This (L&S) is trying to make his point the hard way, remove Federal authority to regulate foods that do not cross state lines, by Constitutional amendment, which virtually guarantees the proposal is only for posturing, rather than passage. The case before the SCOTUS probably has a higher percentage of being a “JC” win, and with much wider scope.
1 Like
I dunno. I think he’d have a better case if the one he’s pursuing hadn’t already been linked to two outbreaks of food born illness from a non-compliant vendor.
“Oh, you’ve made dozens of people sick? Wait! Let’s make it legal to keep doing it. Then the freeeee market will take over. It might be too late for your dead victims, but it’ll be good with Adam Smith.”
3 Likes
As we see. repeatedly, in Shiny-land, ideology takes priority over facts and common sense.
According to the “news”, SCOTUS today ruled that Texas immigration law can take priority over Federal immigration law. If Texas is “freee” to impose stricter laws, then the “sanctuary cities” are equally entitled to take a more lax approach to immigration than Federal law requires. Seriously, do people give a moment’s thought and reflection on what they are saying?
Steve
2 Likes
Who do you think people are? Founding Fathers from the line of Benjamin Franklin? We don’t need no stinkin’ thought and reflection. We could use a “restart” button on this otherwise wonderful video game we are playing. I am bored with the current scenario.
d fb
2 Likes
Just give dip$hit a tax cut he will never get and call it freedom.
I wonder who would sell that story.