Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  

400,000 people attend massive outdoor concert during deadly pandemic that killed up to 4 million people!

Recommended Posts

16 minutes ago, TheFatMan said:

I mean...people were so upset that the governor of Michigan so arrogantly wanted them to stay alive that they devised a plot to kidnap her. Must have been spoiled millennials, because their coping ability and problem solving skills aren'treally on par with what I would expect from literally any other generation.

People get upset when elected officials make an end run around Constitutional limits placed on their authority. A governor might need to declare a state of emergency in the face of a developing situation until further info can be gathered. Months in, governors need to stop making unilateral decisions and involve the legislature. That's not happening in some states. 

Constitutional rights don't just evaporate in the face of an emergency. 

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, CJAdmission said:

People get upset when elected officials make an end run around Constitutional limits placed on their authority. A governor might need to declare a state of emergency in the face of a developing situation until further info can be gathered. Months in, governors need to stop making unilateral decisions and involve the legislature. That's not happening in some states. 

Constitutional rights don't just evaporate in the face of an emergency. 

It sounds like you’re trying to defend some military rejects plotting to kidnap an official elected by a majority vote because of perceived grievances. If we are saying that’s okay then I got a list.

 

2 hours ago, CJAdmission said:

Yeah, but don't you think things are getting worse? You can't compare Congress today to 30 years ago. There's something in the water. 

My conspiracy theory is that it has something to do with peanut allergies. No one ever even heard of a kid with peanut allergies when I was a kid. 

I believe it started long before that, back in the 50s, possibly 20s, but the problems with congress certainly are certainly coming to a head.

you can blame allergists and pediatricians for that, stupidly telling people to keep kids away from eggs and peanuts with evidence until they were older, not realizing they were actually creating a whole generation of kids with lethal peanut allergies.

 

to answer the question, no, I think there is a wider divide than ever between the poor and the super rich. I think we have come more under the thumbs of corporations since the time of industrial revolution and child labor. I think that money drives politics the same as ever, I just think all the money has been consolidated by so few, there are only a few voices that matter.

but kids, they have always been the same. Elders, always the same. If any subsequent generation is worse, then it’s fault of those that raised them.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, LT_Oneal_PAC said:

It sounds like you’re trying to defend some military rejects plotting to kidnap an official elected by a majority vote because of perceived grievances. If we are saying that’s okay then I got a list.

I don't really know enough of the details to analyze the situation, but if government officials overstep boundaries far enough or often enough, people are going to get froggy. 

Answer me this: would you defend a bunch of military rejects that shot up a British regiment tasked with confiscating arms outside of Boston? Why or why not?

Edited by CJAdmission
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, CJAdmission said:

I don't really know enough of the details to analyze the situation, but if government officials overstep boundaries far enough or often enough, people are going to get froggy. 

Answer me this: would you defend a bunch of military rejects that shot up a British regiment tasked with confiscating arms outside of Boston? Why or why not?

That’s a false equivalence. You can’t invoke the founding fathers every time some band of misfits gets a The idea they are oppressed any more than I can compare Trump’s presidency to the rise of Hitler and Fascism in Nazi Germany. 

Then: The king was not elected. They were taxed without representation. No one was property was being taken. Dissenters were shot and hanged. They were disarming the populace. Today: No troops were being quartered. No one was being massacred. No one has ever tried to take away guns from the populace. It was lead by a gun nut living in a rent free basement after his girlfriend kicked him out.

now if PR or DC wants to take out guns and march since they are taxed and not represented, I might say you have an argument there.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, LT_Oneal_PAC said:

sounds like you’re trying to defend some military rejects plotting to kidnap an official elected

no, it doesnt.  In no way did he defend those nutcases.

He brought up a different subject.

Is there ANY amount of freedom you would NOT surrender in order to "stay safe"?

Edited by Boatswain2PA
  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Boatswain2PA said:

no, it doesnt.  In no way did he defend those nutcases.

He brought up a different subject.

Is there ANY amount of freedom you would NOT surrender in order to "stay safe"?

No, he didn’t. He asked if I would have supported colonial Americans fighting British soldiers, which is a different situation.

and he absolutely made it seem like he was saying ends justified the means in the post below, where he posed no question. Just saying “hey, that’s what you get.”

 

1 hour ago, CJAdmission said:

People get upset when elected officials make an end run around Constitutional limits placed on their authority. A governor might need to declare a state of emergency in the face of a developing situation until further info can be gathered. Months in, governors need to stop making unilateral decisions and involve the legislature. That's not happening in some states. 

Constitutional rights don't just evaporate in the face of an emergency. 

now that you’ve moved the goal post @Boatswain2PAIt depends on the level of risk and what the danger was. So you’ll need to be more specific. 

As to the thought behind you’re question: had they even come close to legal means? Had they tried leaving the state? I’ve certainly heard some “leave this country if you don’t like it” rhetoric somewhere before. Certainly he wasn’t attached to his basement crawlspace. The Michigan Supreme Court just ruled she doesn’t have emergency powers due to Covid. Seems if they just waited a bit, they wouldn’t be buying that soap on a rope right about now.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

I like to blame social media. Suddenly every imbecile on earth has a bully pulpit (starting with celebutards). 

If you haven't watched 'The Social Dilemma' on Netflix, I recommend you do.  If you've cancelled Netflix because of Cuties, I'm sure you have some friends who have not...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, LT_Oneal_PAC said:

Seems if they just waited a bit, they wouldn’t be buying that soap on a rope right about now.

People forget that the boxes of freedom are sequential: Ballot, Jury, Ammo, in that order.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, CJAdmission said:

People get upset when elected officials make an end run around Constitutional limits placed on their authority. A governor might need to declare a state of emergency in the face of a developing situation until further info can be gathered. Months in, governors need to stop making unilateral decisions and involve the legislature. That's not happening in some states. 

Constitutional rights don't just evaporate in the face of an emergency. 

You guys always surprise me with the next further right post. This one is just pathological. The so-called party of “law and order”, more like the party of the constitutional subverter-in-chief. Surprising but not surprising considering the rally highlights over the last few days downplaying the criminal actions of these losers. “Lock her up” right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, ANESMCR said:

You guys always surprise me with the next further right post. This one is just pathological. 

Wanting government officials to respect the limits of their office and work with other branches to effect change is not something that I would have traditionally considered limited to the "right."

There are two main causes of things boiling over. One is government officials making unilateral, unconstitutional decisions to close businesses, houses of worship, restrict freedom of movement, etc. Declaring a perpetual state of emergency and issuing long series of executive orders is not the way government was designed to run. 

The second cause is abdicating responsibility to maintain order. If the government is going to surrender its responsibility to maintain order and let armed mobs commit arson, sooner or later business owners, home owners, and others are going to take matters into their own hands and you wind up with Kyle Rittenhouse. 

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, LT_Oneal_PAC said:

No, he didn’t. He asked if I would have supported colonial Americans fighting British soldiers, which is a different situation.

and he absolutely made it seem like he was saying ends justified the means in the post below, where he posed no question. Just saying “hey, that’s what you get.”

Defending a populations right to revolt, or in this case his defense of freedom, is not the same as justifying the actions of the small group of nutcases who planned on kidnapping the governor.

One can understand, and agree with, the reason behind their grievances without agreeing that it is time to start kidnapping elected officials.

Just like one can agree that policing in America is out of control and needs drastic changes (starting with changing qualified immunity, demilitarization, etc) without agreeing that burning down neighborhoods is a good idea.

My question ("Is there any amount of freedom you would not surrender to achieve safety?") wasnt about moving goalposts, but rather about identifying a major difference in ideology between the right and the left.  The right chooses freedom over safety, while the left chooses safety over freedom.  This generalization applies to our covid response, derivs the nationalization of our healthcare,  gun control debate, social security, etc.

10 hours ago, LT_Oneal_PAC said:

Seems if they just waited a bit, they wouldn’t be buying that soap on a rope right about now.

If they weren't idjits they wouldnt have done what they appear to have done.  They deserve to be in prison for a long time.

Too bad few people say the same thing about the left wing extremists who are driving the urban rioting.

3 hours ago, CJAdmission said:

to take matters into their own hands and you wind up with Kyle Rittenhouse

By most non-crazy-left-wing accounts Rittenhouse was a kid who went to the riots to play "Army medic", was attacked by multiple people (some of whom were armed and fired at him), causing Rittenhouse to run for his life, and eventually forced to use deadly force to save his life.  He does not appear to be the vigilante that much of the news (not surprisingly) painted him as.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Boatswain2PA said:

By most non-crazy-left-wing accounts Rittenhouse was a kid who went to the riots to play "Army medic", was attacked by multiple people (some of whom were armed and fired at him), causing Rittenhouse to run for his life, and eventually forced to use deadly force to save his life.  He does not appear to be the vigilante that much of the news (not surprisingly) painted him as.

Spot on. My personal take is that he had 0% business being there as a juvenile. Once he was there, he unfortunately got separated from his group and found himself in an extremely bad position. He was no threat to anyone who wasn't directly attacking him. He is going to walk on almost all charges and the situation is going to explode again. 

Life is so much better when people just keep their hands to themselves.

  • Sad 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, ANESMCR said:

You guys always surprise me with the next further right post. This one is just pathological.

An executive declaration of emergency should last no longer than necessary, which in most cases is going to be when the respective legislative body can be assembled (even if virtually), deliberate, and vote to continue, modify, or abandon the executive emergency orders.  If that's pathologically far right, then, well, guess I am.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, CJAdmission said:

Life is so much better when people just keep their hands to themselves.

Exactly this.  Especially as a long time CCW holder who carries whenever and where-ever it's legal, my firearm is only for those situations that I can't manage to foresee and avoid that put me or those close to me in serious danger.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A sycophant to a group of proud boy militia planning to kidnap and murder government officials. Summarizing the recent civil rights movement as nothing but hooligans and thugs burning buildings down. Being a sycophant to Kyle Rittenhouse. Islamophobia (Boats). Not republican. All day alt-right. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, ANESMCR said:

A sycophant to a group of proud boy militia planning to kidnap and murder government officials.

https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/michigan/2020/10/09/alleged-kidnapper-posted-anti-trump-video/5940296002/

Not that that's remotely on topic, but really: the dialogue is best served when everyone has their facts straight.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, rev ronin said:

https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/michigan/2020/10/09/alleged-kidnapper-posted-anti-trump-video/5940296002/

Not that that's remotely on topic, but really: the dialogue is best served when everyone has their facts straight.

But facts dont trump the intense feelings and emotions todays leftists have.

Folks like [2 other posters] think they are liberals, because they have been told they are liberal by their professors and the media they consume.  But they are not liberals at all.  They are intolerant, ILliberal leftists.  They cannot stand people who think differently than they do.

You and I are far more liberal, in the classical sense, than today's leftists who use the term liberal.

 

Edited by rev ronin
Removing inappropriate nickname for another poster
  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aw, stay cool Boats. Go after ideas, not people.

But you are right, I don't know what the deal is. I used to be able to hang out with a pretty diverse group and we would all rag on each other over politics, religion, you name it and we were still all friends at the end. Now this stuff tears families apart. It's a sickness. 

 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, CJAdmission said:

Aw, stay cool Boats. Go after ideas, not people.

Indeed, folks.  Sorry, but there's really no way to expect this to stay professional in the light of BOTH sides slinging ad hominem around.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to the Physician Assistant Forum! This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Learn More