Does this sound like civil war?

[jayem]

What you're referring to here doesn't relate to what we're talking about. Portland didn't file a lawsuit. They are banning travel, good and services from that state of Texas. If Portland wanted to file a lawsuit against the representatives of Texas because they don't agree with a law they passed (as if that's any of their business), then that's what they should have done. Instead, Portland authorities are going after businesses and any other entity in Texas.

Of course Portland didn’t file a lawsuit because they know there is no legal standing for such an action. The city is calling for an economic boycott of Texas products and services. Which they have a perfect right to do.

Can tou answer a simple question: Do you think TX was right to sue 4 other states because it didn’t like their election protocols?

 

[Pommer]

Can tou answer a simple question: Do you think TX was right to sue 4 other states because it didn’t like their election protocols?

[Jeopardy Music]

 

[Sparagmos]

When a violent mob stormed the capitol because they didn't like the result of an election, I began to take civil war as a serious possibility.

Me too.

 

[TLK Valentine]

[Jeopardy Music]

I'll take "Change the Subject" for 200...

 

[Aldebaran]

Of course Portland didn’t file a lawsuit because they know there is no legal standing for such an action. The city is calling for an economic boycott of Texas products and services. Which they have a perfect right to do.

As if punishing businesses stationed in Texas would accomplish anything other than make officials in Portland feel better?

Can tou answer a simple question: Do you think TX was right to sue 4 other states because it didn’t like their election protocols?

Those protocols certainly needed review before finalizing the vote tally that was based on those protocols. Considering that a national election was going to be decided based on an election based on those protocols, YES, Texas was right. If they would have announced bans on doing any type of business with those 4 states as retribution, then that would have been wrong.

 

[TLK Valentine]

As if punishing businesses stationed in Texas would accomplish anything other than make officials in Portland feel better?

Are you suggesting that boycotts shouldn't be done only because they are ineffective?

Those protocols certainly needed review before finalizing the vote tally that was based on those protocols. Considering that a national election was going to be decided based on an election based on those protocols, YES, Texas was right. If they would have announced bans on doing any type of business with those 4 states as retribution, then that would have been wrong.

Too bad the Supreme Court of the United States disagreed with you.

 

[Yttrium]

When a boycott becomes a civil war.

The proper term for this is:

Histrionics

 

[Gene2memE]

I know.

Portland could pass a law making it illegal for the local government to do business with companies that aren't boycotting Texas or dont plan to do so in the future

Then they could create a blacklist of those companies, and also ensure that government funds, either direct or indirect, are punitively pulled from them.

Then they could argue, in court, that lawsuits opposing such boycotts are not suppressing protected speech or expression of free speech or freedom of association

But hey, punishing businesses for their actions does nothing other than make politicians feel better, right?

 

[jayem]

Those protocols certainly needed review before finalizing the vote tally that was based on those protocols. Considering that a national election was going to be decided based on an election based on those protocols, YES, Texas was right. If they would have announced bans on doing any type of business with those 4 states as retribution, then that would have been wrong.

Let's be real. Both the Portland City Council, and Ken Paxton's (the Texas AG) actions are publicity stunts. They're tossing some red meat to their political bases. But Portland is voluntarily boycotting businesses in a state who's politics they believe most of their citizens despise. What Paxton did is 1000 times worse. He tired to subvert the federal court system. By making the preposterous claim--completely unsupported by evidence--that his state was damaged by the election procedures of 4 other states. That would be like me suing some neighbors down the street because I think their choice of paint colors on their houses hurts my property value. What AG Paxton did was a totally frivolous abuse of the courts for political gain. And if the man truly thought he had a valid legal case, then he's a dunce.

 

[KCfromNC]

That is absolutely bizarre. I’ve never heard of a state putting sanctions on another state.

I assume Texas v. Pennsylvania - Wikipedia has already been mentioned.

 

[Petros2015]

I feel like the Oregon troops will be awfully tired by the time they march to Texas.
And awfully outgunned when they get there.
I can hear Texas yawning.

"ban city business and employee travel related to the state of Texas"

Maybe they could enforce the use of kitten filters on texas citizens during incoming zoom calls?

I'm not sure that Texas would notice unless someone threatened to take them off the national power grid.
Oh wait...
...They have their own don't they?

It's interesting, but doesn't really sound like civil war to me.

Things like this concern me when they come from retired 3 star generals who have been pardoned:

Days after being pardoned by Trump, Flynn tweeted a press release by the "We the People Convention" that called on the president to "exercise the Extraordinary Powers of his office and declare limited Martial Law to temporarily suspend the Constitution and civilian control of these federal elections in order to have the military implement a national re-vote that reflects the true will of the people."

But not so much from randos in Portland.

 

[Estrid]

We don’t have monuments to Hitler yet kids somehow still manage to learn a thing or two about the guy in school. There’s no need to glorify and commemorate our racist history but my point was that there’s only one side really pushing the whole civil war thing and it ain’t the side trying to take down those monuments.

Not bad. Invoking Godwin and Orwell (four legs good, two legs bad)

Are we certain by that a statue serves exclusively to "glorify"?

Abraham Lincoln spoke of "the brave men" who fought
at Gettysburg, not "our brave men".

 

[Desk trauma]

I feel like the Oregon troops

Must have missed the city of Portland organizing their own troops…

 

[GoldenBoy89]

Not bad. Invoking Godwin and Orwell (four legs good, two legs bad)

Are we certain by that a statue serves exclusively to "glorify"?

Abraham Lincoln spoke of "the brave men" who fought
at Gettysburg, not "our brave men".

I think you’re missing the point that there’s one side that’s constantly clamoring for civil war and the other side just thinks they’re kinda nutzo for it.

 

[Estrid]

I think you’re missing the point that there’s one side that’s constantly clamoring for civil war and the other side just thinks they’re kinda nutzo for it.

You missed the pointvof. "four legs good, two legs bad",
though now you have added the absurd "one side
constantly clamouring".

 

[Arcangl86]

No it doesn't sound like civil war to me. Sounds like a boycott. If the law even passes.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Must have missed the city of Portland organizing their own troops…

If there's a civil war brewing between Portland and Texas, we must have missed a lot of things....

 

[TLK Valentine]

You missed the pointvof. "four legs good, two legs bad",

Oddly fitting from a state that prefers horse de-wormer to COVID vaccines.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

Since you're the one who attempted to change the narrative to deflect from what I originally said, it's your job to provide those citations.
And I'm still waiting....

You're the one deflecting. I pointed to things that should be seen as evidence of a desire to start a civil war, to counter your lack of evidence. No reasonable person should equate a travel ban with a desire to start a civil war. Now, if you have evidence that people in Portland are actually saying they want to start a civil war, then you'd have something.

Do you?

 

[GoldenBoy89]

You missed the pointvof. "four legs good, two legs bad",
though now you have added the absurd "one side
constantly clamouring".

That’s because one side is constantly clamoring about civil war. Maybe you haven’t noticed it but I’ve been hearing them say this stuff for years now.

Thankfully, they seem to be mostly all talk and no action. Most people these days don’t have what it takes to engage in armed conflict with their neighbors and friends. Thankfully.