Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Reports of protests are overblown. A few incidents around the country, but nothing major.

5 (45.5%)

A few major incidents in capitals, but nothing much in DC.

5 (45.5%)

A major incident in DC, but nothing much around the country.

0 (0%)

More than 10 capitals have major upheavals, but nothing much in DC.

0 (0%)

A major incident in DC plus more than 10 capitals with significant upheavals.

1 (9.1%)

More than half the capitals around the country have problems with protesters, but DC is quiet.

0 (0%)

DC has major problems, while more than half the capitals around the country also have considerable trouble with protesters.

0 (0%)

Huge disruption to the day.

0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 9

Voting closed: January 19, 2021, 10:49:21 PM

[Hairy Lime]

Terrorists.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/oklahoma-city-ends-face-mask-rule-shoppers-after-store-employees-n1198736?cid=sm_npd_ms_fb_ma&fbclid=IwAR3C2vKYe_SDhgfa-dLnl-5qvvCTUi6bIfxleH8w6EoMbCFnvwSb8MKA8H0

Deny it all you will, but threats of violence and other forms of intimidation to get the change you want is terrorism. Even when it doesn't work, let alone when it does.

Not true. 
Any government mandate for wearing a mask that results in a government citation, fine etc could face Constitutional challenges. The store owner can refuse to serve you if the mask order is the posted policy of the store.

Can the government mandate you cover your genitals? Or motorcycle helmet? And fine you if you do not?

It already does in many places.

It was a rhetorical question you blathering idiot. If the government has the power to make you wear a helmet for your safety it has the power to make you wear a mask for the public safety. It is not a close or novel proposition.

Then you aren’t paying attention.

Then the right wing web site you poach all your arguments and most of your language from have not explained the issue to you.

[LarryBnDC]

Yeah... I’m sure he has Jewish friends.


https://www.citybeat.com/news/article/21131406/ohio-state-rep-nino-vitale-calls-dr-amy-acton-a-globalist-an-antisemitic-epithet

[barton]

I have the feeling that Red saw seatbelt laws as a slippery slope to fascism.   

[barton]

A mob of the MAGA persuasion
Staged a statehouse invasion.
Though heavily armed,
They left unharmed.
And that's how you know they're Caucasian!

A red-hatted mob in Michigan
Demanded the right to fish again.
Though they wielded rifles
The guv saw they were trifles
And affirmed the majority's wish again.

A mob of gun toters in Lansing
Liked manly strutting and prancing.
From the rocks they crawled unda
To the marbled rotunda
They fear all feminine de-pants-ing.

A neoNazi paid shill may annoy
Waving placards in Illinois.
Though some merely sigh
At Arbeit macht frei
Others cry,  what a bad goy!

[REDSTATEWARD]

Terrorists.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/oklahoma-city-ends-face-mask-rule-shoppers-after-store-employees-n1198736?cid=sm_npd_ms_fb_ma&fbclid=IwAR3C2vKYe_SDhgfa-dLnl-5qvvCTUi6bIfxleH8w6EoMbCFnvwSb8MKA8H0

Deny it all you will, but threats of violence and other forms of intimidation to get the change you want is terrorism. Even when it doesn't work, let alone when it does.

Not true. 
Any government mandate for wearing a mask that results in a government citation, fine etc could face Constitutional challenges. The store owner can refuse to serve you if the mask order is the posted policy of the store.

Can the government mandate you cover your genitals? Or motorcycle helmet? And fine you if you do not?

It already does in many places.

It was a rhetorical question you blathering idiot. If the government has the power to make you wear a helmet for your safety it has the power to make you wear a mask for the public safety. It is not a close or novel proposition.

Then you aren’t paying attention.

Then the right wing web site you poach all your arguments and most of your language from have not explained the issue to you.

LOL!
The right wing site I frequent is the Constitution.

[REDSTATEWARD]

I have the feeling that Red saw seatbelt laws as a slippery slope to fascism.

A remedial course in how our laws are made might a good idea for you.

[josh]

Terrorists.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/oklahoma-city-ends-face-mask-rule-shoppers-after-store-employees-n1198736?cid=sm_npd_ms_fb_ma&fbclid=IwAR3C2vKYe_SDhgfa-dLnl-5qvvCTUi6bIfxleH8w6EoMbCFnvwSb8MKA8H0

Deny it all you will, but threats of violence and other forms of intimidation to get the change you want is terrorism. Even when it doesn't work, let alone when it does.

Not true. 
Any government mandate for wearing a mask that results in a government citation, fine etc could face Constitutional challenges. The store owner can refuse to serve you if the mask order is the posted policy of the store.

Can the government mandate you cover your genitals? Or motorcycle helmet? And fine you if you do not?

It already does in many places.

It was a rhetorical question you blathering idiot. If the government has the power to make you wear a helmet for your safety it has the power to make you wear a mask for the public safety. It is not a close or novel proposition.

Then you aren’t paying attention.

That doesn't even make sense in context.

I think you meant to say that you, Ward, were not paying attention. Certainly, it is the truth - you are just going on, but without citing any examples to support your case. Same as almost every time.

The highest courts in more than 25 states have held motorcycle helmet laws to be constitutional. The Massachusetts motorcycle helmet law was affirmed by the U.S. Supreme Court. Simon v. Governor of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

Helmets are for personal safety. Masks are for both personal safety and safety of others. Got a counter-parallel you would like to suggest?

It's unclear to me if a judge in some states can order more stringent safety measures than ordered by the governor of that state, but I think that will vary state to state.

[josh]

I have the feeling that Red saw seatbelt laws as a slippery slope to fascism.

A remedial course in how our laws are made might a good idea for you.

Another irrelevant response.

[josh]

Terrorists.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/oklahoma-city-ends-face-mask-rule-shoppers-after-store-employees-n1198736?cid=sm_npd_ms_fb_ma&fbclid=IwAR3C2vKYe_SDhgfa-dLnl-5qvvCTUi6bIfxleH8w6EoMbCFnvwSb8MKA8H0

Deny it all you will, but threats of violence and other forms of intimidation to get the change you want is terrorism. Even when it doesn't work, let alone when it does.

Not true. 
Any government mandate for wearing a mask that results in a government citation, fine etc could face Constitutional challenges. The store owner can refuse to serve you if the mask order is the posted policy of the store.

Can the government mandate you cover your genitals? Or motorcycle helmet? And fine you if you do not?

It already does in many places.

It was a rhetorical question you blathering idiot. If the government has the power to make you wear a helmet for your safety it has the power to make you wear a mask for the public safety. It is not a close or novel proposition.

Then you aren’t paying attention.

Then the right wing web site you poach all your arguments and most of your language from have not explained the issue to you.

LOL!
The right wing site I frequent is the Constitution.

Yet, you provide neither specificity nor case law to support your position. Hand-waving, "It's unconstitutional!" doesn't actually make an argument. It has about as much weight as "But I said so!"

[facilitatorn]

I have the feeling that Red saw seatbelt laws as a slippery slope to fascism.

He saw the Abolition of Slavery and the enfranchisement of both Former slaves and their descendants along with women as a slippery slope to “fascism”.

As long as Moscow Mitch has his jackboot on the neck of our democracy, Red will honor laws passed and signed into law under his malignant influence. He also finds fault with the actions of duly elected governors when they fight crippling emergencies in states with ALEC bought legislatures.

If the situation is reversed, a republican governor or president with a Democratic legislature, Red loves to see any amount of freelancing from the executive. You never see him rip Hogan or Baker. For some reason though Pritzker and Whitmer draw his ire for doing the exact same things.

[REDSTATEWARD]

Helmets are for personal safety. Masks are for both personal safety and safety of others. Got a counter-parallel you would like to suggest?

I wear a face mask and, if I drove a motorcycle, I would wear a helmet.
But I also recognize that there are other views and people with those views have a right to protest.
You want to criticize the present day protestors as being terrorists when they are not.
A pro-choice advocate argues that a woman has a right to control her body. An anti/helmet motorcyclist argues he has the right to guard his own head.

[barton]

Does my right to protest mean I have a constitutional  right to spit Hepatitis C laden spittle on you?

Physical threats of harm are not free speech,  they are terrorism.   Masks are mainly effective in containing your viruses.   They protect others, by capturing droplets from your coughs,  sneezes and exhalation.   They help promote public safety,  just as do laws that ban dumping raw sewage or used motor oil.   No Constitutional problem whatsoever.   

[REDSTATEWARD]

Yet you provide neither specificity nor case law to support your position. Hand-waving, "It's unconstitutional!" doesn't actually make an argument. It has about as much weight as "But I said so!"
 

If you want to wade through case law on helmet laws be prepared to be confused.
To simplify in 1967 the federal government required states to enact helmet laws to qualify certain federal safety programs and highway construction funds. Nearly all states had such laws by the early 1970s, but as the decade went on (with protests and court challenges)states managed to stop the Department of Transportation from denying funds over helmet laws.

Today there are 3 states with NO helmet laws
19 With FULL laws
and 28 with laws that require helmets but only for 21 and under motorcyclists.

[josh]

Yet you provide neither specificity nor case law to support your position. Hand-waving, "It's unconstitutional!" doesn't actually make an argument. It has about as much weight as "But I said so!"
 

If you want to wade through case law on helmet laws be prepared to be confused.
To simplify in 1967 the federal government required states to enact helmet laws to qualify certain federal safety programs and highway construction funds. Nearly all states had such laws by the early 1970s, but as the decade went on (with priests and court challenges)states managed to stop the Department of Transportation from denying funds over helmet laws.

Today there are 3 states with NO helmet laws
19 With FULL laws
and 28 with laws that require helmets but only for 21 and under motorcyclists.

As I said, 25 state's top courts have ruled that they are constitutional by state law and SCOTUS has ruled that the Mass law passes muster.

You provided some specificity, Ward. Congratulations.

No court decisions, but a step in the right direction. Clearly, it overwhelmed your ability to format, but not bad.

[REDSTATEWARD]

Does my right to protest mean I have a constitutional  right to spit Hepatitis C laden spittle on you?

Physical threats of harm are not free speech,  they are terrorism.   Masks are mainly effective in containing your viruses.   They protect others, by capturing droplets from your coughs,  sneezes and exhalation.   They help promote public safety,  just as do laws that ban dumping raw sewage or used motor oil.   No Constitutional problem whatsoever.

LOL!
I have no problem with wearing a mask
People who do protest against being told by a government to wear them are not terrorists.