My youngest daughter lived in Seattle for a while, but then she decided to move back to the United States and settled in Decatur, Georgia.I can't get out of this fucking shitpile state soon enough.
My youngest daughter lived in Seattle for a while, but then she decided to move back to the United States and settled in Decatur, Georgia.I can't get out of this fucking shitpile state soon enough.
Point by point:When you write: “ Of course, the "that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" wasn't something Jefferson believed, he was a most enthusiastic slaver, but it rings well down through the years.”
I figured you would go there, that’s why I worded my response the way I did. What about Adams and Franklin? You don’t mention them? Why? Because they can’t be mentioned; they didn’t own any slaves...but they did edit the DOI HEAVILY and all of the men (Jefferson included) agreed that the new version better represented the sentiments of the proposed new nation as a whole.
You then go on to say: “We have a way to handle governmental overreach that doesn't require armed rebellion”... When did I ever imply this? Putting words in someone’s mouth is simply poor form especially, for someone of you obvious intellect. What I did attempt to imply (via the founders writing) is that we are a country built on individual rights and individual freedoms; and that our current elected officials sometimes miss this point.
You go on to write: “an option not open the Colonials of the 18th century with regard to Britain, an option provided to us BY those 18th century Colonials, the right to vote.”
And: “If the People of Washington state want this law overturned they have the means to do something about it.” Wrong & Wrong.
Very recently, the people of North Carolina had the right to vote on a certain marriage law, and they unanimously voted NO to that law. Well...their government officials didn’t think that their vote mattered and overturned the will of the people by passing the law anyway. So, no...the people clearly don’t have the means if their government officials say they don’t. Now, Mr. Brush, go back and read the preamble to the DOI and tell me where bad ole’ Mr. TJ was wrong?
All kidding aside, I agree with you in theory, but in practice what you say doesn’t work.
This^^^Seems fair. Break the law, pay the penalty. It's not like the Washington State ban on internet sales is something new and unknown.
Well, it is after 10:00pm on this coast and I do have to get some rest, so let me just touch on the things that matter to me. From my point of view and using your words, your argument doesn’t line up, but that might be the point. If you were simply talking about the context of the DOI itself and the outsized use of it by me on such a trivial issue, I simply would have said “touché” and moved on. But you chose to go off on a rant and slandered a great man - a founder of this country by whose intellect mankind was freed from 5000 years of fruitless servitude - and along with him, all the founders who had a hand in writing that history altering document. What was calculated by me was feeling that by me mentioning the DOI, that you (or someone) would invariably call Thomas Jefferson a racist (which, much to my surprise, happened); that is why I made sure to make allusions to the other authors. No one can reasonably call either of them racist? Discredit the author, discredit the document...no?Point by point:
1. I quite understood that your quoting the Declaration of Independence was calculated. Nothing earlier in the thread point to this and you made it so I couldn't miss it by quoting me at the beginning. I decided it would be fun to play.
2. I did not bring up any other of the Founding Fathers as they did not author the Declaration of Independence. But as we know, they were of many minds about severing relations with Britain, as well as extending the right to self determination.
3. One could imply this since you chose to quote from a document that essentially declares the colonies to be in rebellion from its government. Ever seen that happen without a call to arms? Come on, you know better. If there's one truism of human interaction it's that people are loath to give up an unearned advantage. I did not suggest that you were in favor of the people of Washington State rising up in armed rebellion. As a matter of idle curiosity, are you? Don't be disingenuous. I put nothing in your mouth.
4. Not Wong & Wrong. I can't speak to North Carolina as I don't live there, but In California we have a long populist tradition of adding Initiatives, generally referred to as Propositions, to the ballot of most, if not all, elections at the State level. If they pass they have the force of law and can, and do, overturn laws enacted in Sacramento. Prop 13, the Jarvis initiative, began the whole tax revolt in the US. This last election had 12 of them, and one of them, prop 22, overturned a state law that required businesses like Uber and Lyft to classify their drivers as employees rather than independent contractors. Others expand or contract the reach of laws passed in the state legislature.
Tag, you're it.
Hard to understand any real grounds for righteous indignation here as the risks are clear as are the consequences.
Is that not "in Massachusetts"? If not, I am confused.
This^^^
I don’t believe there are any of the 50 states that allow illegal activity based on personal like or dislike of their respective state statutes, or ignorance of the law for that matter.
Hard to understand any real grounds for righteous indignation here as the risks are clear as are the consequences.
Apparently the company has decided to bite the bullet, pay the fine and amend their business practices to comply. This was the expedient route they evidently chose at the advice of whatever legal council they decided to retain I imagine.
To allude to or overtly cast them as victims seems a curious position to take without apparent cause.
However this thread, with its many twists of logic and passion, is definitely an entertaining and fitting entry in the annuals of 2020.
Rock on brothers.
I'm happy to let this go. Life's too short.Well, it is after 10:00pm on this coast and I do have to get some rest, so let me just touch on the things that matter to me. From my point of view and using your words, your argument doesn’t line up, but that might be the point. If you were simply talking about the context of the DOI itself and the outsized use of it by me on such a trivial issue, I simply would have said “touché” and moved on. But you chose to go off on a rant and slandered a great man - a founder of this country by whose intellect mankind was freed from 5000 years of fruitless servitude - and along with him, all the founders who had a hand in writing that history altering document. What was calculated by me was feeling that by me mentioning the DOI, that you (or someone) would invariably call Thomas Jefferson a racist (which, much to my surprise, happened); that is why I made sure to make allusions to the other authors. No one can reasonably call either of them racist? Discredit the author, discredit the document...no?
When you wrote “an option not open the Colonials of the 18th century with regard to Britain, an option provided to us BY those 18th century Colonials, the right to vote.” I thought that you were talking about every citizen, in every state of the United States...but it seems you were only talking about Californians? I can assure you that my reference to North Carolina is 100% factual, but not relevant because I misunderstood you? For that I apologize; but you really should pay attention to what happened in North Carolina, as it could spread to where you live.
As to the rest, I don’t like the taste of Red Herring nor do I enjoy fighting Straw Men. And, yes, a lot could have been implied by my use of the DOI, but the the burden is on the intellect of the reader to properly infer the spirit of what was written by the context of the whole of the subject. At best, for anyone to call for revolution over not being able to sell tobacco in a certain state is simply retarded (guilty as charged) and plain evil and anarchist at worst. My only hope was to convey (in the strongest possible way) that we are free people living in a free country and so long as we are not infringing on anyone else’s rights, to please leave us the hell alone! (But you know this already as you are a provocateur of the most fun kind and enjoy when people get enmeshed in your web.)
Now, we could sit up all night like two pharisees straining out gnats and shallow camels, but lets just agree that it’s been all great fun? If not, we can pick up on this tomorrow and surely get this thread closed down. ? Gam Zu L’Tovah.
Although its obviously not easy to uproot yourself at least you have the option in the US to move to a state that halfway respects the rights of its citizens. Oh wait Washington is fine with letting people shoot heroin publicly in the streets just not ordering pipe tobacco on the internet. Apparently their definition of liberty is just a little backwards from everyone elses.I can't get out of this fucking shitpile state soon enough.
The direct initiative process for passing laws was an invention of the progressive era in the late 19th and early part of the 20th century. It exists mainly in the western states. All the states along the Pacific ocean - CA, OR and WA - have it.Our right to place initiatives on the ballot is part of the California Constitution. It would require a vote of the people to change that. Not likely to happen.
If Washington State has similar law, a concerned group can offer a proposition to change the regulations regarding shipping online sales of tobacco to residents of the state.