted
Posted

We loved living in Wisconsin, but after we left, their politics went bsc.

Spouse pays attention to some of the things that may not be pressing immediately, but to consider for the future and for our children: sea levels will affect coastal regions. Drought will change landscapes, weather patterns will change etc. This in turn affects production. People w/o food get real mean real fast. We are considering options but don't have anything specific lined up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
wildcat09

wildcat09 29337

Posted
Posted
On 2/19/2021 at 12:55 PM, MC Fresh Breath said:

 

Chose central Oregon for much the same reasons.  In terms of reasons for leaving, add blistering summers, a dearth of majestic scenery (there are some great spots in Texas,  yes, but not a bunch of them), and the backwards attitudes on so many things as other reasons I left.    For example, I can buy beer when the stores open on Sunday, not have to wait until Noon. The Death with Dignity act.  Everyone votes by mail.  Things that just make sense, whether right or left. The people here are friendlier by far than they were in most of Texas, honestly. 

But it was first and foremost the desire to experience a true four seasons and great outdoor activities more so than politics.  My views every day are better for me than they ever would be in Texas, and the climate suits me.  The smoke for a few weeks was pretty bad, but dealt with it OK.

Plus I get a coast w/in a four hour drive.  Colorado being land locked was a mental stopper for me.  Downsides are a real lack of diversity, for a long time by malicious design.   And the rural areas can make small town Texas look like Berkley. 

Yeah, but on the other hand you're way too fucking close to eastern Oregon, which makes aggy look positively progressive by comparison.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
YChang

YChang 3441

Posted
Posted

Well I’m committed at least for the next 3 years while I finish grad school part time. Not going down with a fight though. If anything I’m more motivated than ever to find ways to help out the Democratic Party or nonprofits focus on sound public policies. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MC Fresh Breath

MC Fresh Breath 4074

Posted
Posted (edited)
15 hours ago, wildcat09 said:

Yeah, but on the other hand you're way too fucking close to eastern Oregon, which makes aggy look positively progressive by comparison.


I suppose.  I would have to drive there to see that, though.  Otherwise I am 25 minutes from a ski resort in winter and epic mountain biking trails, hiking, kayaking, stand up paddle boarding, on and on In the warmer months.  I haven’t even scratched the surface of activity possibilities here.  And real trees, holy mackerel.  If you are a fisherman you would be in heaven here too.   

Nowhere is perfect, but I feel like it is perfect for me.   

 

Edit:  I had a few beers in me when I pounded this one out on the phone.  I sincerely apologize for the bragging.  I am happy here, and I'm glad I decided to not live my entire life in one State, no matter which one.

Edited by MC Fresh Breath
  • Hook 'Em 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 1 year later...
atomheartbevo

atomheartbevo 89617

Posted
Posted (edited)

Lot of threads this could go in, including the abortion one, but this is probably most fitting.  Texas legislators want to prevent women from even going out of state for an abortion.

At least they have stopped pretending they don’t want a full-blown police state.

 

Edited by atomheartbevo
  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
Beau Vine

Beau Vine 54203

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted

I'm in Colorado for the month.  Today we were at the Golden farmer's market and as these two fat women came walking up, I commented to my daughter (who lives in Golden) that until then, I hadn't seen a really fat person since we got here.  

She said, "Yeah, everyone who lives here has some form of exercise as their main hobby." 

About 20 seconds later, another fat lady came waddling by, wearing a Texas A&M t-shirt.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 3
  • Haha 16
  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
tx 3 putt

tx 3 putt 76859

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, atomheartbevo said:

Lot of threads this could go in, including the abortion one, but this is probably most fitting.  Texas legislators want to prevent women from even going out of state for an abortion.

At least they have stopped pretending they don’t want a full-blown police state.

 


microchip all females, only way to be sure 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CooterBrown

CooterBrown 18001

Posted
Posted
I'm in Colorado for the month.  Today we were at the Golden farmer's market and as these two fat women came walking up, I commented to my daughter (who lives in Golden) that until then, I hadn't seen a really fat person since we got here.  
She said, "Yeah, everyone who lives here has some form of exercise as their main hobby." 
About 20 seconds later, another fat lady came waddling by, wearing a Texas A&M t-shirt.

How does she like Golden? That’s one of the top spots for our eventual relocation. Granted, I’ve only spent a few hours there but it seemed ideal for mountain and Denver access. I’ll take my 10th grader up in September to check out CSOM, CSU, and CU.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Beau Vine

Beau Vine 54203

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, CooterBrown said:


How does she like Golden? That’s one of the top spots for our eventual relocation. Granted, I’ve only spent a few hours there but it seemed ideal for mountain and Denver access. I’ll take my 10th grader up in September to check out CSOM, CSU, and CU.

It is literally about the best place in the country.  I would retire in Golden if I could afford it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 85257

Posted
Posted
9 hours ago, atomheartbevo said:

 

If the governor of Texas has that much power when working hand in hand with POTUS, why didn't Abbot and Trump save Texas?  They had 4 years. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted
11 hours ago, atomheartbevo said:

 

Gee, that seems to sound a lot like a former President's campaign in an election that he lost. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
Js1

Js1 85257

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, 4th&Five said:

seems like providing drugs that help keep people alive and not spread a deadly virus would be pro life but what the fuck do i know?!

God, can someone run on making venue shopping illegal?   These fucksticks find the most sympathetic judges so rule in their favor.  This tool is notorious for it.  

 

  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nice Guy Eddie

Nice Guy Eddie 13506

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, 4th&Five said:

seems like providing drugs that help keep people alive and not spread a deadly virus would be pro life but what the fuck do i know?!

But the drugs are keeping the gays alive. A god-fearin' Texan shouldn't be required to fund them pills that keep their sinful lives going.

Under his eye.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Satchel

Satchel 6925

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Pato del Muerto said:

All drugs can keep gays alive. All drugs can keep breeders alive.  
 

Weird that being gay is somehow different than other sins. No healthcare for all sinners has a little larger pool. 

Surely you aren’t saying that being gay is a sin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pato del Muerto

Pato del Muerto 52484

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Satchel said:

Surely you aren’t saying that being gay is a sin.

I was posting from their perspective.  Which they have because of a really old book that supposedly is no longer valid because of the newer book, but they still cherry pick from it to validate that their bullshit is in line with god’s thinking. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Satchel

Satchel 6925

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Pato del Muerto said:

I was posting from their perspective.  Which they have because of a really old book that supposedly is no longer valid because of the newer book, but they still cherry pick from it to validate that their bullshit is in line with god’s thinking. 

Gotcha. Because the majority of Christians are very poorly catechized, most don’t understand that the Bible is not and was never intended to be a science book or a sex manual.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
UpperWestside

UpperWestside 6159

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, trauma babe said:

Texas has now literally targeted every aspect of the care I provide through my clinic lmao

It's almost like the state is telling this dyke to gtfo

When the government of a state tells you exactly who they are and exactly how difficult they are willing to make your life believe them. I hope you are able to relocate to a state where who you are and what you do for a living are both fully respected.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Satchel

Satchel 6925

Posted
Posted

There’s a lot at stake here:

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2022/9/7/23341076/obamacare-reed-oconnor-prep-supreme-court-braidwood-becerra-affordable-care-act

When Congress enacted the Affordable Care Act, it delegated the power to determine which preventive treatments should be covered by insurers to three different federal entities with specialized experience on vaccines and preventive medicine. 

The US Preventive Services Task Force (PSTF) has fairly broad authority over preventive care for all patients. The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) determines which vaccinations should be covered. And the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) issues “comprehensive guidelines” governing women’s health and preventive care for infants, children, and adolescents.

This delegation of authority allowed these entities to make sure that, as new health challenges emerge and new treatments are developed, those treatments would remain broadly available to patients. If Congress had simply itemized a list of vaccines which insurers must cover when it enacted Obamacare in 2010, for example, that list could not have included the Covid-19 vaccine — because Covid-19 did not exist in 2010.

The three federal entities have placed about 80 items on the list of preventive services that health insurers must cover. These items include things like blood screening for newborns, vision screening for children, birth control, Pap smears, and screening for conditions like depression, hepatitis, HIV, and some forms of cancer.

The Braidwood plaintiffs took issue with that. Those plaintiffs are a hodgepodge of individuals and business owners (along with some businesses owned by individual plaintiffs) who object to buying insurance that covers at least some of these treatments, either on religious or economic grounds. 

Their most potent legal argument is that delegating this power to federal agencies violates something known as the “nondelegation doctrine,” a judicially created doctrine that the Supreme Court briefly flirted with in the 1930s, and then abandoned for nearly a century.

This ill-defined doctrine places vague limits on Congress’s power to delegate policymaking authority to federal agencies. In a 2019 dissenting opinion that a majority of the Court has since signaled that they find persuasive, Justice Neil Gorsuch claimed that the Court should strike down any congressional delegation of regulatory power that does not set “forth standards ‘sufficiently definite and precise to enable Congress, the courts, and the public to ascertain’ whether Congress’s guidance has been followed.”

In any event, the nondelegation doctrine is not currently the law — Gorsuch’s dissenting opinion is, for now, just a dissent. And O’Connor’s decision in Braidwood concedes that existing law does not permit him to strike down Obamacare’s entire preventive care regime as a violation of the nondelegation doctrine.

But there is enormous risk that this Supreme Court will change existing law and doom the regime in fairly short order. Two years ago, in Little Sisters v. Pennsylvania (2020), all of the Court’s Republican appointees joined an opinion by Justice Clarence Thomas, which strongly implied that HRSA’s decision to require health insurers to cover birth control violates nondelegation — although Thomas ultimately declined to strike down the birth control rule because “no party has pressed a constitutional challenge to the breadth of the delegation involved here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...