And he’s so upset about the law that he’s thinking of Doing Something
(News And Observer) Â Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel says he will try to poach businesses and conventions from North Carolina because of a law eliminating anti-discrimination protections for lesbians, gays and bisexuals.
Emanuel also says he will he ban the use of city funds for nonessential travel to the state.
The law also prohibits transgender people from using washrooms that do not match the gender they had at birth.
He can try to poach all he wants, but, how businesses want to move to an area know for lots and lots of causal gun-play, lots of murders, lots of crime, and a police force that has been keeping secret detention facilities? The law, HB2, doesn’t eliminate any anti-discrimination protections, highlighting the bias of the Raleigh News and Observer, nor does it prohibit that bathroom use at private entities (I have a post on this later today).
Notice, though, that Rahm hasn’t actually gotten around to doing any of this as of yet. But, good for him to institute some fiscal responsibility, so he can use that money to deal with the extreme gun violence in his Democratic Party run city.
https://twitter.com/WilliamTeach/status/715506171138932736
Furthermore, all state travel to Vermont (which instituted their non-essential travel ban) should be banned, as we should be concerned about our state employees traveling to the heroin capital of the USA. San Francisco? Definitely a worry over disease. NYC? Increasing crime. Seattle? Escalating crime from the large number of illegal aliens.
So your point is that discriminating against the transgendered will lower the rate of murder in a city?
No wonder the conserv-a-movement is circling the toilet bowl like a flushed turd.
Trump/Teach 2016!
jeffs ability to miss the point is impressive to the extreme.
As for Rahm, he’s simply doing what the left always does – focusing on fringe issues to keep the focus off the real problems they’re causing.
Oh, not to worry: the gun violence in Chicago isn’t in the areas where businesses and conventions are held. As long as the violence is pretty much restricted to the areas inhabited by Negroes, businesses won’t worry about it.
No one cares about black thugs killing other black thugs, and the last people who would ever say a harsh word about such are the #BlackLivesMatter groups.
hankm
I was just pointing out the increasingly peculiar structure of Teach’s arguments.
Don’t worry about discrimination if you have murders in your town. WTF?
Global warming is a hoax because liberals drive cars. WTF?
Hoisting Teach by his own petard, we derive:
Are there NO OTHER PROBLEMS in NC, such that the legislature can hold special sessions to let fly at the transgendered? The athletes at the flagship state school (UNC) don’t attend classes and have their grades tampered with. Fix that. Unemployment is too high there. Fix that. People are still being murdered. Fix that. Poverty is on the rise in NC. Fix that! Once you solve all those serious problems come back and harass transgendered folk.
Each of Teach’s arguments deflect from the point, rather than address the point. These are common debate tactics. Donald Trump does this too.
Sure jeff. That’s a lot of word salad to admit you don’t get the point.
We get it. It’s you that doesn’t understand.
Jeffrey ranted:
The legislature came in to solve a simple problem. The other problems:
The UNC athletes? That’s not something the legislature needs to solve, but the college administration, and the NCAA.
People being murdered? Well, last time I looked, murder was already against the law! These problems need to be addressed by the community, by the churches, by the police, and by parents.
Unemployment? The legislature could solve that, by ending welfare in the Tarheel State. Make it simple: if you don’t work, you don’t eat, and American citizens will quickly push out the illegal immigrants working.
Poverty? The same solution: the cure for poverty is work!
Dana are you currently at work??
The legislature came in to solve a simple problem ???
I am sorry I wasn’t aware that NC had any significant problems in that area
Could you cite any from news stories?
The NC Attorney General apparently was unaware of those problems, and has since said he will not enforce that law and that as it is written he believes is unconstitutional
You do realize Teach that the number of deaths by homicide is currently about 1/2 of what it was in 1992?
That NC law that was passed is a job killer which with NC’s already high unemployment rate is really not needed
Trying to gin up social conservatives fears will only alienate the moderate independents
2016 is going to be a tough election year st best for the GOOP (Grand Old Peoples Party)
dana,
You’ve missed every point.
Teach doesn’t want to talk about transgender issues and the response of most of America to the right-wing law in NC. Instead he tears into those who criticize the law. According to Teach, Rahm Emmanuel has no right to criticize since there are lots of shootings in Chicago.
Wouldn’t that apply to the NC legislature as well? Investing their time harassing intersex folks and ignoring the bigger problems in NC?
It’s irrelevant to the argument, but really. Do you really believe our current economy can employ, at a livable wage, every person who wants a job? That most of the impoverished are impoverished by choice?
So, let me get this straight: everyone else is allowed to criticize our law, which requires biological sex people to use the bathroom of their biological sex in government owned buildings, but, I’m not allowed to criticize those same people back, who, say, may be mayors of a city with a high gun violence rate, and, really do not seem to care that Blacks are killing and shooting each other? Such is the version of liberal free speech.
I never said Rahm wasn’t allowed to criticize, and saying so puts words in my mouth. But, maybe he should worry about the violence in his own city, and that his cops seem to be out of control.
Um, I’ve had at least one post up about every day. I have another that I didn’t get around to posting. How is that “not wanting to talk about it”?
Jeffrey wrote:
Given the voters’ response to the Houston Equal Rights Ordinance, in a city which twice elected an openly lesbian mayor, perhaps “the response of most of America” wouldn’t be exactly what you think it is.
That ordinance was defeated precisely because it included the ‘transgendered’ sections, the bathroom ordinance if you will; had those provisions not been included, HERO might not have even been challenged, much less overturned.
You see, it’s really pretty simple: most Americans don’t want to be bothered. If the law is just about a discrimination which doesn’t effect them, they don’t have a problem with it. But the bathroom bill is an invasion of everyone’s expectation of some privacy, and a threat to children, and that does intrude on the lives of other people.
Jeffrey asked:
If there was no welfare, and everyone had the choice of working or going hungry, then what we wouldn’t have is illegal immigration, because the jobs being done by the illegals would be getting done by Americans.
Are most of the impoverished impoverished by choice? Hell, yes, I believe that! I have seen too many people who have taken the choice to live in poverty in exchange for not having to work.
That was the problem with welfare all along: it was created by good-hearted, well-intentioned people who were hard working themselves, and couldn’t imagine that they would ever choose the Faustian bargain of agreeing to live in poverty in exchange for not having to get up and go to work. It turned out that they were too ego-centric, unable to conceive of the possibility that there really were people who would take such a bargain, and they created a system where such a bargain existed. I’ve seen these people! They do exist, by the millions.