LOCAL and Florida Politics

[jrs2]

Val & Marco hashed it out.  Marco cited to legislation he was involved in passing, and Val just called him a liar, again and again.  I think she would have been more effective if she just showed Marco's voting record or non-voting record that proved he was a liar.  So now, the State sees in practice the fruit of the extremist tree that was portrayed in prior campaign ads.   Campaigns don't occur in a vacuum without direction from the top.  

[JFW657]

2 hours ago, jrs2 said:

Val & Marco hashed it out.  Marco cited to legislation he was involved in passing, and Val just called him a liar, again and again.  I think she would have been more effective if she just showed Marco's voting record or non-voting record that proved he was a liar.  So now, the State sees in practice the fruit of the extremist tree that was portrayed in prior campaign ads.   Campaigns don't occur in a vacuum without direction from the top.  

Extremism as in, no right to abortion even in cases of rape and incest? 

[spenser1058]

Let’s all sing!

https://youtu.be/wxiMrvDbq3s

America’s Progressive Anthem!
 

[jrs2]

1 hour ago, JFW657 said:

Extremism as in, no right to abortion even in cases of rape and incest? 

last I checked, isn't it a 14 week deal?  3 1/2 months to decide whether or not to have an abortion?  

[jack]

7 minutes ago, jrs2 said:

last I checked, isn't it a 14 week deal?  3 1/2 months to decide whether or not to have an abortion?  

15 weeks based on the new law with no exceptions afterwards from my understanding. 

Edited October 19, 2022 by jack

[jrs2]

1 hour ago, JFW657 said:

Extremism as in, no right to abortion even in cases of rape and incest? 

for the record, when the law was passed I told lady friends of mine I thought it was odd that there was no exception, like one of these teenage girls forced into marital servitude in a cult where they can't escape within 15 weeks, for example.  I had another female colleague tell me point blank that she felt that you should have your sh!t together and decide whether you want to have an abortion within 15 weeks.  

I dunno.  I don't have a womb.  However, if I knocked someone up I would make sure they got one before 15 weeks, definitely within 6-7 weeks.

So, the ACLU suit is disingenuous.  Why would an immigrant want one when the whole point is to give birth to a kid on US soil?  Poor people can't get one at Planned Parenthood, both Black and White?  And, since the govt funds sex changes, don't they also fund abortions (or at least Planned Parenthood)?  Isn't that the whole point of Planned Parenthood?

Personally, this renewed talk of abortions p!sses me off b/c it gives fuel to Liberals' fire when finger pointing the Right.  But, I told everyone here, that it is penciled in that the Right use right to life as a war cry and that the Left use freedom of choice as theirs in an effort to split the country down the middle or close to it.  But no one wants to believe that its an orchestrated effort.

Wackadoodle signing off on this issue...for now...

[JFW657]

3 hours ago, jrs2 said:

for the record, when the law was passed I told lady friends of mine I thought it was odd that there was no exception, like one of these teenage girls forced into marital servitude in a cult where they can't escape within 15 weeks, for example.  I had another female colleague tell me point blank that she felt that you should have your sh!t together and decide whether you want to have an abortion within 15 weeks.  

I dunno.  I don't have a womb.  However, if I knocked someone up I would make sure they got one before 15 weeks, definitely within 6-7 weeks.

So, the ACLU suit is disingenuous.  Why would an immigrant want one when the whole point is to give birth to a kid on US soil?  Poor people can't get one at Planned Parenthood, both Black and White?  And, since the govt funds sex changes, don't they also fund abortions (or at least Planned Parenthood)?  Isn't that the whole point of Planned Parenthood?

Personally, this renewed talk of abortions p!sses me off b/c it gives fuel to Liberals' fire when finger pointing the Right.  But, I told everyone here, that it is penciled in that the Right use right to life as a war cry and that the Left use freedom of choice as theirs in an effort to split the country down the middle or close to it.  But no one wants to believe that its an orchestrated effort.

Wackadoodle signing off on this issue...for now...

Some girls, especially younger ones don't even know they ARE pregnant by 15 weeks.

But it's still beside the point.

If a woman is raped or the victim of incest, she should have up to the point when the fetus is viable outside the womb to decide to end the pregnancy.

Also, (and I can't believe I even have to explain this) if you "knocked someone up", it wouldn't be up to you to "make sure they got one before 15 weeks".

What a neanderthal thing to even say.

What would you do, pull a Herschel Walker on her?

Maybe slap her around until she gave in? Drag her to the clinic by her hair? Order her to obey your supreme command because you're the man? 

That was one of the most obtuse statements I've ever read by anyone anywhere. 

Oh, wait.... your next comment about the only reason why immigrants have babies was equally A&W Root Beer commercial-esque. 

[jrs2]

12 hours ago, JFW657 said:

Some girls, especially younger ones don't even know they ARE pregnant by 15 weeks.

But it's still beside the point.

If a woman is raped or the victim of incest, she should have up to the point when the fetus is viable outside the womb to decide to end the pregnancy.

Also, (and I can't believe I even have to explain this) if you "knocked someone up", it wouldn't be up to you to "make sure they got one before 15 weeks".

What a neanderthal thing to even say.

What would you do, pull a Herschel Walker on her?

Maybe slap her around until she gave in? Drag her to the clinic by her hair? Order her to obey your supreme command because you're the man? 

That was one of the most obtuse statements I've ever read by anyone anywhere. 

Oh, wait.... your next comment about the only reason why immigrants have babies was equally A&W Root Beer commercial-esque. 

Aren’t we talking about deciding to have an abortion versus keeping the kid? It was in that context, you know it, everybody knows it.  

And, it takes two to tango.  Last I checked, at least presently before the Left eradicates gender completely, the human species takes a female and a male to propagate.  Men have no less equal rights to procreation issues than women do.  Deal with it.  Your stance is the man should be at the woman completely (like they aren’t already in society).  But the man is also an affected party.

“Affected?” Well, guess what, until they change the child support laws so that guys aren’t on the hook to raise a kid until age 18yo, then, guys have equal say in what happens with the pregnancy, especially in cases where the woman is trying to get pregnant to either snatch a guy thru marriage or just have their payday for 18 years; like single women aren’t already getting government support for each kid that drops out of them (speaking from personal knowledge).

Guess what, this isn’t a GOP concept.  Guys are affected by this BS that are liberal as well (See for reference: reality).

You can’t have it both ways.  You can’t sit there on one hand and say the ultimate choice rests with the woman, so that, the guy either loses his kid (unwillingly) to an abortion doctor, or, in the alternative, the guy (who doesn’t want a kid) is on the hook financially for 18 years.  Or, in the case of green cards, the intent is to get knocked up and have a birth on US soil for immigration purposes.  You think I’m commenting in a vacuum on either of these points? Please.  I’ve seen enough and keep seeing it.

Oh, and not to mention the ‘get knocked up before my husband leaves me’ tricks women play as well.  Yeah, I know women and women talk.  But I’m sorry if that goes against YOUR adopted Liberal or whatever narrative, or doesn’t comport with Anderson Cooper’s queefs, because that is what’s going on in society and has been going on for generations.

Edited October 20, 2022 by jrs2

[JFW657]

1 hour ago, jrs2 said:

Aren’t we talking about deciding to have an abortion versus keeping the kid? It was in that context, you know it, everybody knows it.  

And, it takes two to tango.  Last I checked, at least presently before the Left eradicates gender completely, the human species takes a female and a male to propagate.  Men have no less equal rights to procreation issues than women do.  Deal with it.  Your stance is the man should be at the woman completely (like they aren’t already in society).  But the man is also an affected party.

“Affected?” Well, guess what, until they change the child support laws so that guys aren’t on the hook to raise a kid until age 18yo, then, guys have equal say in what happens with the pregnancy, especially in cases where the woman is trying to get pregnant to either snatch a guy thru marriage or just have their payday for 18 years; like single women aren’t already getting government support for each kid that drops out of them (speaking from personal knowledge).

Guess what, this isn’t a GOP concept.  Guys are affected by this BS that are liberal as well (See for reference: reality).

You can’t have it both ways.  You can’t sit there on one hand and say the ultimate choice rests with the woman, so that, the guy either loses his kid (unwillingly) to an abortion doctor, or, in the alternative, the guy (who doesn’t want a kid) is on the hook financially for 18 years.  Or, in the case of green cards, the intent is to get knocked up and have a birth on US soil for immigration purposes.  You think I’m commenting in a vacuum on either of these points? Please.  I’ve seen enough and keep seeing it.

Oh, and not to mention the ‘get knocked up before my husband leaves me’ tricks women play as well.  Yeah, I know women and women talk.  But I’m sorry if that goes against YOUR adopted Liberal or whatever narrative, or doesn’t comport with Anderson Cooper’s queefs, because that is what’s going on in society and has been going on for generations.

Nothing funnier than an angry incel on a women hating tirade!!!!   

You my friend, are literally a fountain of indignant disinformation, factual inaccuracy and hypocritical inconsistency.

On one hand, you support candidates who want to end all abortions completely, then you go off on an angry rant about how guys should have equal say in abortion decisions based on their willingness or lack of willingness to support the child. 

Regarding your claim that "guys have equal say in what happens with the pregnancy", in Planned Parenthood of Central Missouri v. Danforth v. Danforth....

"The court struck down the provisions of the statute that required spousal and parental consent to obtain an abortion. 

In addressing the issue of spousal consent, the Court upheld the lower court's decision that just as the state could not regulate or proscribe abortion during the first 12 weeks of pregnancy nor could the state "delegate to a spouse veto power.""

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_Parenthood_of_Central_Missouri_v._Danforth

Also....

So from a legal perspective, your argument, once again, falls flat on its face.

For all the right's blather about keeping the government out of people's personal lives, you seem to think that the law should be able to discern what a woman's motives were for getting pregnant (excuse me, "knocked up" to put it in terms you can relate to) and give the guy who had sex with her an equal or better say in her abortion decision, even if HIS motive for forcing her to have one, is purely rooted in his own financial interest vis-a-vis not wanting to pay child support.

IOW, for all your fake concern about the right to life of the unborn, when you're on the hook to help support the child post birth, your money is more important than the child. 

What you are refusing to acknowledge is the fact that the pregnancy is occuring inside of HER, and as such SHE has the overriding interest in how to proceed with it. 

Your financial self interest comes in a distant second place (if that) to a living breathing child's need to be financially supported.

If a guy doesn't want to get stuck paying child support for 18 years, he needs to be more careful and responsible about his sexual encounters.

Simple as that.

Or as one friend who was in that same situation back in the early 80's put it to me....

"It's the screwing you get for the screwing you got." 

(Actually, he used a different word than "screwing" but in the interest of "forum decorum", I'll let you figure out what the word was. ) 

[jrs2]

1 hour ago, JFW657 said:

Nothing funnier than an angry incel on a women hating tirade!!!!   

You my friend, are literally a fountain of indignant disinformation, factual inaccuracy and hypocritical inconsistency.

On one hand, you support candidates who want to end all abortions completely, then you go off on an angry rant about how guys should have equal say in abortion decisions based on their willingness or lack of willingness to support the child. 

Regarding your claim that "guys have equal say in what happens with the pregnancy", in Planned Parenthood of Central Missouri v. Danforth v. Danforth....

"The court struck down the provisions of the statute that required spousal and parental consent to obtain an abortion. 

In addressing the issue of spousal consent, the Court upheld the lower court's decision that just as the state could not regulate or proscribe abortion during the first 12 weeks of pregnancy nor could the state "delegate to a spouse veto power.""

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_Parenthood_of_Central_Missouri_v._Danforth

Also....

So from a legal perspective, your argument, once again, falls flat on its face.

For all the right's blather about keeping the government out of people's personal lives, you seem to think that the law should be able to discern what a woman's motives were for getting pregnant (excuse me, "knocked up" to put it in terms you can relate to) and give the guy who had sex with her an equal or better say in her abortion decision, even if HIS motive for forcing her to have one, is purely rooted in his own financial interest vis-a-vis not wanting to pay child support.

IOW, for all your fake concern about the right to life of the unborn, when you're on the hook to help support the child post birth, your money is more important than the child. 

What you are refusing to acknowledge is the fact that the pregnancy is occuring inside of HER, and as such SHE has the overriding interest in how to proceed with it. 

Your financial self interest comes in a distant second place (if that) to a living breathing child's need to be financially supported.

If a guy doesn't want to get stuck paying child support for 18 years, he needs to be more careful and responsible about his sexual encounters.

Simple as that.

Or as one friend who was in that same situation back in the early 80's put it to me....

"It's the screwing you get for the screwing you got." 

(Actually, he used a different word than "screwing" but in the interest of "forum decorum", I'll let you figure out what the word was. ) 

Face it, you're just a denialist; you deny anything that challenges your Leftist belief system.  On this issue with abortion, what I said or meant is men should have equal say.  Court of public opinion, right? Well, that was mine, regardless of your legal research.  . 

Oh, I don't hate women by any stretch like you claim.  Like I said it takes two to tango.  So if it takes two to tango, then it should take two to make that decision, or, overturn the child support laws.  Maybe the government you love so much should pay the mother to raise the kid to 18yo instead of paying for people unhappy in their skin to have sex changes.  There isn't one man in this country that has heterosexual sex that would disagree on changing that law.  Any man that does is a Leftist partisan hypocrite (that doesn't want to tick off his dating pool).  Shoot, even gay friends of mine snicker at all the problems heterosexuals have to deal with when  dealing with women, which is a far cry from what they do at Hank's, Bar Codes, or the Bath House.  And they are 100% correct.

And don't even...  Every one of those scenarios I wrote about above is  a fact of life.    To deny any of that just shows how ignorant you are about what goes on in society on a daily basis.  

And you are again a hypocrite.  A child's needs to be financially supported?  One minute you're for killing them, pro abortion, now you want them supported too? So you take the woman completely out of the equation and label her a victim, right?  And therefore needs to be compensated and/or protected?  Unbelievable.  Hollywood has even depicted these situations where women "trap" men  for decades and you turn a blind eye to it just to push your Leftist rhetoric that supports the "victim.". After all, the Left needs "victims" and where none exist it creates them, otherwise it has no logical purpose to exist.    

And like I stated, women that trick men and get pregnant should not have the benefit from the pregnancy that the law currently affords them.  There are so many women that I know that are disgusted at that notion.  Yeah, a kid needs to be supported. but you cannot get off Scott free for tricking a guy into impregnating you.  The real victims are men, both Black and White.  So, if you're a White male hater, you are way off on who get's hit the hardest in society.

...Which brings us back to abortion.  I am against banning it and said as much in my original comment that you mischaracterized.

[spenser1058]

More disquieting news from Tampa Bay’s attempt to step up regional transit options:

http://www.tampabay.com/news/transportation/2022/10/21/tampa-bay-transit-agency-heads-derailment/

From The Tampa Bay Times

After Hillsborough County’s second attempt at a transportation tax was struck down, now it also appears that TBARTA, the regional transit authority, is about to disband.

Meanwhile, Central Florida’s attempts at regional transit are faring a bit better, with local leaders (Lake County being a glaring exception) from Volusia, Seminole, Orange and Osceola (plus Orlando) working together on projects like the Sunshine Corridor.

 

[spenser1058]

Remember when a poster here on UP Orlando insisted after the Dobbs decision that DeSantis wouldn’t go further with more restrictions on birth after the election?

Well, his staff is already gearing up to do just that:

https://www.news-journalonline.com/story/news/politics/2022/10/21/democrats-ron-desantis-should-detail-abortion-law-plans-roe-wade-dobbs-heartbeat-bill/10561572002/

From The News Journal

[jack]

15 hours ago, spenser1058 said:

Remember when a poster here on UP Orlando insisted after the Dobbs decision that DeSantis wouldn’t go further with more restrictions on birth after the election?

Well, his staff is already gearing up to do just that:

https://www.news-journalonline.com/story/news/politics/2022/10/21/democrats-ron-desantis-should-detail-abortion-law-plans-roe-wade-dobbs-heartbeat-bill/10561572002/

From The News Journal

I was that poster. And the article is speculative. He is being mum because it is the smart thing to do politically. 

[jrs2]

here's a little something that has to do with the race baiting that Liberals do regarding the issue of mandating voter ID's at the polling place.  Wow, weird concept; actually making someone prove they are who they say you are to avoid any voter fraud.  Here, a bunch of "students" think they have all the answers; quoting the pamphlets they get from the Left on how racist voter ID's are.  After they give their uninformed opinions, a bunch of Black New Yorkers are asked questions about whether or not they themselves have ID's, whether they know where the local DMV is, and whether they think it's racist to ask for your ID at a polling place.  Look at the contrasting views between a bunch of white Liberal do-gooder ignorant student cause-heads versus actual people in the working world (and students) that are Black:

 

[spenser1058]

The West Orange Chamber of Commerce supports the OC transportation tax:

https://www.orangeobserver.com/article/my-view-vote-yes-for-transportation

From The West Orange Times Observer 
 

[aent]

Thankfully, it looks like sanity has prevailed and a court has officially struck down the appeal of the Orange County rent control measures that the democrats were trying to pass on the upcoming election ballot. According to the democrats own consultant, the democrats were pushing a measure that “may impede the objective of speeding overall housing deliveries as well as create a number of unintended consequences,” The housing crisis and rents have already skyrocketed as a result of the democrats continuing the eviction moratorium, which resulted in a massively reducing housing supply, and many people getting in trouble by not paying their rent, even if they could afford to because they wouldn't get in trouble if they failed to do so, discouraging new construction of rental properties.

The democrats made this mess, gave us massive inflation, and now we need to vote them out to get out of this problem over the next couple weeks. It appears that with the absolutely abysmal performance by democrats in the debate, polling has shifted in the republican favor, so perhaps our republic, can, infact, be saved.

Edited October 28, 2022 by aent

[jack]

8 hours ago, aent said:

Thankfully, it looks like sanity has prevailed and a court has officially struck down the appeal of the Orange County rent control measures that the democrats were trying to pass on the upcoming election ballot. According to the democrats own consultant, the democrats were pushing a measure that “may impede the objective of speeding overall housing deliveries as well as create a number of unintended consequences,” The housing crisis and rents have already skyrocketed as a result of the democrats continuing the eviction moratorium, which resulted in a massively reducing housing supply, and many people getting in trouble by not paying their rent, even if they could afford to because they wouldn't get in trouble if they failed to do so, discouraging new construction of rental properties.

The democrats made this mess, gave us massive inflation, and now we need to vote them out to get out of this problem over the next couple weeks. It appears that with the absolutely abysmal performance by democrats in the debate, polling has shifted in the republican favor, so perhaps our republic, can, infact, be saved.

Housing and rent inflation is bipartisan. You see it in the bluest of big cities and the reddest of suburban and rural areas. California is trying to force local jurisdictions to be more accepting of housing but even they are running into roadblocks. There is a town in Maine that has a republican mayor that is big on adding new housing to the city. His opposition is people of all stripes. 

You see folks in red areas that are opposed to new housing and they sound like they have forgotten about property rights. Blue area residents opposed to housing forget they care about equity. It's a mess and everyone is to blame. 

[aent]

16 hours ago, jack said:

Housing and rent inflation is bipartisan. You see it in the bluest of big cities and the reddest of suburban and rural areas. California is trying to force local jurisdictions to be more accepting of housing but even they are running into roadblocks. There is a town in Maine that has a republican mayor that is big on adding new housing to the city. His opposition is people of all stripes. 

You see folks in red areas that are opposed to new housing and they sound like they have forgotten about property rights. Blue area residents opposed to housing forget they care about equity. It's a mess and everyone is to blame. 

Can you show any areas in the country where republicans are proposing so devastating like rent control? While I know there is some republicans who oppose new developments as part of NIMBYism and it is a no doubt bipartisan effort to ban people from having homes as part of an environmentalist movement, its not even comparable levels.

[spenser1058]

Pot dispensaries at Florida Circle K stores? Can legal recreational weed be far behind?

https://www.orlandosentinel.com/business/fl-bz-circle-k-legal-recreational-weed-in-florida-20221030-dmuho57xbzfslmhywq4ou2jpam-story.html

From The Sentinel 

I guess now they’ll be saying “Oh Thank Heaven!”’at a new store…

Edited October 30, 2022 by spenser1058

[jack]

On 10/29/2022 at 4:31 PM, aent said:

Can you show any areas in the country where republicans are proposing so devastating like rent control? While I know there is some republicans who oppose new developments as part of NIMBYism and it is a no doubt bipartisan effort to ban people from having homes as part of an environmentalist movement, its not even comparable levels.

No. But rent control is not the only mechanism to stop new development. Euclidian zoning, unrealistic design standards, out of control planning boards, lack of transparency, planning departments that are under staffed, all impact jurisdictions big and small republican and liberal. 

[aent]

4 hours ago, jack said:

No. But rent control is not the only mechanism to stop new development. Euclidian zoning, unrealistic design standards, out of control planning boards, lack of transparency, planning departments that are under staffed, all impact jurisdictions big and small republican and liberal. 

I gotta say, I work in the industry dealing with this, and while there are some examples in republican jurisdictions with these issues, it is super consistently less bad, and more minor then any democrat department.

[jrs2]

I've got absolutely nothing to add to any conversation, other than to say hello to all.

[spenser1058]

2 hours ago, jrs2 said:

I've got absolutely nothing to add to any conversation, other than to say hello to all.

Hi!

[codypet]

I'm gonna go on a rant here, but it shouldn't be so hard to see where judges stand on issues, and why does the Sentinel have their political coverage behind a paywall?  I feel like its like having the damn severe weather alerts behind a paywall.

[spenser1058]

4 minutes ago, codypet said:

I'm gonna go on a rant here, but it shouldn't be so hard to see where judges stand on issues, and why does the Sentinel have their political coverage behind a paywall?  I feel like its like having the damn severe weather alerts behind a paywall.

The Sentinel paywall I can’t help with but judges get into ethics problems if they talk about issues. They also can’t disclose party although if you look at their bios you can sometimes figure it out

Sentinel judicial endorsements (or lack thereof mostly on SCOFL):

Florida Supreme Court: • Yes: Jorge Labarga; • No: John Couriel, Jamie Grosshans, Charles Canady and Ricky Polston

5th District Appeals Court: • Yes: Jay Cohen, James A. Edwards, Brian D. Lambert, Dan Traver, Carrie Ann Wozniak; • No: Mary Nardella

Seminole County Judge, Group 5: • Ken Lester

Edited November 2, 2022 by spenser1058