Numark3 Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 3 minutes ago, GG said: Actually, the economy is not doing fine by any stretch of the imagination. yea, people equate the stock market to the economy to casually. Just now, B-Man said: THAT’S ENTIRELY RATIONAL: CBS News Poll Says 70% Of Americans Would Wait To Get COVID-19 Vaccine, Or Wouldn’t Get One At All. It’s a rushed vaccine for a disease that isn’t all that dangerous in most people. It’s not like an Ebola vaccine. And did I mention it’s being rushed? Unless you’re at high risk, the vaccine won’t change the odds much for you even if it works perfectly. And when you factor in the risk that it will be dangerous — did I mention it’s being rushed? — people aren’t crazy to forego it. And I say that as a guy who gets vaccinated for everything. It’s just risk analysis math. who is rushing it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 3 hours ago, Magox said: Clearly the point went right over your head. The frustration isn't so much about John Lewis, it's that for the selected few chosen by the political class of the left, it's ok to break the "rules" as long as it is a cause they support. Such as protests and in this case funerals. Whereas, for many many people a big complaint about these lock downs is that they haven't been either to attend a funeral for a loved one or that it was limited to a handful of people. That's the criticism, it's not about just scoring "political points". You just continue to keep missing the point or parroting mainstream analysis without any ability to critically analyze things. It happens on a daily basis with you. It has to be intentional because he's proven that he can at least provide some coherent thinking from time to time here. Unfortunately, this is the norm for leftists: instruct, accuseor blame the right for doing things that the left is literally doing while they instruct, accuse and blame. Obama stands in a crowd to tell people they shouldn't stand in crowds, and the left's response to the obvious stupidity of what Obama is doing is "Well, you're missing the point..." 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 Just now, BuffaloHokie13 said: I'm not sure what people expected after an entire quarter of businesses being required to close under threat of arrest and fines... The stimulus checks are masking a disaster in the making. Nobody knows what the employment situation will be when the states reopen and how many small businesses will be around or how many more layoffs will happen at the large companies. the longer the lockdowns linger, the worse the outcome. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 1 minute ago, GG said: The stimulus checks are masking a disaster in the making. Nobody knows what the employment situation will be when the states reopen and how many small businesses will be around or how many more layoffs will happen at the large companies. the longer the lockdowns linger, the worse the outcome. Anyone who thinks the economy is doing fine should probably stop thinking out loud. The number of small businesses being wiped out is horrible. The number of people who relied on that small business job will find it extremely difficult to land a similar job when things open up because millions will be lined up for crumbs. It'll take years to get this corrected, and you don't need to be an economics major to see this. But hey...if we can save one life from a virus that kills less than 1% of the population, it'll be worth all the overdoses, suicides and abusiveness that came in its path. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Blitz Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 More from Osterholm. With a straight face, he inadvertently tells us the goal was "get rid of the virus." Ummmmmmmmmmmmm............ This is the absolute worst..worst in Monday Morning Quarterbacking and why "this is full on political now" and that should tick off everyone. If states "opened to soon" can we stop with full national totals and just do a "we think these states did it right" total and a "these states did it all wrong" total? Dr. Michael Osterholm, epidemiologist at the University of Minnesota, told MarketWatch’s Jaimy Lee in an interview that the U.S. effort to contain the virus has failed because victory was declared long before it made sense. Early hot spot New York and neighboring states succeeded in getting their outbreaks under control by strict lockdowns that were followed by very gradual reopenings. Other states did not follow suit. “This virus has been poised to be transmitted in our communities, and we thought we had done enough to get it down. It’s like a fire crew. “I only put out half the forest fire but you know, I put out half so we’re done.” And then look what happened. It’s burned more acres since we gave up than it did before we gave up,” he said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dante Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 Lying Fauchi is a pos. Another one that should go to prison for a good 20 years. Jordan guy is a rock star 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Numark3 Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 1 minute ago, Dante said: Lying Fauchi is a pos. Another one that should go to prison for a good 20 years. Jordan guy is a rock star why? Fauci said right away they increase the spread and that he can’t comment on restrictions on protests. jordan guy Is pandering to you (hey, it worked!). He knows damn well the government can’t restrict or limit these protests. amazing to see politicians fool people (like you) in real time 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WEATHER DOT COM Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dante Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 1 minute ago, Crayola64 said: why? Fauci said right away they increase the spread and that he can’t comment on restrictions on protests. jordan guy Is pandering to you (hey, it worked!). He knows damn well the government can’t restrict or limit these protests. amazing to see politicians fool people (like you) in real time "Fooled" says the guy most likely running around in a mask afraid of the flu. Anyway, he's not pandering, just pointing out the hypocrisy and inconsistencies. Fauchi is a liar who can't answer a simple question because he knows he's a puppet and doesn't want to be exposed. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bilzfancy Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 1 minute ago, Crayola64 said: why? Fauci said right away they increase the spread and that he can’t comment on restrictions on protests. jordan guy Is pandering to you (hey, it worked!). He knows damn well the government can’t restrict or limit these protests. amazing to see politicians fool people (like you) in real time If you can stop people from going to a ball game, to church, to a gym, to a funeral, then you should be able to stop protests. Yes, protesting is a protected right, but so is going to church. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Blitz Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 5 minutes ago, Crayola64 said: why? Fauci said right away they increase the spread and that he can’t comment on restrictions on protests. jordan guy Is pandering to you (hey, it worked!). He knows damn well the government can’t restrict or limit these protests. amazing to see politicians fool people (like you) in real time But they can limit literally everything else like Church services? Gtfo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Numark3 Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 1 minute ago, bilzfancy said: If you can stop people from going to a ball game, to church, to a gym, to a funeral, then you should be able to stop protests. Yes, protesting is a protected right, but so is going to church. the right to go to a church is not anywhere near as strong as a right to protest in public. like it or not, that is the way it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloHokie13 Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 Just now, Crayola64 said: the right to go to a church is not anywhere near as strong as a right to protest in public. like it or not, that is the way it is. Both are peaceful assemblies as far as I can tell. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Blitz Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 6 minutes ago, Crayola64 said: why? Fauci said right away they increase the spread and that he can’t comment on restrictions on protests. jordan guy Is pandering to you (hey, it worked!). He knows damn well the government can’t restrict or limit these protests. amazing to see politicians fool people (like you) in real time Oh he also said the virus will dictate if we have football. He had no problem opining on that. This whole thing literally is just going to go away on November 4 and we're going to live like it never even happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WEATHER DOT COM Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 3 minutes ago, Dante said: Fauchi Fauci Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Numark3 Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 Just now, Big Blitz said: But they can limit literally everything else like Church services? Gtfo Um yes? The conservative-majority Supreme Court just said limits on church is within a state’s right. and there’s a reason no state has placed restrictions beyond curfews (see, some restrictions are okay!) on protests. It would be shot down instantly as unconstitutional. cry about your constitution, this isn’t a partisan point. Did the government shut down the conservative protests? Genuine question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 Just now, Crayola64 said: the right to go to a church is not anywhere near as strong as a right to protest in public. like it or not, that is the way it is. Which of those 2 rights are protected by the FIRST Amendment? Oh, they both are? Holy cow, you may be an intelligent person in real life, but you sure do love to play an idiot on the internet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Blitz Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 Fauci also had no problem telling us people can't go to football games. What a freaking joke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WEATHER DOT COM Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 Just now, Big Blitz said: Fauci also had no problem telling us people can't go to football games. Quote? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 2 minutes ago, Big Blitz said: Oh he also said the virus will dictate if we have football. He had no problem opining on that. This whole thing literally is just going to go away on November 4 and we're going to live like it never even happened. Wifey made a good point. IF Biden wins, it doesn't go away in November, it goes away in early February so he can claim he "fixed it." 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Numark3 Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Taro T said: Which of those 2 rights are protected by the FIRST Amendment? Oh, they both are? Holy cow, you may be an intelligent person in real life, but you sure do love to play an idiot on the internet. im being fully serious in this discussion. Freedom of religion and freedom of speech are both first amendment rights. Neither are absolute rights. limits on attendance to religious services (equally applied to all religions) is going to be upheld. And it has been upheld consistently, including the Supreme Court. restrictions on protests have been made and are okay. But simply preventing people from protesting in public spaces, would never be attempted or upheld. It’s clearly unconstitutional How is that an idiotic statement? Edited July 31, 2020 by Crayola64 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RiotAct Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 2 minutes ago, Taro T said: Wifey made a good point. IF Biden wins, it doesn't go away in November, it goes away in early February so he can claim he "fixed it." heh. Interestingly enough, that may be the natural progression of things anyway. Biden gets elected in November (pretty much a given at this point), vaccine or newly-found effective treatment comes out first quarter of ‘21. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whatdrought Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 10 minutes ago, Crayola64 said: the right to go to a church is not anywhere near as strong as a right to protest in public. like it or not, that is the way it is. They’re protected under the same Constitutional amendment guaranteeing both. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Blitz Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 7 minutes ago, wAcKy ZeBrA said: Quote? Not only no fans. No football! “Unless players are essentially in a bubble — insulated from the community and they are tested nearly every day — it would be very hard to see how football is able to be played this fall,” the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases told CNN. https://www.bostonglobe.com/2020/06/18/sports/dont-let-dr-anthony-fauci-burst-your-bubble-nfl-fans/ This is what 40 years in the swamp does to you. But on that clip....he says he doesn't make policy decisions like this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whatdrought Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 6 minutes ago, Crayola64 said: im being fully serious in this discussion. Freedom of religion and freedom of speech are both first amendment rights. Neither are absolute rights. limits on attendance to religious services (equally applied to all religions) is going to be upheld. And it has been upheld consistently, including the Supreme Court. restrictions on protests have been made and are okay. But simply preventing people from protesting in public spaces, would never be attempted or upheld. It’s clearly unconstitutional How is that an idiotic statement? Your initial post said the government can’t limit protests. Which is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Numark3 Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 2 minutes ago, whatdrought said: They’re protected under the same Constitutional amendment guaranteeing both. Oh yea, it’s that simple Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whatdrought Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 Just now, Crayola64 said: Oh yea, it’s that simple It is. If you’re arguing that the government can restrict constitutional rights in one way, they can do it in any way. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Blitz Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 "I'm not in a position to determine what the government can do in a forceful way." "I'm not going to opinine on limiting anything." Incredible. Get this clown out of here Trump. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Numark3 Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 1 minute ago, whatdrought said: Your initial post said the government can’t limit protests. Which is it? The government cannot just prevent people from protesting in public. They can put restrictions on time and place, but they can’t just restrict it. Just now, whatdrought said: It is. If you’re arguing that the government can restrict constitutional rights in one way, they can do it in any way. um no? Different standards apply to different first amendment rights... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whatdrought Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 Just now, Crayola64 said: The government cannot just prevent people from protesting in public. They can put restrictions on time and place, but they can’t just restrict it. And they can force social distancing, and masks, and limit number of participants because that’s what they’re doing with churches. And for those who don’t comply they can arrest and fine as needed. That’s the precident or removed rights that we’re seeing with freedom of religion and assembly and it doesn’t change because it’s a protest. Your continued attempt to draw an imaginary distinction is idiotic. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Numark3 Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 (edited) 1 minute ago, whatdrought said: And they can force social distancing, and masks, and limit number of participants because that’s what they’re doing with churches. And for those who don’t comply they can arrest and fine as needed. That’s the precident or removed rights that we’re seeing with freedom of religion and assembly and it doesn’t change because it’s a protest. Your continued attempt to draw an imaginary distinction is idiotic. You can disagree. But the distinction is based in fact and law (not based on political opinions) you should email the Supreme Court and let them know their understanding of the law is idiotic. Edited July 31, 2020 by Crayola64 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whatdrought Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 3 minutes ago, Crayola64 said: um no? Different standards apply to different first amendment rights... You’re so full of *****! This is literally the exact opposite of how it works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Blitz Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 Fauci's hand wave at Jordan at the end...like an F... you. Might as well be an F you to the American people asking these same questions. And for the record. Protests are fine by me. Going to football games. Yep. This is a joke. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whatdrought Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 Just now, Crayola64 said: You can disagree. But the distinction is based in fact and law (not based on political opinions) you should email the Supreme Court and let them know their understanding of the law is idiotic. Your argument is that the SC is always right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Numark3 Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 Just now, whatdrought said: You’re so full of *****! This is literally the exact opposite of how it works. lol okkkkkkkk. It’s as simple as “they did it to churches so they can do it to protests.” your stance is is beyond moronic, and not grounded in anything but a misunderstanding of the first amendment. Just now, whatdrought said: Your argument is that the SC is always right? no, but I think the past 200 years of decisions that have formed two entirely different standards and rules for these seperate first amendment rights KINDA means something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Blitz Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 Jordan forgot to bring up Fauci has opined on the protests! These protests!! Fauci warns protests will 'backfire,' slow economic recovery Anthony Fauci, the top government official on infectious diseases, warned Monday that protests in opposition to governors' stay-at-home orders meant to slow the spread of the coronavirus will "backfire" and further delay the reopening of the economy. "Clearly this is something that is hurting from the standpoint of economics and the standpoint of things that have nothing to do with the virus, but unless we get the virus under control, the real recovery economically is not going to happen," Fauci said on "Good Morning America." "So what you do if you jump the gun and go into a situation where you have a big spike, you’re going to set yourself back," he said. "So as painful as it is to go by the careful guidelines of gradually phasing into a reopening, it’s going to backfire. That’s the problem." https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/493647-fauci-warns-protests-against-against-stay-at-home-orders-will Fire him. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bilzfancy Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 7 minutes ago, B-Man said: Now that is some bullcrap, I can understand Lewis having a funeral, he was a long time congressperson but George Floyd was a nobody before he was killed and he had 3 funerals 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whatdrought Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 (edited) 8 minutes ago, Crayola64 said: lol okkkkkkkk. It’s as simple as “they did it to churches so they can do it to protests.” your stance is is beyond moronic, and not grounded in anything but a misunderstanding of the first amendment. no, but I think the past 200 years of decisions that have formed two entirely different standards and rules for these seperate first amendment rights KINDA means something. It’s called an equal application of the law. You can’t draw arbitrary distinction for one groups right to assembly and another's. Thinking you can make such arbitrary decisions is what makes you a liberal and someone who doesn’t understand the basic idea of the constitution. As I said, full of *****. so precedent is king, huh? I’m sure glad there’s no black marks on the SCOTUS record.... I Dred the thought. Edited July 31, 2020 by whatdrought 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Numark3 Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 (edited) 5 minutes ago, whatdrought said: It’s called an equal application of the law. You can’t draw arbitrary distinction for one groups right to assembly and another's. Thinking you can make such arbitrary decisions is what makes you a liberal and someone who doesn’t understand the basic idea of the constitution. As I said, full of *****. so precedent is king, huh? I’m sure glad there’s no black marks on the SCOTUS record.... I Dredd the thought. I’m just pointing out that comparing the protests to churches is comparing two entirely different concepts that have entirely different bodies of law. It is not apples to oranges, it’s fruit to sports. Applying first amendment law to freedom of religion is an entirely different concept than applying the relevant law to freedom of speech. you can throw your hissy fit because you don’t understand it at all. The difference between me and you is that I understand this topic is highly confusing and complicated, while you think it is very simple. You should be more aware of your ignorance. Edited July 31, 2020 by Crayola64 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts