what I hate is when perverts dress and act like normal people, those are the ones you have to watch out for
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Target and its Transgendered Bathroom boycotted by 100s of thousands
- Thread starter jem
- Start date
%%I went to our local Target yesterday in Cary, NC. The parking lot was so completely full it was hard to find a space. It appears the "boycott" is having very little impact.
As if payday is always on friday?? One million targets,on Target now; Radio Shack turned in to a shack, but not by friday.LOL
The big political battle over transgender people in bathrooms, explained
http://www.vox.com/2016/5/5/11592908/transgender-bathroom-laws-rights
A lengthy but good summary.
http://www.vox.com/2016/5/5/11592908/transgender-bathroom-laws-rights
A lengthy but good summary.
Sadly the bill's authors (rural counter conservative legislators) put every conservative pipe-dream into the bill in an attempt to live out their rural county fantasies to roll-back the historical clock and stick it to the city people. Unfortunately it back-fired on them on a national basis and they seem to have difficulty undoing their actions.
A pipe dream is something considered to be a fantasy. The bill passed and was therefor no pipe dream. I keep wondering why you've referred to it as such on several occasions. It is clearly no pipe dream.
Who cares what national people think of their bathroom laws? It's the little girls in North Carolina that the legislators should be concerned with.
The law did not cause business in North Carolina to decrease. All the law did was keep men out of women's bathrooms.
What has caused business to decrease are homos and their backers who don't want to do business where they can't engage in their perverted agenda in public places. The homosexual agenda can no longer be considered just a moral question. That horse has left the barn. It is now an economic question as well. The homosexual agenda has cost the state of North Carolina over 65 million dollars of business and the law didn't kick them out, they decided to leave all by themselves.
And I recall you putting in a dig on 'small gov't conservatives' who wanted to make a law on bathrooms. I could just as easily reach back to when you were outraged that some conservative guy talked about eliminating the law about employees being required to wash their hands. The horror! But you got no problem with men flashing their dicks at little girls in the rest room. Just so the perverts keep doing business there!
You do realize that only two pages of the HB-2 bill addresses the bathroom issue. All the other pages roll-back civil rights by 100 years. The bill does not allow you to sue over discrimination in state court, does not allow towns/cities to raise the minimum wage, removes the ability of town/cities to pass ordinances, does not allow towns/cities to participate in regional boards for water and airport operations... plus a long list of conservative pipe-dreams tossed into the bill. The bill passed you say, eh? Why are these pipe-dreams then - because they will be turned over in court as being unconstitutional and an over-reach of state power. So much for the party of small-government - it appears they want to control every minor decision normally made by town boards in our state.
A pipe dream is something considered to be a fantasy. The bill passed and was therefor no pipe dream. I keep wondering why you've referred to it as such on several occasions. It is clearly no pipe dream.
Who cares what national people think of their bathroom laws? It's the little girls in North Carolina that the legislators should be concerned with.
The law did not cause business in North Carolina to decrease. All the law did was keep men out of women's bathrooms.
What has caused business to decrease are homos and their backers who don't want to do business where they can't engage in their perverted agenda in public places. The homosexual agenda can no longer be considered just a moral question. That horse has left the barn. It is now an economic question as well. The homosexual agenda has cost the state of North Carolina over 65 million dollars of business and the law didn't kick them out, they decided to leave all by themselves.
And I recall you putting in a dig on 'small gov't conservatives' who wanted to make a law on bathrooms. I could just as easily reach back to when you were outraged that some conservative guy talked about eliminating the law about employees being required to wash their hands. The horror! But you got no problem with men flashing their dicks at little girls in the rest room. Just so the perverts keep doing business there!
You do realize that only two pages of the HB-2 bill addresses the bathroom issue. All the other pages roll-back civil rights by 100 years. The bill does not allow you to sue over discrimination in state court, does not allow towns/cities to raise the minimum wage, removes the ability of town/cities to pass ordinances, does not allow towns/cities to participate in regional boards for water and airport operations... plus a long list of conservative pipe-dreams tossed into the bill. The bill passed you say, eh? Why are these pipe-dreams then - because they will be turned over in court as being unconstitutional and an over-reach of state power. So much for the party of small-government - it appears they want to control every minor decision normally made by town boards in our state.
If there is gov't overreach, I'd say that democrats have perfected that art long ago. It appears to me that every instance you stated does make gov't smaller. Being small gov't means making gov't smaller, just like the name says, doesn't it? If you pass a law that makes gov't smaller, that would qualify as small gov't policy. How exactly do you propose that republicans make gov't smaller without passing legislation to do so? If the DC republicans passed a bill repealing obamacare, would you consider that to be a big gov't bill? Because they got involved and took control?
About this prediction that it will all be overturned because of overreach. Now that would be a hoot, wouldn't it. The courts determining that gov't can force citizens to buy a health insurance policy is not considered overreach, but making gov't smaller is gov't overreach in North Carolina.
Given what a farce of a society we live in, I wouldn't be surprised at all if they came to that conclusion.
If there is gov't overreach, I'd say that democrats have perfected that art long ago. It appears to me that every instance you stated does make gov't smaller. Being small gov't means making gov't smaller, just like the name says, doesn't it? If you pass a law that makes gov't smaller, that would qualify as small gov't policy. How exactly do you propose that republicans make gov't smaller without passing legislation to do so? If the DC republicans passed a bill repealing obamacare, would you consider that to be a big gov't bill? Because they got involved and took control?
About this prediction that it will all be overturned because of overreach. Now that would be a hoot, wouldn't it. The courts determining that gov't can force citizens to buy a health insurance policy is not considered overreach, but making gov't smaller is gov't overreach in North Carolina.
Given what a farce of a society we live in, I wouldn't be surprised at all if they came to that conclusion.
So you're small town raised money along with 4 neighboring towns to build a water and sewage plant. The towns have had a regional board that has operated the water plant for years with no issues. The state passes a law that takes over your water plant operation and removes your oversight of operations.
Tell me how this is not over-reach and is a demonstration of conservative small government at the state level?
Apparently the republicans didn't think that everyone doing it across the state had "no issues".
The media is full of reports of how obamacare has been a great success on many levels. Even though the facts are that the Affordable Care Act raised costs substantially and only insured a quarter of the uninsured. I'd like to know why the republicans did this before i come to the conclusion that it was just republicans acting like democrats.
You seem to be for big gov't everywhere except where you think republicans can be accused of it.
The media is full of reports of how obamacare has been a great success on many levels. Even though the facts are that the Affordable Care Act raised costs substantially and only insured a quarter of the uninsured. I'd like to know why the republicans did this before i come to the conclusion that it was just republicans acting like democrats.
You seem to be for big gov't everywhere except where you think republicans can be accused of it.
Apparently the republicans didn't think that everyone doing it across the state had "no issues".
The media is full of reports of how obamacare has been a great success on many levels. Even though the facts are that the Affordable Care Act raised costs substantially and only insured a quarter of the uninsured. I'd like to know why the republicans did this before i come to the conclusion that it was just republicans acting like democrats.
You seem to be for big gov't everywhere except where you think republicans can be accused of it.
And where exactly do you get the concept that I support Obamacare? It is one of the most flawed federal programs ever put into place.
Yet you have not responded to my above query asking how you can defend what HB-2 did in regards to the regional water plant? Tell me again how this is an example of conservative small government and is not over-reach.