Jump to content
To change color scheme, click on themes at bottom of page ×
If having issues logging in with login name, try using your DISPLAY name. If your password is the issue and you did not update your email address prior to upgrade, use the Contact Us link at bottom of page for a reset. ×
Bronze & Silver Supporters now have ability to create a blog ×
RightNation.US
Sign in to follow this  
pepperonikkid

MI #OperationHaircut…

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

pepperonikkid

MI #OperationHaircut…77-Yr-Old Barber, Karl Manke Tells Large Crowd Of Protesters: “I refuse to get into a cattle car!…I will not stand down!… I will continue my work, with or without a license…I have been denied my livelihood by the governor!” [VIDEO]

 

https://100percentfedup.com/

May 20, 2020

 

The Michigan Conservative Coalition was the first group to organize a protest against draconian lockdown measures put in place by an overreaching governor.

On April 15th, over 10K vehicles drove to the state’s capital, Lansing, MI, to express their frustration over the devastating economic effects of the shutdown on the state’s economy.

Since April 15th, Democrat Governor Gretchen Whitmer, who is on Joe Biden’s shortlist for VP, has twice extended her draconian lockdown orders on citizens of Michigan. From banning travel between private residences in Michigan to prohibiting workers whose jobs are performed strictly outdoors, Governor Gretchen Whitmer made a succession of irrational decisions that unnecessarily harmed Michigan residents. Each time Michigan residents protested her decisions, she doubled down on her tyrannical behavior, threatening protesters she would keep the state shut down even longer and then blaming them for spreading the pandemic.

One of the victims of Democrat Governor Gretchen Whitmer’s overreaching executive orders is 77-year-old Owosso, MI barber, Karl Manke, who defied the governor’s shutdown order after he realized he was going to lose his business if he didn’t reopen.

Another salon owner, Shelly Luther of Texas, defied shutdown orders and opened her hair salon to customers before restrictions were lifted on hair salons in her state. When Luther was cited but refused to close her doors, she was thrown in jail by an overzealous judge, who sentenced her to 7 days and gave her a $7,000 fine. Republican Governor Greg Abbott and the Texas Supreme Court made the decision to release the hairdresser from jail.

Shelley Luther traveled to Michigan so she could join Karl Manke in solidarity on the steps of the Capitol building in Lansing.

 

 

Full Story

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dean Adam Smithee

QUESTION FOR Y'ALL in Michigan. Why aren't y'all going to your state legislators about this??? Governor has this authority ONLY because the legislature granted it back in 1946. Majority in both chambers is with those who CLAIM to be Republican; they could have revoked/restricted this authority and opened the state up WEEKS ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
zurg

I guess the old guy is still out of jail since I haven’t read anything more about it... what are the other barbers doing? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kestrel
10 hours ago, Dean Adam Smithee said:

QUESTION FOR Y'ALL in Michigan. Why aren't y'all going to your state legislators about this??? Governor has this authority ONLY because the legislature granted it back in 1946. Majority in both chambers is with those who CLAIM to be Republican; they could have revoked/restricted this authority and opened the state up WEEKS ago.

Question for you!..Why do you keep bringing this 1946 law up when it was modified in 1976 only giving the Governor extreme powers for 28 days and then have the legislature approve another 28days..and those who claim to be Republican are in court as we speak about this..are you saying they should grab their rocket launchers and storm the governor's crib?..I seem to remember you clutching your pearls about the "bad optics' and that all those democrats won't vote for Trump cuz people showed up at the capital bldg with their deer rifles?..But really though politicians rep/dem for the most part are a gutless self consumed septic tank. period. BTW how's things going down in Dixie? did your legislature finally codify a "unarmed black guy" hunting season yet?..or is it just wannabe cops that are allowed to shoot black guys?..with the obvious bent that you southern semi republicans have I'm surprised y'all haven't gotten the state govt to get busy..I mean y'all ARE out of lock down right?:nanner:

Kestrel...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dean Adam Smithee
53 minutes ago, kestrel said:

Question for you!..Why do you keep bringing this 1946 law up when it was modified in 1976 only giving the Governor extreme powers for 28 days and then have the legislature approve another 28days..and those who claim to be Republican are in court as we speak about this..are you saying they should grab their rocket launchers and storm the governor's crib?..I seem to remember you clutching your pearls about the "bad optics' and that all those democrats won't vote for Trump cuz people showed up at the capital bldg with their deer rifles?..But really though politicians rep/dem for the most part are a gutless self consumed septic tank. period. BTW how's things going down in Dixie? did your legislature finally codify a "unarmed black guy" hunting season yet?..or is it just wannabe cops that are allowed to shoot black guys?..with the obvious bent that you southern semi republicans have I'm surprised y'all haven't gotten the state govt to get busy..I mean y'all ARE out of lock down right?:nanner:

Kestrel...

 

The PROBLEM with the 1976 modification was that it was EXTREMELY poorly written to the point of conflicting with itself. I suspect some legislative assistant tacked on some boilerplate language and nobody was paying too much attention (WAAAY too much of that at both the state AND federal level), but the net effect being that the 1976 law essentially nullified itself.

I understand it's in court, probably as we speak, but it's likely a court will merely send it back to the legislature to be rewritten.

ON THE ONE HAND, YES, it says:

EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT ACT (EXCERPT)
Act 390 of 1976

30.403 Responsibility of governor; etc..

Sec. 3...

(4) The governor shall, by executive order or proclamation, declare a state of emergency if he or she finds that an emergency has occurred or that the threat of an emergency exists. The state of emergency shall continue until the governor finds that the threat or danger has passed, the emergency has been dealt with to the extent that emergency conditions no longer exist, or until the declared state of emergency has been in effect for 28 days. After 28 days, the governor shall issue an executive order or proclamation declaring the state of emergency terminated, unless a request by the governor for an extension of the state of emergency for a specific number of days is approved by resolution of both houses of the legislature.

BUT ON THE OTHER HAND, it ALSO says, further down in the boilerplate area:

EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT ACT (EXCERPT)
Act 390 of 1976


30.417 Construction of act.

Sec. 17.

   This act shall not be construed to do any of the following:...

  .... (d) Limit, modify, or abridge the authority of the governor to proclaim a state of emergency pursuant to Act No. 302 of the Public Acts of 1945, being sections 10.31 to 10.33 of the Michigan Compiled Laws, or exercise any other powers vested in him or her under the state constitution of 1963, statutes, or common law of this state independent of, or in conjunction with, this act.

Which gets us back to...

EMERGENCY POWERS OF GOVERNOR (EXCERPT)
Act 302 of 1945

10.31 Proclamation of state of emergency; promulgation of orders, rules, and regulations; seizure of firearms, ammunition, or other weapons.

Sec. 1.

  (1) During times of great public crisis, disaster, rioting, catastrophe, or similar public emergency within the state, or reasonable apprehension of immediate danger of a public emergency of that kind, when public safety is imperiled, either upon application of the mayor of a city, sheriff of a county, or the commissioner of the Michigan state police or upon his or her own volition, the governor may proclaim a state of emergency and designate the area involved. After making the proclamation or declaration, the governor may promulgate reasonable orders, rules, and regulations as he or she considers necessary to protect life and property or to bring the emergency situation within the affected area under control. Those orders, rules, and regulations may include, but are not limited to, providing for the control of traffic, including public and private transportation, within the area or any section of the area; designation of specific zones within the area in which occupancy and use of buildings and ingress and egress of persons and vehicles may be prohibited or regulated; control of places of amusement and assembly and of persons on public streets and thoroughfares; establishment of a curfew; control of the sale, transportation, and use of alcoholic beverages and liquors; and control of the storage, use, and transportation of explosives or inflammable materials or liquids deemed to be dangerous to public safety.

See the problem here? It's the specific wording: The 28-day limit is by definition "Limiting, modifying, or abridging" the governors authority under the '45 law "upon his or her own volition" which places no such limits. 

As for Georgia? We're doing fine. I've heard a rumor that the county commission is considering an ordinance requiring anyone shooting an unarmed black man to be wearing a white facial covering so as to protect from Covid-19.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SARGE
2 hours ago, kestrel said:

Question for you!..Why do you keep bringing this 1946 law up when it was modified in 1976 only giving the Governor extreme powers for 28 days and then have the legislature approve another 28days..and those who claim to be Republican are in court as we speak about this..are you saying they should grab their rocket launchers and storm the governor's crib?..I seem to remember you clutching your pearls about the "bad optics' and that all those democrats won't vote for Trump cuz people showed up at the capital bldg with their deer rifles?..But really though politicians rep/dem for the most part are a gutless self consumed septic tank. period. BTW how's things going down in Dixie? did your legislature finally codify a "unarmed black guy" hunting season yet?..or is it just wannabe cops that are allowed to shoot black guys?..with the obvious bent that you southern semi republicans have I'm surprised y'all haven't gotten the state govt to get busy..I mean y'all ARE out of lock down right?:nanner:

Kestrel...

 

 

Short answer?

Fred subscribes to the approach, "if you can't dazzle them with your brilliance, baffle them with bullschidt:.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kestrel
Just now, SARGE said:

 

Short answer?

Fred subscribes to the approach, "if you can't dazzle them with your brilliance, baffle them with bullschidt:.

 

lol...I know DAS is a good sort but like you said I'm not needing my extra dark Ray Bans just yet:):)

Kestrel...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dean Adam Smithee
30 minutes ago, SARGE said:

 

Short answer?

Fred subscribes to the approach, "if you can't dazzle them with your brilliance, baffle them with bullschidt:.

 

Citing the relevant laws and pointing out the obvious problems with the '76  law is "bullschidt"???

If the people in Michigan want to end this sooner rather than later, then the Republicans in the Michigan Legislature, that THEY control both chambers of, need to get to work and GET IT RIGHT THIS TIME,  rather than pissing and moaning in a courtroom about a poorly-worded law that the legislature themselves effed up in the the first place.  

Of course, grandstanding in front of the cameras on the courthouse steps IS a whole lot easier than actual legislative "work", eh? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kestrel
On 5/21/2020 at 2:45 PM, Dean Adam Smithee said:

Citing the relevant laws and pointing out the obvious problems with the '76  law is "bullschidt"???

If the people in Michigan want to end this sooner rather than later, then the Republicans in the Michigan Legislature, that THEY control both chambers of, need to get to work and GET IT RIGHT THIS TIME,  rather than pissing and moaning in a courtroom about a poorly-worded law that the legislature themselves effed up in the the first place.  

Of course, grandstanding in front of the cameras on the courthouse steps IS a whole lot easier than actual legislative "work", eh? 

 

Not working Adam. You need to work on your performance skills a bit...its dusty.

Kestrel...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kestrel
On 5/21/2020 at 1:33 PM, Dean Adam Smithee said:

The PROBLEM with the 1976 modification was that it was EXTREMELY poorly written to the point of conflicting with itself. I suspect some legislative assistant tacked on some boilerplate language and nobody was paying too much attention (WAAAY too much of that at both the state AND federal level), but the net effect being that the 1976 law essentially nullified itself.

I understand it's in court, probably as we speak, but it's likely a court will merely send it back to the legislature to be rewritten.

ON THE ONE HAND, YES, it says:

EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT ACT (EXCERPT)
Act 390 of 1976

30.403 Responsibility of governor; etc..

Sec. 3...

(4) The governor shall, by executive order or proclamation, declare a state of emergency if he or she finds that an emergency has occurred or that the threat of an emergency exists. The state of emergency shall continue until the governor finds that the threat or danger has passed, the emergency has been dealt with to the extent that emergency conditions no longer exist, or until the declared state of emergency has been in effect for 28 days. After 28 days, the governor shall issue an executive order or proclamation declaring the state of emergency terminated, unless a request by the governor for an extension of the state of emergency for a specific number of days is approved by resolution of both houses of the legislature.

BUT ON THE OTHER HAND, it ALSO says, further down in the boilerplate area:

EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT ACT (EXCERPT)
Act 390 of 1976


30.417 Construction of act.

Sec. 17.

   This act shall not be construed to do any of the following:...

  .... (d) Limit, modify, or abridge the authority of the governor to proclaim a state of emergency pursuant to Act No. 302 of the Public Acts of 1945, being sections 10.31 to 10.33 of the Michigan Compiled Laws, or exercise any other powers vested in him or her under the state constitution of 1963, statutes, or common law of this state independent of, or in conjunction with, this act.

Which gets us back to...

EMERGENCY POWERS OF GOVERNOR (EXCERPT)
Act 302 of 1945

10.31 Proclamation of state of emergency; promulgation of orders, rules, and regulations; seizure of firearms, ammunition, or other weapons.

Sec. 1.

  (1) During times of great public crisis, disaster, rioting, catastrophe, or similar public emergency within the state, or reasonable apprehension of immediate danger of a public emergency of that kind, when public safety is imperiled, either upon application of the mayor of a city, sheriff of a county, or the commissioner of the Michigan state police or upon his or her own volition, the governor may proclaim a state of emergency and designate the area involved. After making the proclamation or declaration, the governor may promulgate reasonable orders, rules, and regulations as he or she considers necessary to protect life and property or to bring the emergency situation within the affected area under control. Those orders, rules, and regulations may include, but are not limited to, providing for the control of traffic, including public and private transportation, within the area or any section of the area; designation of specific zones within the area in which occupancy and use of buildings and ingress and egress of persons and vehicles may be prohibited or regulated; control of places of amusement and assembly and of persons on public streets and thoroughfares; establishment of a curfew; control of the sale, transportation, and use of alcoholic beverages and liquors; and control of the storage, use, and transportation of explosives or inflammable materials or liquids deemed to be dangerous to public safety.

See the problem here? It's the specific wording: The 28-day limit is by definition "Limiting, modifying, or abridging" the governors authority under the '45 law "upon his or her own volition" which places no such limits. 

As for Georgia? We're doing fine. I've heard a rumor that the county commission is considering an ordinance requiring anyone shooting an unarmed black man to be wearing a white facial covering so as to protect from Covid-19.

Well golly DAS they sure could have used you back there in 1976...Your just..just...I just can't decide if you're full of your self of just lefty excrement...but I'll tell you one thing about your constant contrarian "look at me"...it's boring..no offense it just is.

Kestrel...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...