A new low for the AG. (rank, cities, history)

[timberline742]

Originally Posted by Bruins_Fan

Okay, I'm done with you. And the legislature isn't designing the bridges. Jeez.

No, laws, public policy, and public administration. Something also very complex.

[massnative71]

Originally Posted by chicagoliz

I know what federalism is. You know who else knows? The Attorneys General of the various states. I *think* that maybe to become an A.G. they had to have some kind of educational credential or maybe somewhere where they might have learned about laws and our governmental structure? Hmmm...

I would hope anyway. We will find out when Ms. Healey makes her appearance in court re. the Exxon/Mobil deal, as to how squared away she really is.

Originally Posted by chicagoliz

As far as the federal funds and drinking age - I am at a loss as to why you brought that up. I don't see the relevance.

How do you not see the relevance? Federal funds to states with strings attached that has been upheld in court.

Originally Posted by chicagoliz

You need a FT legislature or something close to it to have competent people. It also helps to prevent conflicts of interest, because when you have part time legislatures, many people MUST work in order to earn a living, and it's very easy to get work that somehow could conflict with issues that are decided by the legislature.

As I said, it would be one thing if all the MA legislators treated it as a FT job. Are you saying defending criminals for a living, isn't a conflict of interest? Really???

[chicagoliz]

Originally Posted by massnative71

How do you not see the relevance? Federal funds to states with strings attached that has been upheld in court.

I still do not see the relevance. Yes, the SCOTUS has held that the Feds may use funds as a carrot. That's not the same as them failing to do something required or doing something not allowed.

[massnative71]

Originally Posted by timberline742

You do know that NH is dependent on MA financially, right? Without MA, they would crash.

It works both ways. All those workers who work in MA, they pay taxes to MA but MA doesn't have to educate their kids or any of that. Not to mention, could you imagine with the Boston area's housing shortage if all those NH commuters had to live in MA? Both state's are dependent on each other.

Originally Posted by timberline742

And please, their schools aren't good outside of MA commuter towns.

That is where the best schools in MA are too, commuter towns to Boston. I'm familiar with the Nashua schools, and they seem to stack up very well to similar cities in Mass.

Originally Posted by timberline742

Stop sniffing black powder. It is a drive through state that can be thankful that MA is next to it to support it.

Have you ever even been there?

[timberline742]

Originally Posted by massnative71

Have you ever even been there?

Yup, enough time to know that other than Portstmouth, its a cesspool. And even now the best parts of Portsmouth are actually in Kittery. I had to regularly go to Manchester for business (among other locations). Now, other than driving through or visiting friends who are stuck there (until their children are grown, all regret moving there, understandably) I avoid it. Blankhole of a state.

Originally Posted by massnative71

It works both ways. All those workers who work in MA, they pay taxes to MA but MA doesn't have to educate their kids or any of that. Not to mention, could you imagine with the Boston area's housing shortage if all those NH commuters had to live in MA? Both state's are dependent on each other.

MA isn't dependent on NH for ANYTHING. Not even skiing. And now you're claiming NH residents are paying property taxes in MA to fund MA schools?

Hahahahahahahahahahahahaahah

[CaseyB]

He didn't claim NH residents are paying Mass property taxes, geesh. Why are you so angry all the time?

[Partial Observer]

Originally Posted by CaseyB

Why are you so angry all the time?

You could have asked the same question about any of these posts:

Originally Posted by massnative71

I expect nothing less from grandstanding opportunistic buffoons like Liz Warren, or Marty Walsh. I also realize that we no longer hold our elected officials to even the same moral standards as are required from most of us on the job, as various actions from BOTH recent presidential candidates would get most of us fired. But this is the attorney general we are talking about. She is not only here to serve and represent us, but to also uphold the law of the commonwealth. That position carries with it the highest of moral and ethical standards, and the person holding it should certainly not suffer from a loose tongue or be putting on a political show.


But this is of course Maura Healy, who has already demonstrated that pushing a political agenda is a higher priority than enforcing the law itself (which the legislature decides, not her).


Police: 100,000 attend Boston Common Women


Healey vowed to challenge the Trump administration.

"We're going to stand up to bullies," Healey said. "We're going to protect the vulnerable ... I have a message for President Trump. The message from people of Massachusetts is, 'we'll see you in court.'"


What???


What bullies? Protect what vulnerable from what? Have credible threats been made? The "People of Massachusetts" will see Trump in court??? Has Trump committed/or shown intent to commit a crime against the "People of Massachusetts"? He hadn't even taken office yet when she said this!


Healy could clearly use a refresher course on her position's responsibilities. She is there to uphold the law and protect ALL (legal) residents of Massachusetts, not just those not supporting Trump (and before you nail me to the cross, I did not vote for Trump). She is not doing this, and she does NOT speak for the "people of Massachusetts". The woman is a disgrace, and needs to step down before she makes an even bigger mockery of the office (and the law).

Originally Posted by massnative71

"Keeps" fighting??? Care to share what she has done other than attempt to confiscate previously LEGAL firearms from law abiding citizens, and block clean energy expansion?


Meanwhile, crickets on stuff like this...

Deportation's revolving door: Suspects in Lawrence shooting shouldn't have been in U.S. | Boston Herald



Why does that not surprise me, LOL.

Originally Posted by massnative71

OK Mr. "Facts". Tell us what a cleaner source is, and/or what will reduce the region's over-dependence on oil. Let me guess, wind turbines. Even if it were a viable alternative, your beloved Liz Warren doesn't seem on board with it.

Originally Posted by Bruins_Fan

Jesus H. Who the heck ever said an average person can't have an education?! You're too much.

But you didn't. I see a pattern.

[massnative71]

Originally Posted by timberline742

Yup, enough time to know that other than Portstmouth, its a cesspool. And even now the best parts of Portsmouth are actually in Kittery. I had to regularly go to Manchester for business (among other locations). Now, other than driving through or visiting friends who are stuck there (until their children are grown, all regret moving there, understandably) I avoid it. Blankhole of a state.

No NH is a beautiful state as long as you avoid Nashua, Manchester, Rochester and a few other anomalies. I know many people who have bailed from MA to NH. None of them have indicated a desire to move back, save for maybe one but he's a bit of a weirdo anyway LOL. Most say it's a breath of fresh air after MA.

Originally Posted by timberline742

MA isn't dependent on NH for ANYTHING. Not even skiing. And now you're claiming NH residents are paying property taxes in MA to fund MA schools?

Hahahahahahahahahahahahaahah

Never said such. They are paying MA income taxes, which as you know help fund education for MA residents among many other things.

You are letting your emotions shield you from reality.

[massnative71]

Originally Posted by chicagoliz

That's not the same as them failing to do something required or doing something not allowed.

Point being? How does this relate to anything Trump is proposing regarding the withholding of grant funds from sanctuary cities?

[chicagoliz]

Originally Posted by massnative71

Point being? How does this relate to anything Trump is proposing regarding the withholding of grant funds from sanctuary cities?

I don't know. You keep bringing it up as somehow relevant, when it is not.