Writes Molly Hennessy-Fiske, in "Antagonisms flare as red states try to dictate how blue cities are run" (WaPo).
२८ नोव्हेंबर, २०२३
"The antagonisms between red states and blue cities are all the more notable because the urban areas in the crosshairs are mostly majority-minority..."
"... with many mayors and district attorneys of color.
These actions go 'squarely against the Republican philosophy of small government and more freedom,' said Cleveland Mayor Justin Bibb, a Black Democrat who has struggled to pass local tobacco and gun control ordinances because of constraints enacted by Ohio’s Republican-controlled legislature.... Columbia University law professor Richard Briffault faults states for hypocrisy: 'They’re in favor of home rule when it’s the feds, but not when it’s states versus locals.'
The U.S. Conference of Mayors passed a resolution at its annual gathering this summer 'to undertake an all-out campaign' against state preemption, which it identified as racist and punitive...."
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
५२ टिप्पण्या:
actions go 'squarely against the Republican philosophy of small government and more freedom,'
said Cleveland Mayor Justin Bibb,
as opposed to the Democrat philosophy of more government and less freedom,' said Cleveland Mayor Bibb?
so, who here (besides Cook) prefers more government and less freedom?
Ireland Green Party's @paulinegalway
says democracy is all about limiting your freedom in case someone else gets offended.
A black Idiocrat “struggling”… I like reading that first thing in the morning… it adds a note of whimsy to the grift by and enrichment of said Idiocrat and all his or her cronies.
Another prime example of inauthenticity.
"The antagonisms between red states and blue cities" have nothing to do with racism and everything to do with the way they're being run....right into the ground.
Those evil nasty red-staters are sick of seeing people killed and injured by criminals let out of prison by the omission or commission of the black prosecutor or the black DA or the black mayor of whichever blue urbanity you choose to select. They're sick of the reputation of their state suffering for urbanite malfeasance. They're also not a little apprehensive that continued poor urban governance will lead to urban bailouts, which they will be paying for with both their state and federal taxes.
Pulling the race card to explain this problem is not authentic, as it almost always is. It's unfortunate that so many stereotypes about black leadership are being proved by black leaders, and only they can do something about that...which apparently is nothing at all.
Reading of the major city mayors complaining about their inept management skills is laughable. When you create a city-wide dystopian outhouse, enjoy the stink! Of course they blame the R's.
States holding incompetent local governments accountable is "racist and punitive..." Natch.
Mayor Justin Bibb ought to be more concerned about school choice in Cleveland and the number of single-parent homes in Cleveland more than anything else.
You want change? This is where the change begins.
Columbia University law professor Richard Briffault faults states for hypocrisy: 'They’re in favor of home rule when it’s the feds, but not when it’s states versus locals.'
A law profesor thinks that relationship between the state and city is the same as the relationship between the state and the federal government? Yeah, it's hypocrisy when someone who preaches small government limits the powers of government.
Good god what a shit show Columbia has descended into!
I work for Republican state legislators, and I'm a local elected government official, and this is true. State Republicans are for local control unless it's something they feel strongly about, such as schools, crime, energy policy.
Gun laws are a big preemption issue.
NONE of it has to do with race. Restricting local gun laws is seen as defending constitutional rights. State school mandates are seen as trying to prevent progressive indoctrination of children, etc. You can note the inconsistency without playing the race card. But that won't rile up the base.
Hypocrisy and "rules for thee but not for me" at WaPo once again. Pot calls kettle black. Those who've been winning can't stand it when they start to lose.
Blue states and governments have dictated to red rural areas since the dawn of time. Just look at the severe cultural splits in urban versus rural New York, Illinois, and California.
To see overt blue racism, consider anti-poor, anti-black "Saturday Night Special" gun laws of 50 to 100 years ago. These class-oriented laws were pushed hard by the left into the 1990s.
Cities don't have the same relationship with state governments that state governments do with the federal government. This is basic civics. And while it's certainly better to permit local governments wherever possible to make their own decisions, and live with the consequences, state governments have a responsibility to step in if mismanagement causes too many external problems, or if the local government oversteps its authority.
They also banned slavery, diversity, restricted witch trials (e.g. human rites), limited medical mandates, ensured a republican form of government, support marriage equality, stood up to Levine's dreams of Herr Mengele, oppose redistributive change (e.g. progressive prices or trickle-down poverty), etc.
Translation: red states are playing the blue states' song and WaPo has roe all over its face, what is a liberal to publish?
Nice try but that’s not how it works. If it is imma claim my condo board trumps the tyranny of our Mayor…
Oh no, hypocrisy in government.
Ohio just passed constitutional amendments for abortion and marijuana. The blue urban areas are pleased with that. Each side likes when they can impose their rules on the other side, but cries hypocrisy when it goes the other way.
The WaPo article tries to capture the high ground by throwing race into the mix.
Many progressive cities are destroying themselves. States need to step in.
Our major cities are shitholes and have been despoiled by long rule by colored Democrats. I cannot understand why Republicans don’t run campaigns based on reportage of what’s been done.
'Richard Briffault faults states for hypocrisy: 'They’re in favor of home rule when it’s the feds, but not when it’s states versus locals.'"
He doesn't get the real issue: the need to balance control with freedom.
"... These actions go 'squarely against the Republican philosophy of small government and more freedom,' said Cleveland Mayor Justin Bibb, a Black Democrat who has struggled to pass local tobacco and gun control ordinances because of constraints enacted by Ohio’s Republican-controlled legislature."
Two decades ago, the whole quoted piece would be found in the text of a satire piece in The Onion (back when it was funny and the Babylon Bee hadn't been invented yet).
"Columbia University law professor Richard Briffault faults states for hypocrisy: 'They’re in favor of home rule when it’s the feds, but not when it’s states versus locals.'"
That's what the 10th Amendment says. "Federalism" is a more accurate term than "Home Rule". There is overlap, but they are different concepts.
What should we call the professor's position? How about "Cities' Rights"?
"The U.S. Conference of Mayors passed a resolution at its annual gathering this summer 'to undertake an all-out campaign' against state preemption, which it identified as racist and punitive..."
If you have the facts on your side, pound the facts. If you have the law on your side, pound the law. If you have neither on your side, play the race card.
The notion that opposition to more government regulation of anything, be it tobacco, guns, or even schools, as “squarely against smaller government and more freedom” is an inauthentic notion. Liberals understand this. Progressive marxist do not.
Well. The majority/minorities running Philadelphia, Atlanta and Detroit stole our election. Why shouldn't we steal theirs?
We live in The United States of America.
The States are the primary political subdivision and have the most power per the Constitution, other than the powers specified for the central government.
I learned that in high school.
It was true back then.
Just more boring Libtard nonsense. The Red states are hypocrites. Well the Blue staters in the Federal GOvernment are hypocrites too then. Why don't they let the Red states do what they want?
States rights are written into the constution. It was the "we the people of the United states". People felt so strongly about being part of state they fought a civil war over it.
None of this applies to Local Governments. The boundries of cities and counties are completely arbitrary. And the power of cities wax and wane as people move in and out.
And what libtard arguement could be complete without calling the opposition raciss, sexist, bigot, homophobes? When is everyone else going to start counter-attacking this nonsense?
And finally, why is it Libtards love criminals and crooks so much? Is it their bleeding hearts? Or is it because they hate middle class/working class people and root for the crooks?
Cleveland is not a city-state. Cities are extensions of state governments. This mayor admits he wants to restrict the rights of citizens to make their own decisions. Just like a "good" fascist would do.
If Cleveland Mayor Justin Bibb, a Black Democrat, really cared about the Black residents of Cleveland, he'd promote policies and behaviors that improve civilization in Cleveland, not policies that promote barbarism. Such policies would:
- Promote sex after marriage.
- Two parent families and fathers' involvement with their kids
- Getting an education
- School discipline
- School curriculums from the 1960s, not 2023's woke curriculum.
- Effective policing and crime control
Texas had a problem some years back with the DAs in Houston and Dallas arresting folk from out of town on spurious gun charges, and making the defendants pay lawyers for the privilege of arguing before a judge that state law allowed "travel" as an affirmative defense against such charges. Arrest, arraignment, bond, charges that often lost jobs, lawyering up, appearing in court and having the defendant adjudicated "Not Guilty" 100% of the time: the process was the punishment. The arrests were purel harassment of the exercise of 2nd Amendment rights.
The local DAs got slapped down by the state legislators, who passed laws more clearly defining "travel" and legal gun carry. So the local DAs started arresting locals for having guns in cars at work, when employers did not allow guns in their workplaces. Whish was slapped down. So whenever a legally concealed firearm was seen in public, as when the wind blew a jacket up and the holstered gun at the hip was visible, became cause for prosecution for "brandishing." And so on and so on.
So state legislators increased the clarity of the state level laws for firearms possession and legal, licensed carry again and again until now we have constitutional carry here in Texas and the DAs have to find an actual criminal misuse of a lawfully carried firearm to harass, err, prosecute gun owners.
The local DAs abuse of gun owners' rights has been repeated endlessly by locals wanting unconstitutional control over the citizenry, when the state says otherwise. That, I think, is a very useful state level interference with local regulation.
Waiting for the Commie-Pinkos to tell us is the red states forced them to become sanctuary cities. Sanctuary cities .... what a liberal story!!!!
Blue cjties are a compelling argument against self government.
"a Black Democrat who has struggled to pass local tobacco and gun control ordinances"
Yea let's elect some more democrats so they can tell us how to live.
States protecting the 2nd Amendment rights, as well as any other civil rights of people who live in cities is rather ordinary.
Stopping cities from passing laws that restrict freedoms in regards to gun ownership and tobacco use, or any other punitive progressive social restriction, is entirely in alignment with being for less government and more freedom.
" These actions go 'squarely against the Republican philosophy of small government and more freedom,' said Cleveland Mayor Justin Bibb, a Black Democrat who has struggled to pass local tobacco and gun control ordinances because of constraints enacted by Ohio’s Republican-controlled legislature."
This is really Alice in Wonderland Red Queen type thinking.
"'They’re in favor of home rule when it’s the feds, but not when it’s states versus locals.' . . . "Antagonisms flare as red states try to dictate how blue cities are run"
Hey, can I play?
"They're in favor of state rule if it's California dictating, but not when it's red feds against blue states."
"Antagonisms flare as blue feds try to dictate how red states are run."
Our major cities are shitholes and have been despoiled by long rule by colored Democrats. I cannot understand why Republicans don’t run campaigns based on reportage of what’s been done.
a) Local GOP is often corrupt or incompetent, and b) it wouldn't matter if they weren't, because the cities are often filled with the kinds of voters who don't care.
"state preemption, which it identified as racist…"
Because of course it is. (eyeroll)
They lay every (and I do mean every) disagreement to racism. It used to be amusing. It's become tedious. And destructive..
Chicago proudly elected a teachers' union lobbyist as Mayor. "We don't need your law and order!" Meanwhile, the population of black males is kept under control by homicide.
Molly! How dare you use the term "cross hairs". I thought that the Washington Post said the term was politically toxic.
WaPo uncovers an epiphany in a republican form of government with federalism, electoral firewall, and judicial restraint.
"Antagonisms flare as red states try to dictate how blue cities are run".
That is the opposite of the growth of the antagonism. The entire west coast is my example.
"They lay every (and I do mean every) disagreement to racism."
After 150 years of emancipation the African-American community is distinguished largely by its criminal culture. Racism is the handiest explanation.
The significant presence of the community in athletics and entertainment is "in spite of" racism.
Racism!!!
Up until COVID and 2020s summer of love, I used to go downtown Milwaukee a lot. There were other cool neighborhoods and the 100-year-old Taverns once owned and operated by Milwaukee's breweries were cool places to get loaded, Wisconsin style. Most still have the huge ornate wooden bars.
Now, I don't go. It's a shithole and it's safer and more fun west of Milwaukee in Lake Country. I do feel however, that due to Milwaukee's corrupt, incompetent leadership and woke white population, something has been taken from me. I have family history going back to when the Irish occupied the 3rd Ward prior to the 1892 fire. Even going to the safer white neighborhoods like the Upper East side, the empty headed wokeness and arrogance is palpable.
Milwaukee is no longer policed. People drive 65 on 35 MPH thoroughfares. Driving thru Milwaukee in it's current state is depressing.
Not long ago Milwaukee was just smaller than Chicago, but safe...and nice.
The other bullshit about this is when cities like Milwaukee and Soros DA's like John Chisolm don't do anything about crime it bleeds over into the next county. In SE WI that's Waukesha County. That's how we got Darrell Brooks running over our Dancing Grannies and little league players two years ago at the Waukesha Christmas Parade.
If you live on the east side of Menomonee Falls or Waukesha bordering Milwaukee and West Allis, exposure to crime is higher than if you are another six miles inland. Same looking north, but those are the rich, woke white people in Whitefish Bay and Glendale that voted for this shit. They're the Martha's Vineyard of SE WI.
Milwaukee has crack, heroine, and fentanyl all over. Illegal guns too. WI is a concealed carry state. I have some cousins in construction. When they have jobs in Milwaukee they keep a gun in the glove compartment. That's their WI State right. If Milwaukee doesn't want that...clean up your horseshit.
In the meantime build a wall at 124th Street.
Funny, my education on civil government in the United States told me that states were sovereign but cities were chartered, or granted license by those states. The federal government is only sovereign within the restrictions of the Constitution, or was until the 20th century usurpation.
"Many progressive cities are destroying themselves. States need to step in."
No they don't. You broke it. You bought it. Dig your own way out.
Ain't free market capitalistic Democratic republicanism fun? The great system of checks and balances just creates a giant whack-a-mole game. Don't fret libtards, some lefty'll eventually figure out a work around.
Michael K said...
"Chicago proudly elected a teachers' union lobbyist as Mayor. "We don't need your law and order!" Meanwhile, the population of black males is kept under control by homicide."
Mayor "Little" Richie Daly. "Chicago is now a sanctuary city!"(The crowd; Yay! Huzzah! Way to go yerhonor!)
Then the actual illegal immigrants show up.
The Current King of Chicago. " We need federal help to house all these immigrants that bwe are not prepared to take care of!" We'll have to house them in police stations!(the King hate the CPD), We'll house them in unused schools!(the schools are mostly in black neighborhoods.)
Crime spikes.
Always with the racism card. Thanks Obama.
Youtube Videos of street prostitutes around the world led to suggestions of poorest areas in United States. Common theme, abandoned big factories which had employed thousands of people.
If only we had a politician or two, or three who wanted to bring manufacturing jobs back to USA...
Why is this controversial? The States preceded the Constitution and the Federal government it ordained. They have always had plenary power to do anything not forbidden by the Constitution, including granting city and town charters that strictly limit their powers. (The converse notion that the Federal Government may do only that which is explicitly authorized by the Constitution has been pretty well killed off by the government thugs and their bootlickers.)
It is already trouble enough to travel interstate and deal with unfamiliar and opaque rules, especially with regards to firearms. There is no reason at all that a college town of pinch-faced leftist scolds should be allowed to pass local ordinances to entrap travelers passing through with firearms that are otherwise legal all over the state. This is just performative moral preening and it ought to be totally forbidden in all states.
And it's going to get WAY worse when the hand Amnesty to 40 million invaders...
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2023/11/i-am-hopeful-that-congress-will-do-it/
These actions go 'squarely against the Republican philosophy of small government and more freedom
Says the dictatorial politician who is desperately upset the State won't let him trample people's freedoms.
He probably hates the Bill of Rights, too
Because crime and smoking is way, way down in those cities with restrictive gun and tobacco control laws.
Sure. The problem is obviously those rednecks who won't let us pass the right laws.
Columbia University law professor Richard Briffault faults states for hypocrisy: 'They’re in favor of home rule when it’s the feds, but not when it’s states versus locals.'"
The powers grantedvto states and those reduced of the federal government is constitutionally addressed! Who granted this dingbat a teaching license?
How is it in the USA that thw most constitutionally illiterate people are law professors?
"Cleveland Mayor Justin Bibb, a Black Democrat who has struggled to pass local tobacco and gun control ordinances because of constraints enacted by Ohio’s Republican-controlled legislature.."
As in other large US cities, there's little doubt that those criminals arrested and charged with illegal possession of a firearm serve not one day in jail for said possession. So Bibb not being able to pass "gun control ordinances" when the existing laws aren't enforced is risible.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा