1
hitchhiker 1 point ago +1 / -0

I could really go for one of those undeniable "no name returning to headlines" style deltas related to this...

3
hitchhiker 3 points ago +3 / -0

This one's not a local business, but for a manufacturer it's pretty small. I needed some new underwear, T-shirts and socks, and wanted to buy American made. My search turned up All American Clothing Company.

I got my underwear, and just got my second order with some jeans, a pair of canvas pants, a dress shirt and a couple hoodies. Everything's made in the USA, top quality, and almost all the materials are American grown/made, too. The web site tells you when a product contains anything imported. They'll even tell you which states the cotton was grown in, the fabric was woven in, etc if you ask.

A very refreshing change from all the crap clothing made in China. It's been 20+ years since I've worn stuff like this.

1
hitchhiker 1 point ago +1 / -0

Thanks for the clarification, fellow Maine anon. I somehow missed the origin. And yes, it’s the technical execution of the amendment, not the spirit of it, that gave me pause. Much bigger issues to worry about, though.

4
hitchhiker 4 points ago +4 / -0

I don't think this is quite the wind it sounds like, and while obviously I know I have a right to grow food, I voted against this. Why? The actual text being added to the constitution is:

Section 25. All individuals have a natural, inherent and unalienable right to food, including the right to save and exchange seeds and the right to grow, raise, harvest, produce and consume the food of their own choosing for their own nourishment, sustenance, bodily health and well-being, as long as an individual does not commit trespassing, theft, poaching or other abuses of private property rights, public lands or natural resources in the harvesting, production or acquisition of food.

This defines an "unalienable right to food", includes certain activities and excludes certain things which are already illegal. It does not, however, place any limitation on the "right to food" itself. In a shortage or survival situation, can the government now say that due to everyone's unalienable right to food, my own stockpile must be shared? Or in a less extreme situation, will Mainers see raised taxes to fund more food handouts, and reduced barrier to entry for said handouts?

Perhaps someone with more experience interpreting legal text can explain why these doors are not left open, but that's my interpretation. I will also note that the wording regarding the unalienable right to food was left off of the ballot form, and only the right to farming language was present.

On a more general philosophical level, I feel that rights are indeed inherent, and that a constitution should not serve to grant rights to the people, but to limit the rights of the government.

3
hitchhiker 3 points ago +3 / -0

I make no comment on the first point, but to say he took no part in building his companies is ridiculous. He is one of the most hands-on big company CEOs on the planet.

1
hitchhiker 1 point ago +1 / -0

Yup. It is properly “awakened”.

3
hitchhiker 3 points ago +3 / -0

This. My company’s CEO sent a company wide email hailing the Chauvin verdict as a triumph of justice, but has been completely silent on this issue. Political posturing gives way really quickly when faced with actual potential consequences, such as loss of up to half of the company’s workforce.

2
hitchhiker 2 points ago +2 / -0

That was the Nobel.

by PepeSee
7
hitchhiker 7 points ago +7 / -0

Nancy Pelosi?

by Quelle
4
hitchhiker 4 points ago +4 / -0

I keep meaning to do this. Thanks for the reminder.

2
hitchhiker 2 points ago +2 / -0

I grew up in Warwick, so definitely know about RI corruption. Back then it was at least done with some class. Buddy Cianci had Providence cleaned up nicely.

26
hitchhiker 26 points ago +26 / -0

Thank you. I was wondering how ME was on there. Our state government is currently a blue cesspool.

3
hitchhiker 3 points ago +3 / -0

A high school can't get a .edu. It's reserved for postsecondary institutions only, so-called "higher learning". If a high school has one, it had to have obtained it prior to 2001. A lot use .org domains, some use .k12.XX.us, where XX is the state postal abbreviation.

19
hitchhiker 19 points ago +19 / -0

This made me laugh at the sheer absurdity of this photo. We have been pointing out the clothing and the trees, but this should have been the most obvious clue.

4
hitchhiker 4 points ago +4 / -0

Nope. Probably pulling from voter registrations, I don't know.

0
hitchhiker 0 points ago +8 / -8

Does this mean I won't get junk mail for a while? Probably not. I support them, I donated, which is why I get the junk mail. I told them I wouldn't donate again until the junk mail stopped, they said it would stop. It hasn't.

1
hitchhiker 1 point ago +1 / -0

Welcome home, Smart Towel RG-400.

1
hitchhiker 1 point ago +1 / -0

It has no geolocation because it's reserved for multicast traffic, i.e. sending the same stream of data to multiple recipients. There's no technical reason it couldn't be used for something else, but it would not be used in any typical or default configuration, as it's reserved for specific purpose. It's interesting to see an HTTP POST to an IP reserved for multicast...

4
hitchhiker 4 points ago +4 / -0

For sure. I heard nothing but support for Trump from everyone I spoke to here, even in coastal towns. I still see flags everywhere.

view more: ‹ Prev Next ›