David Simon will pull upcoming HBO series from Texas over abortion law

David Simon will pull upcoming HBO series from Texas over abortion law


I’m wondering if Harjo will pill Reservation Dogs since Oklahoma will have the same laws starting Nov 1


How is this the first I’m hearing of this


A Florida legislator introduced a bill that's basically a copy of the Texas one. E: https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2022/167/?Tab=BillText


It is gross that they struck out “fetus” and replaced it with “unborn child.” Strike that kind of science vocabulary but leave in “gestation sac” and “fetal heartbeat” just to make sure it isn’t too dumbed down. I get that it’s all about controlling women but to what end? Just grasping at power for power’s sake?


Prior to 11 weeks gestation, the term is "embryo". Fetus/Fetal period is the term for at 11 weeks to ~40 weeks. I'm assuming embryo sounds less like baby so the supporters of bill are trying to do everything they can to support human development through birth. After birth, they won't give a crap, won't provide food, healthcare or education. The funding for that gets slashed. In a sci-fi version of the bill, the Gentry pass this law to keep an ongoing supply of people to man a workforce, a military and supply servants.


Bro that isnt the sci fi version; its the reality


To clarify, if they were doing “everything they can to support human development through birth,” they would also support healthcare and economic support for the pregnant mother. This is just about punishing women and keeping people poor


They should start clinics geared towards soon to be mother's to help them along and plan for Parenthood. They could call it Planned Parenthood, no wait... Yeah, they don't wanna do that.


There are plenty of people that truly believe life begins at conception. I believe the potential life begins at conception. The living human being trumps the potential. I've tried to keep an open mind on opinions but not at the expense of others. l equate that stance to how I would react if someone was shooting up hospital nurseries. So I give those people the benefit of the doubt. Even then I agree the legislation is disgusting. When they used the term "host body", my first thought was "hosts can kick a guest out". I mean this is the state that has a stand your ground law to trespassers on your property, no?


And you can believe life begins at conception and also understand that you can't *make* a woman use her body to support that life, just like you can't *make* a Doctor give you his organ to save your life. The two are not mutually exclusive even if you believe that that sucks for the fetus. It's been considered medically ethical since forever. It's the same thing for vaccinations: I can't tie you down to a table and stick it in you if you don't give permission. I can think you're a moron for not wanting to get vaccinated, but you do have to respect a person's right to not want something in their body. By the same token an abortion is the person's right to choose to have it. You can think that it is monstrous to want to kill something that you consider a life that has human rights, but you can't make somebody use their body to do something they don't want it to do.


It's meat for fascists and an effective way to restrict economic mobility.


This is exactly it. They need to continue to feed the war machine and need fuel.


Who else is going to work the taco Bell's? It's a crisis! We need poor people!! /S


People can get mad when I say "they care about the births so they can die for the military" but. It feels true. My best friend's dad was drafted to Vietnam at 19. Was shot and paralyzed. Died a few years ago after shitty VA care, because it was cheaper for the govt for him to die, because they could reduce the monthly payout to his widow by like $8k a month. It was cheaper for him to die than for the government to give a shit about him. So yeah, it feels like they care about the births so they can die for the military.




>Just grasping at power for power’s sake? Yes. It's a way to assert power over another. I'm just learning some people are really wired this way and I'm seeing the world in a new lens. It makes some incomprehensible actions finally make sense.


Women make up half of the population. Stripping them of rights right now is easy because these dumb fucks consider them "host bodies", and they're 'backed' by their religion. The more they can oppress people along lines of sex, race, etc. The easier it is to distract people from the real shady shit that's going on.


But there's a shit load of women who are down with this law


So much for separation of church and state


Non US person here. There is no real separation of church and state in the US. When your money has "in god we trust", most of your legislators swear on the bible and you hammer the pledge of allegiance on kids, which contains the words "one nation under God"; that's not separation of church and state. It may be because I'm from a French-speaking background and, due to history, French speakers (even outside of France) tend to have a notably different view of what "separation of church and state" mean, but if one of our politicians even mentioned their religion during a public speech or let it influence their politics, it'd be hell on earth. Even our "Christian" parties don't talk about religion.


For what it's worth, the founding fathers of the US were more concerned with state religions and free exercise of religion than having a strictly secular government. The US constitution doesn't actually contain the phrase "separation of church and state"; that came from a letter of one of the founding fathers. Instead, it bans the creation of an official state church, and preventing the free exercise of religion. They had been part of England, and England *still* has a bunch of seats in its legislature reserved for Anglican bishops, and the queen is *still* the Supreme Governor of the Church of England. > you hammer the pledge of allegiance on kids, which contains the words "one nation under God" Interestingly, 'under god' was added in 1954, literally dividing the phrase "one nation, indivisible".


Basically all of that is relatively new. Nearly every one of those was introduced during the cold war in the 1950s as propaganda against the USSR which was seen as a "godless" country. It's honestly the same mindless "we'll do the exact opposite of whatever the other guys are doing" thinking that's causing so many problems currently. There have been some attempts to remove all of it and some mild success, but there's still a long way to go.


You're not wrong, but 70 years ago is about 1/3 of the time that the US has existed, so it's pretty well established at this point


Because 40% will vote for it, 35% will vote against and 25% don't care. Same with any boneheaded policy, if you can get all the morons to vote for something then you're basically over the line.


More children born into low income families means more low skill workers, keeping the cost of labor down.


I don't even think it's a power thing. I believe it's more so these Republicans are seeing the world change around them, and because their egos are basically paper mache, this terrifies them. So rather than you know, moving the people you represent forward, they froth and flail and do everything they can to slow (if not reverse) any progress being made. It's truly pathetic and I believe the root of it lies in religion (since fear mongering is Christian's bread and butter). When these disgusting geriatrics feel lost and confused they just turn back to the bible and justify their actions using archaic nonsensical bullshit. It honestly would not surprise me if some of these southern Republicans start pushing to build **MORE** statues honoring their piece of shit Confederate ancestors, since we know the progress being made through BLM terrifies them too.


Gotta have lots of poor babies for the military industrial complex to turn into dead soldiers in the name of profit


Is america great again yet?


When Texas happened, I immediately started planning my exit strategy from Ohio. I'm sure we'll be next.


Of Reservation Dogs or Stitt hating women?


Of the new Oklahoma law


Figured all of the red states would do it after the supreme court action.


Inaction, really. The conservatives on the court along with the bill makers seem to think they're really clever trying to kill abortion the way the Texas bill was set up. Part of that was not having to have the Supreme Court rule against abortion itself.


We need $10,000 bounties per violation of state workplace was, corporate wage theft (the biggest crime in the U.S. by monetary value), securities fraud, and environmental regulation lapses. The Supreme Court will strike these laws down with emergency orders immediately, and we can end this farce of pretending that the Supreme Court is a vaunted independent branch of government, instead of a craven tool of tenuous minorities that hang on to power with extreme voter suppression and gerrymandering. The instant the justices strike down a blue state citizen-based swamp the civil courts law, such that no one can legitimately sue anyone for anything, then it is time to call for an 11, 13, 15, 17, then 19 justice Supreme Court. This farce of justice under the rule of law and established jurisprudence is already dead and gone. We should constitutionally kill the facade and acknowledge that the three branches of government are the gerrymandered Senate, House, and Executive, and that the law and jurisprudence mean absolutely NOTHING.


We will see. Illinois has a bill in the works that flips the TX legislation on its head and offers a $10k award to anyone who reports DV or rape. Cannot wait to see SCOTUS strike down a bounty bill for rapists but uphold one for women seeking potentially life-saving abortion access.


You underestimate its power of hypocrisy. Did you hear the tragedy of Darth McConnell? It is not a story a Democrat would tell you.


I don’t like Darth McConnell. He’s coarse and rough and irritating… and he gets into everything.


This was the problem with the TX law. In trying to put the onus on *others* to clamp down on abortions, no one could sue the state as they've done in the past. The clever countermove is to create a similar law that encourages people to turn others in for other crimes. It will force the SCOTUS to rule on the law they just kinda ignored or "wouldn't block." This might also work with turning people in who are buying guns illegally, or not following gun laws to the letter.


I mean why even have bounties for something illegal? Abortion is legal and (theoretically) constitutionally protected but Texas still made the law. A liberal state should apparently be able to impose bounties for "aiding and abetting" other rights, like say purchasing a firearm? Would love to see how SCOTUS reacts to that one.


Inb4 'Roe v Wade' isn't a constitutionally enumerated right, just a SCOTUS decision. Personally, I'd like to see that changed.


The government recognizes that the right to free speech is protected under the first amendment. That said, we will be paying a $10,000 bounty to any private citizen who sues anyone talking shit about the great state of Texas in civil court.




Wait. What the fuck. Passing the SB about making it okay to relinquish a baby in a box for up to 30 days instead of 7 just says that fuckface is clearly aware that preventing access to abortion will result in more unwanted and abandoned children but it's just peachy. I hate the governor. Absolutely loathe.


Fodder for the military. Trap the poor people in poverty. That’s always been the goal.


Because it's not the same as the Texas law. It's just a standard fetal heartbeat bill, which have been enjoined then struck down 100 times. Texas's is different because it gives the policing authority to everyone, not just state officials, which means you can't just sue the state to stop implementation of the law.


> it gives the policing authority to everyone, not just state officials, You're incorrect on one thing there. The state is in no way enforcing the ban. The law explicitly states that the state will not enforce or threaten any of the violations, instead it literally offloads that responsibility to civilian enforcement (civil court where the state is not a party). I am pointing this out, not as a supporter of it, but to highlight just how crazy it is. I have never heard of a law wherein civilians are solely responsible for enforcement. [The Texas Tribune when through the law and did a nice write up on exactly how it works. It's messed up.](https://www.texastribune.org/2021/09/10/texas-abortion-law-ban-enforcement/)


And it creates a horrible, horrible, scary precedent. Today it’s abortion but next week it could be sodomy or cursing or jazz music. This kind of authoritarianism is so scary.


There are plenty of laws that are enforced solely by civilians -- to give some examples, class actions against corporations are almost always civilians suing a company for violation of a law and there are actions where the civilian can sue *for the state* (called a *Qui Tam* lawsuit) -- however, there are serious questions with the Texas law about (1) standing (someone somewhere must have been harmed) and (2) whether utilizing the court to enforce a law is effectively the same as the state enforcing something unconstitutional (*Insert Ron Howard Voice*: It is). Here's roughly how this system would work: A lawyer representing an injured party (e.g. a person, a corporation, a class representative, the state, etc.) files a lawsuit in civil court. But let's say the other side ignores the lawsuit and/or loses. What then? The court would issue a monetary judgment against the defendant. Say they don't pay? Then the court sends the police to the defendant's bank and seizes their account or repos their property. So no matter how you slice it, the state is *definitely* involved in the enforcement of the judgment (i.e. the state judge and state cops seize the defendant's money if they lose). However, the state won't throw the defendant in prison for a criminal violation. The reason lawyers everywhere are flipping out is not so much because the law allows civilians to sue to enforce something the state wants them to deal with. It's that the state would 100% be violating the constitution if it did this itself so, it should have been a no-brainer for the Supreme Court to say "no, this is clearly a law that will be put on hold (stayed) until we hear the case on the merits and decide to either strike it down or overturn *Roe v. Wade* and make all laws like this OK." Instead, the Supreme Court decided to get cute and refused to stay the new law based on a (terrible) procedural position. Some see it as signaling an end to *Roe v. Wade*. Others see it as playing partisan games. But to lawyers, it's a Supreme Court that seems willing to ruin its reputation in an incredibly foolish manner on the most divisive legal issue in America. It was dumb as shit.


So let's have blue states pass laws granting a cause of action against anyone that prevents or attempts to prevent or inhibit a woman's right to choose and make it so damages include the costs of raising the child including cost of college (tuition, books, housing, the whole kit and caboodle). Call it the tort of intentional alienation of reproductive rights.


>which means you can't just sue the state to stop implementation of the law. What can we do to stop it, then? There's no way we can have laws that aren't subject to the constitution or judicial review.


A doctor performed an abortion contrary to the new law last week, admitted it in the Washington Post on Saturday to invite a lawsuit, and was sued on Monday. Federal courts can now take up the question.


Scary part is courts don't enjoin laws. They enjoin the enforcement of laws by state officials. Courts can just enjoin this plaintiff and leave the law. Ugh.


> and was sued on Monday The plaintiff here is supportive of abortion rights, but is trying to force the legal process. https://www.npr.org/2021/09/20/1039122713/doctor-texas-abortion-sued Edit: Apparently there are two separate suits, and both have this intent.


It has to go to court. Which it will because there is a Texas doctor who performed an abortion past 6 weeks. He has been sued by at least two individuals- both with strange legal backgrounds but both hoping to test the case in court. The problem with the law is standing: no private citizen has any legal standing whatsoever- the entire court system is based on standing, you have to demonstrate you are a harmed party. How does anyone demonstrate that with this law? Any complainant should be laughed out of court. No one has standing to sue some random doctor or some random woman they don't know and never met.


Fight fire with fire: https://theconversation.com/how-the-satanic-temple-is-using-abortion-rituals-to-claim-religious-liberty-against-the-texas-heartbeat-bill-167755


Somehow we really manage to fly under the radar here in Oklahoma… We have some fucking insane laws, but usually right after someone else does the same thing, so we sneak through without fanfare. It’s a pretty successful tactic unfortunately.


Yeah as an Oklahoman I haven't heard of that one. It doesn't surprise me.


I don't know how these things work, would OK law apply to the reservations? Could people go to tribal lands for abortions?


For decades now, tribal healthcare has effectively been prohibited from performing abortion services thanks to the [Hyde Amendment](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyde_Amendment). Tribal healthcare (considered a Right, not a privilege, by most of us Natives, but that's another conversation), is funded by federal money. Given the Hyde Amendment, Native women have been effectively denied access to abortion services. Thankfully, Biden may have essentially ended the Hyde Amendment by removing the language from the 2022 budget, but I don't imagine we've yet seen that reflected on tribal lands and funds. We'll see.


Religion is a cancer.


It’s too close to it’s TV term. Go with the Show Vac with blender attachment.


The flowbee?


David has been a journalist and writer and has been consistent in his purpose for years: "Discussing whether he hopes The Wire (2002) will cause reforms of the institutions portrayed in the series) I'll tell you what, this would be enough for me: The next time the drug czar or Ashcroft or any of these guys stands up and declares, 'With a little fine-tuning, with a few more prison cells, and a few more lawyers, a few more cops, a little better armament, and another omnibus crime bill that adds 15 more death-penalty statutes, we can win the war on drugs' -- if a slightly larger percentage of the American population looks at him and goes, 'You are so full of shit' ... that would be gratifying." https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0800108/bio#quotes


"You are so full of sheeeeeeeeeeiittt" FTFY


Haven't watched it in years, still say sheeeeeeiitt every so often


I live in Baltimore and have never seen the show, but still say sheeeeeeiiitt.


Specifically he won’t be filming in Texas. He was planning to film, at least in part, in Texas.


Yeah I read the headline as they weren’t going to stream it in Texas somehow. Now THAT would make some waves.


Geofencing would work quite well.


The fun part is it wouldn't affect anyone remotely educated who can use A VPN


Yeah but it’s Texas. Geofencing would work quite well


https://coloradoencyclopedia.org/article/amendment-2 In the early 90s Colorado passed amendment 2, prohibited the state from enacting antidiscrimination protections for gays, lesbians, and bisexuals. “Hollywood” stopped filming in Colorado for a few years after that. It didn’t change the law, but it did take a stand.


Frasier was going to be set in Denver, but moved to Seattle because of that.


It ain’t actually Boulder in “The Stand” tv miniseries either.


>It didn’t change the law Of course it didn't. Why would we expect it to do so? The only way to change the law is for people to stop voting these shitheads into power or to strengthen the definition of what is a human right in the entire country. Corporations and public/notorious figures can't help with this and we should stop expecting them to. Any money or image issues caused by actions like this one are only temporary and while they might hit some individuals pretty hard, they matter little on the time scale that a state operates on.


That’s not always true; there have been cases where corporations have successfully influenced public policy and law by threatening to take their business elsewhere. A notable example being HB2 in North Carolina (barring transgender people from using the bathroom of the gender they identify as). Films and TV shows pulled out of the state, musicians cancelled concerts, PayPal cancelled an expansion into the state, and the NBA relocated their All-Star game from the state, among other economic effects. Probably most effective was the NCAA announcing it would not select NC to host championship games for 5 years unless the law was repealed. A few days later, the NCAA gave the state a 48 hour deadline to repeal the law, which the state essentially did.


>Corporations and public/notorious figures can't help with this Individual figures maybe, but don't corporations do that whole lobbying thing? Now I understand why they don't bother, but they could bother. They just kinda don't.


What you wrote could not be more wrong. 1. Lobbying is not voting. $3.49 billion in 2020 because it shapes legislation. 2. When corporations threatened to pull out of North Carolina, the state repealed that silly bathroom law a few years back. 3. The promise of doing business within is also powerful. Cities and states forgo taxes and make special legal exceptions to woo large employers. If a government is willing to give away so much to attract employers, why would you expect they would not also move to keep those employers? https://www.statista.com/statistics/257337/total-lobbying-spending-in-the-us/


I love how the minute Colorado legalized cannabis, it’s like the whole state took a hit and went “wait, what are we doing? These people aren’t hurting anybody, maybe we should just take it a bit easy and start helping people more.”


Colorado used to be VERY conservative, but it was a more libertarian brand of conservatism (like New Hampshire, or at least that's how New Hampshire wants to be seen). The states demographics have slowly been changing, but cannabis legalization really kicked the door open for the state becoming solidly blue.


Film it Toronto. Apparently it looks like everywhere.


The central interior of BC stands in very well for the American Southwest. Specifically Ashcroft and Kamloops have been used in many movies and TV shows.


Southern Alberta is used a lot. We have many different interesting locations. Mountains, forest, prairie, bandlands, hoodoos, lakes, beaches. Canada in general has it all.


Just have to change the light filter on the camera


What color is Toronto color?


Maple syrup


I’d say like a dark sky blue


It's Vancouver aka Hollywood North that can stand in for any location.


They used many parts of BC to film the tv show Smallville back in the days. A show supposed to be taking place in Kansas. You could see typical northwestern evergreen-covered mountains in the background quite often.


I used to get to fly to different cities and countries for a company I worked for, and I loved to sample some of the local food wherever I went. Went to Toronto and we ate at a Saltgrass Steakhouse in the burbs. Coulda done that in Dallas! The only difference was a dusting of snow.


I'm from Canada, and I've never heard of adding a dusting of snow to steak before. Did it taste good?


Yep. Between Toronto and Vancouver you have almost anywhere in the world and basically all of the USA.


While I'm pleased to read this, it feels like they will just dig in because of this?


Yeah, I'm wondering if they're intentionally driving liberals out to keep the state from turning blue. Beto losing by just 3% probably spooked them.


To be fair, Beto was running against Ted Cruz, one of the most unpopular polticians in the United States. In Texas, Trump won reelection in 2020 by 5.5%, and Cornyn won reelection by just shy of 10%. And those numbers were with the highest voter turnout in Texas election history. I don't think Democrats really have a chance of winning a major seat in Texas anytime soon unfortunately.


You are correct. Unless it’s a moderate liberal with redneck creds


Matthew McConaughey? He's on the sidelines of UT games, he's outwardly Christian, but socially liberal.


I'm no Christian, but if Christians in America actually followed the teachings of of their Lord and Savior they'd be socially liberal too.


A Christian acting like a Christian? But that goes against everything Christians stand for


"I love Jesus" "But he....." *Shoves fingers in ears* "LALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU"


Nothing turns me off to religion more than the actions of the people claiming their religions. They prove themselves fake and their religions are just to centralize their power and money.


It’s also a way they use to make themselves feel superior to others. Basically everything is just to cause the non elites to fight amongst ourselves while the elites take and do whatever they want. Literally everything boils down to money/power eventually.


They follow the teachings of "Supply Side Jesus" not that commie Jesus of Nazareth.


I guess you can call them hypochristians.


In Norway, the former leader of the Christian Peoples Party (Krf) recently said "I don't think Jesus would have voted for Krf" Interviewer asked why not, he continued (completely unphased): "... Yeah, cause you know, Jesus was a radical, more occupied with helping people and whatnot" Sidenote: Said leader just stepped down last week due to tax evasion where he didn't pay taxes on his govt issued Oslo apartment as he on paper said he still lived with his parents. He's in his 40s. Has a wife and kids. (oh and he also kinda stepped down for leading his party into the worst election since the 1930s, leaving them with only 3 representatives in parliament... He wasn't going to at first, since he only got the position a couple of years ago or whatever, but here we are.)


Yeah. Like I said, I'm not religious, but I'd love to see someone chase some modern-day Pharisees out of their temple with a whip.


I go to mass weekly, an i'm both socially and economically liberal, but then again i'm an old school Catholic, so the nutters would hate me too, and once they kill Roe, they'll throw my fellow Papists to the curb


That’s a really interesting point. With Roe teetering, how will the GOP work the evangelicals they’ve spent decades cultivating into single issue voters into a frenzy to vote for the GOP moving forward?


Easy, they’ll claim the other side will bring Roe back.


Honestly it seems like it'll galvanize them to protect it. My hope is that all the regular tuned-out people who thought the civil rights act + Roe v Wade + gay marriage meant we lived in the safe and cozy future are finally noticing that Republicans can actually do some damage if we don't actively fight against them. You can't get people to legitimately care about things that don't directly affect them, and the ability to have an abortion really does affect *everybody* on some level. Only religious nuts want them banned. Most of the rest of us just treat it like an uncomfortable reality that is best not talked about until necessary, but I'm sure most of that reservation is tied straight back to tiptoeing around conservatives.


Isn't it the case that the Christians in Texas are enforcing their religion on the entire female population of Texas, regardless of whether they are religious or not? I'm a Brit so looking as the USA from afar.


Separation of church and state here is only a necessity when it's not Christianity


I'm just wondering if the law makers will find a way to use that to punch through this decision. Or did it end when your top court blocked the appeal against it?


The only thing our Supreme Court did was decide against hearing the case. They said that the case had to have a suitable defendant. But the law was written very specifically to say that no one working within a government entity, including law enforcement, can bring up the first charges against a woman. This is why you saw that website appear, so citizens can file complaints. In order for the United States Supreme Court to hear this, they want a woman who has been accused, and an accuser to appear before them.


Ehhh ... you can make a reasonably good case that Jesus would have been economically left-leaning. He was all about helping the poor and healing the sick, and when asked about taxes he said to render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. But when it comes to social issues like women's rights and LGBT rights, the Bible is just as backwards as you'd expect for a document that's 2000+ years old. Hell, the Bible even tacitly condones slavery. There are plenty of Christians who are progressive on those sorts of issues, but they're usually the ones who don't take the Bible quite so literally.


Alright alright alright


He could win for sure


> Trump won reelection in 2020 by 5.5% That's the closest margin in a presidential election since 1996 and is probably pretty alarming considering how important Texas is to conservatives in presidential elections. In 2016, Texas was one of just a handful of states that shifted left in the presidential election. While I don't see Texas flipping in the immediate future, especially as republicans here are doing everything they can to restrict voting in their favor, the state is still very purple.


Many people who would have traditionally voted republican would not ever vote for Trump. The Republican Party is just a mess, too many vastly different ideals, there are many conservative libertarian leaning Texans who can’t stand Abbott or Trump, but who would also never vote for a democrat.


Their primary voter base is in the process of dying off, so there’s that.


If you mean because of covid, you are right. If you meant because most of them are old white men. Then you are also right.


Latinos are Catholic conservatives.


I was at a gun show in central Texas and there was a "Latinos for Trump" group selling shirts. The shirt was red with a black stencil of Trump wearing a sombrero. It looked hilarious and awesome. If he wasn't such a nightmare of a president, I would've bought it just for the novelty. I couldn't give justify giving any money to that group though, even if the shirt was funny looking.


Eh, somewhat. As a Texan that grew up Catholic conservative, there was a lot of grief over "fake Catholics" who weren't conservative enough, typically poor Latinos that vote against the theocracy/ethnostate.


We are called “cafeteria catholics” because we just pick the things we want to believe. (and ignore those that purport that Christ said who we are supposed to be hate) (not a Texan or Latino)


Yo Sunday is wafer day in the Cathleteria you goin’?


Latinos aren't a monolith.


There's so many Mexicans in favor of trump it's infuriating. I'm speaking to my family members...


After the census though, but yeah I’ve been checking the numbers daily and they seem to be killing off their voter base. It’s so crazy.


Yeah I think Florida has more covid deaths total than the difference in votes last election so… shit’s getting real.


Yep, exactly. Keep in mind the amount of real estate that might actually open up and the people who could move in and diversify the areas too. Im spitballing but this appease the base strategy seems to be spectacularly backfiring through the mechanisms of Darwinism.


All of these properties are being bought up by a few companies. America is going to end up being a country where you only rent and never buy because everything is going to be owned by these companies.


We need legislation to end that like last year. This is going to end the middle class and just make the rich richer. I don't even know what the poor are going to do when they already struggle to pay rent.


Unfortunately a lot of the older ones "raise" their kids to end up just like them. Pretty much brainwashing them in a lot of cases. Thankfully it doesn't always work so well I see a lot of young "free thinkers" in my town who literally just say and do what their parents raised them to do, yet they have the gall to call other people "sheep" lmao


Man, I remember when “being raised by your parents to be a…” was the most effective way to ensure they grew up to NOT “be a…”


As a Democrat living in Texas, it’s killing me to see all these right wing conspiracy-theory cooks moving to the state from California. My mom is in real estate and has been working with several of these people at a time since a few months after covid started. Some of the shit she tells me about them makes me legitimately fear for her safety.


Some of my nutjob family just moved from CA to TX. One of them ended up on a ventilator almost immediately.


No shit out of basically everyone I know my wife, sister-in-law and brother-in-law and myself are the only ones who haven’t had covid. My parents, her parents, my grandparents, all of our siblings, nieces and nephews, aunts and uncles, coworkers and friends have had it. And just about all of them actively or passively ignored safety protocols. Crazy how we were the only people to strictly follow safety guidelines and also the only people to not get sick. Must be a coincidence. Edit: and no, to the dumbfucks shadow posting and pming me, not everyone I know who has had covid has survived. I know 3 people who have died, 1 who was days away from being taken off a ventilator and made a ‘miraculous’ recovery and lived (though he will be living with debilitating chronic health issues for the rest of his life). My wife’s sister and her husband are also both doing very very poorly and have been for the last 2 1/2 weeks and it isn’t looking good for them or the 5 children they would leave behind(who they also got sick).


Sorry to hear about your family, sounds a lot like mine. My cousin has been on a ventilator for 2 months now, and if he's lucky he'll eventually get off of it alive. He did manage to come out of sedation long enough to tell us Covid wasn't a joke. Too bad he didn't listen when I said that a year ago.


You know, just for the sake of perspective, I’m a liberal atheist heathen living in L.A. who got vaccinated as soon as it was available and who continued to wear a mask everywhere and I got a really nasty case of Covid in July. I didn’t have to go to the hospital but it was close. I’m mentioning this because it’s starting to sound like people are equating “had a bad case of Covid” with “being a stupid conservative who got it because they were careless and/or an anti-mask idiot”.


Yeah I managed to get covid only leaving the house for groceries and doctor appts in a well fitting KN95 mask. Mild case, but still. And I'm feeling a little shitty now and I still don't go anywhere besides those places, but with a surgical mask. If it's covid I'm gonna be pissed because natural immunity from last year, 2 shots, and just got a booster a few weeks ago.


Yeah, people are under the illusion that Californians and others are going to turn Texas blue. The people fleeing from these states are mostly red leaning people. The irony is, Texans will talk a bunch of shit about Californians moving and turning it blue. I've heard it so many times.😂😂😂🤷‍♀️🤷‍♀️🤷‍♀️ Source: Californian living in Texas.


People aren't migrating because of their views, they are migrating because they can't afford to live in CA: https://kinder.rice.edu/urbanedge/2021/03/03/californians-moving-to-texas-covid-migration


Strictly antidotal but I know 2 types of people moving to Texas from Ca. Tech guys who do have $ but their companies are moving to avoid taxes. They have all moved to Austin from SF. And people who don't want to admit they can't afford Ca anymore. They all go to Houston. Only the people moving to Austin invite me to visit fwiw.


Thanks for the antidote. Didn’t think I would make it.


It wasn’t looking good there for a while…


Did you mean “anecdotal”?


This is absolutely what they are doing


They're also going to drive companies away though. It's going to be difficult to recruit from top schools, especially those that tend to be liberal. It's going to hurt their tax revenue.


Yeah but they don't give a fuck about turning their states into shitholes. They just want power. Conservatives would happily eat shit sandwiches the rest of their life if it meant a progressive or liberal had to smell their breath.


Yeah … I’ve seen the Texas plan to maintain power. Considering how badly it did against a frost, I’m inclined to believe their “do nothing” attitude about climate change is to try to prevent their electric grid from collapsing again by hoping Texas weather gets warmer all year.


Which is funny as fuck, because winters are going to be awful when the arctic completely melts in 3 years. They're gonna get that freezing over again and again.


3 years? Got a source? I'm pro-climate action and have never seen a timeline THAT short for the Arctic.


[Wikipedia lists a prediction of as early as 2022](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arctic_sea_ice_decline), but most predictions are more conservative. Doing a linear projection of ice coverage, you're looking at ~2040 before you get consistently ice-free summers. That said, a linear projection doesn't account for increased heating from GHG emissions and decreasing albedo, so sooner is plausible.


Fuck, the IPCC outright said that we need to cut emissions by 85-90% to limit warming to 2C. They then put different scenarios on a graph. The worst case scenario is RCP8.5 and we are doing slightly worse than their worst case. And the IPCC didn't account for negative feedback-loops like permafrost melt and limestone formations releasing methane as they warm.


The levels of bad are actually much worse than scientists had predicted. They predicted a radical climate shift and they've discovered it's worse than a radical climate shift. 3 years is probably a bit hyperbolic, but definitely before the decade is out.


My girlfriend wants us to move in the next few years as to not start our family in Texas 😬 though I think I will enjoy being from Texas more than being a Texan


"If we turn blue, we'll be expected to be productive!"


It also means no more Republican presidents.


Stop, I can only get so erect.


Every little bit helps


They already dug in


Money and power are all the GOP is about. Take away money, they lose power. Let them dig in, it's their own political grave being dug.


Who cares? Let them dig in and let more people boycott the state. When their "up and coming" tech and film industry fall apart because of their archaic laws they'll either come around or fade away.


Fuck em. Let them dig in. Money talks. Especially with this brand of “conservatives”, or whatever they are.


they will attack holywood while saying businesses should just STFU and do business and then praise the bean guy for praising trump. Its republicans.


This will provide incentive for a thousand more companies and production efforts to make the same decision. Remember, these people aren't doing this to make a point, they're withdrawing from Texas because their employees can't be safe there.


A man must have a code


Oh no doubt.


Oh inDEED.


All in the game, yo.


“You are amoral, are you not? You are feeding off the violence and the despair of the drug trade. You’re stealing from those who themselves are stealing the lifeblood of our city. You are a parasite who leeches off the culture of drugs...... “ “just like you...... I got the shotgun, you got the briefcase. It’s all in the game though right?”


Damn it. Now I have to rewatch The Wire for the fifth time.


The problem is now that Oklahoma, Mississippi, and Florida are also passing abortion laws like Texas’. The more states do this, the more dug in they will be and the less likely corporations will withdraw from these states because they won’t want to lose the entire massive southern market. At the end of the day, money talks, and that’s the only language corporations speak.


Maybe Mississippi and Oklahoma. But Texas and Florida are 2 hugely profitable corporate markets, especially Texas, I mean 3 of the top 10 wealthiest companies in America are based in Texas alone.


Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't this just companies not choosing to support the state with jobs. They will still sell their products in the state but not give back with employment.


It became political when the legislature crafted a law specifically designed to curtail a right and escape judicial review.


One could say he's pulling out because of anti abortion law.


More of this please. Consequences for deliberately hurting innocent women and girls solely to advance your own political career are required.


Texas act like they never masturbated their unborn seed into their shorts before


Into your shorts?


Yeah. Going into the laundry anyway. Clean shorts for the rest of the night. Win win


But why? Just grab some paper towels, or toilet paper. Literally all you have to do is stand up and walk around for five seconds and you will have something to jerk off into that isn't your clothing


Nah I’m with the other guy, dump in a used shirt or something and throw it in the wash. Plus toilet paper sticks to your dick. Nobody wants a TP PP.


Seems more efficient, since it's gonna get washed anyway. Save some trees, from your seeds.


Wait, now we're dumping in shirts? That escalated quickly.


Every sperm is sacred.


Every sperm is great.


If a sperm is wasted, God gets quite irate!


Let the heathen spill theirs, on the dusty ground~


They're also trying to curb stomp plan b and birth control too so yeah. Fuck Texas.


I tell people that need to stop claiming they are pro-life & need to start being pro- birth control. Imagine how many less abortions would happen if we hand out birth control like candy? But naaaah, lets restrict money to places as well who provides birth control 🙃🙃🙃🙃


Good! I’m a native Texan and I wouldn’t wish anyone to have to live here for one day. And if anybody want s to say “love it or leave it” my people were here before it was Texas so you leave and I’ll love it.


Good. This is the only thing the dumbfucks really care about. Money.


Film in California. That’ll really piss Texans off.


Good. I recently was looking at ordering some items for a home I am building and I checked where they were located. I decided to order a different product at a higher price point from a blue state. Yes, it cost me more but I will be dammed if I am going to support Texas in any way.


I purchase material for my company and did a review of all my suppliers in Texas. There were tree that I was able to switch from.


Counting the days until you can leaf the others behind?


We’re there about tree fiddy?