UNDlaw80 Posted September 18, 2020 Posted September 18, 2020 3 minutes ago, SIOUXFAN97 said: maybe don't have close indoor close contact with 60 year old and maybe the rest of the world can get back to living???? just a thought? Testing and 'living normally' aren't mutually exclusive. 1
homer Posted September 18, 2020 Posted September 18, 2020 2 minutes ago, Hayduke1 said: He didn't say that presidents can control a virus. He also didn't say that nobody would have died if he would have been president He did say that setting mask requirements, social distancing and closing of businesses early in this pandemic would have slowed the spread of the virus and lessened fatalities, probably by quite a bit. But, go ahead and deny all of this. In spite of data proving otherwise. Remain willfully ignorant and play with your water cannons or write gibberish on college hockey. That seems to make you happy. So he wants govt control over private business??
UND1983 Posted September 18, 2020 Posted September 18, 2020 2 minutes ago, UNDlaw80 said: Testing and 'living normally' aren't mutually exclusive. Do you feel we would have a mask mandate or have had a mask mandate by now if a Democrat was the President?
Hayduke1 Posted September 18, 2020 Posted September 18, 2020 7 minutes ago, homer said: So he wants govt control over private business?? We already do. 1
Hayduke1 Posted September 18, 2020 Posted September 18, 2020 6 minutes ago, UND1983 said: Do you feel we would have a mask mandate or have had a mask mandate by now if a Democrat was the President? Biden has said based on the stats we have now, and if it continues, he would impose a nationwide mask mandate for up to three months. 1
UNDlaw80 Posted September 18, 2020 Posted September 18, 2020 11 minutes ago, UND1983 said: Do you feel we would have a mask mandate or have had a mask mandate by now if a Democrat was the President? Probably. And I'm against a federal mask mandate. That should be a state's decision. That said, that has nothing to do with Trump manipulating the CDC in an attempt to deter citizens from getting tested. That's beyond immoral.
The Sicatoka Posted September 18, 2020 Posted September 18, 2020 23 minutes ago, JohnboyND7 said: You mean like Biden saying Trump had the authority and ability to save literally everyone who died lol. That would require the powers of deity (think: Lazarus). And clearly, folks who do not favor Mr. Trump would not want him to have god-like power such as that.
Oxbow6 Posted September 18, 2020 Posted September 18, 2020 33 minutes ago, UNDlaw80 said: Testing and 'living normally' aren't mutually exclusive. They aren't but wait until the NDHD announcement in minutes that ND set a record number of positives today even though it was on a record amount of tests with the daily positivity rate of 5.2% with 14 day rolling rate of 5.8%. Context and perspective are important but that went by the waste side months ago.
Goon Posted September 18, 2020 Posted September 18, 2020 28 minutes ago, UND1983 said: Do you feel we would have a mask mandate or have had a mask mandate by now if a Democrat was the President? Yes, they would have mandated a mandatory mask mandate. Even though it wouldn't be constitutional.
SIOUXFAN97 Posted September 18, 2020 Posted September 18, 2020 42 minutes ago, Goon said: Exactly, Biden actually thinks presidents can control a virus. It’s not possible. has anyone thought that sometimes people with dementia let the truth slip out sometimes...like how grandma might let it slip at Christmas dinner she had a threesome with hugh hefner and burt reynolds back in in 1973? maybe Biden just let it slip that this plandemic was 100% planned and 100% preventable? 2 1
AlphaMikeFoxtrot Posted September 18, 2020 Posted September 18, 2020 1 hour ago, SIOUXFAN97 said: www.cnn.com www.vox.com www.msnbc.com Do you have examples of actual articles they've put out that convinced people nuclear energy is bad? 1
MrEdway Posted September 18, 2020 Posted September 18, 2020 39 minutes ago, Hayduke1 said: He didn't say that presidents can control a virus. He also didn't say that nobody would have died if he would have been president He did say that setting mask requirements, social distancing and closing of businesses early in this pandemic would have slowed the spread of the virus and lessened fatalities, probably by quite a bit. But, go ahead and deny all of this. In spite of data proving otherwise. Remain willfully ignorant and play with your water cannons or write gibberish on college hockey. That seems to make you happy. I remember the Democrats crying that the China virus hearings were a distraction for the sham impeachment proceedings way back in January. And now they blame Trump. lol.
Hayduke1 Posted September 18, 2020 Posted September 18, 2020 5 minutes ago, Goon said: Yes, they would have mandated a mandatory mask mandate. Even though it wouldn't be constitutional. I see. So, you are a constotutional.lawyer now. Intenet style. LMFAO. Pray tell, how would it be "unconstitutional"? Will ypu and the other internet constitutionsl lawyers get together and throw out seat belt laws, drinking and driving laws, health department codes for restaurants, etc? This should be interesting.
SIOUXFAN97 Posted September 18, 2020 Posted September 18, 2020 4 minutes ago, AlphaMikeFoxtrot said: Do you have examples of actual articles they've put out that convinced people nuclear energy is bad? aint gonna do your work for u
The Sicatoka Posted September 18, 2020 Posted September 18, 2020 4 minutes ago, Hayduke1 said: Pray tell, how would it be "unconstitutional"? I'm no lawyer, and I didn't even stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night, but I'd go with the old standby: Amendment 1: freedom of speech (widely interpreted today to include freedom of expression). Put a far less subtle, less PC, way: Don't make me wear a gold star.
AlphaMikeFoxtrot Posted September 18, 2020 Posted September 18, 2020 Just now, SIOUXFAN97 said: aint gonna do your work for u Then don't "fix" my posts if you can't back it up.
Hayduke1 Posted September 18, 2020 Posted September 18, 2020 16 minutes ago, The Sicatoka said: I'm no lawyer, and I didn't even stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night, but I'd go with the old standby: Amendment 1: freedom of speech (widely interpreted today to include freedom of expression). Weak. https://www.chicagotribune.com/opinion/commentary/ct-opinion-coronavirus-mask-mandates-constitutional-20200723-53dpqip7lff55o5fp444mql6cm-story.html
Goon Posted September 18, 2020 Posted September 18, 2020 17 minutes ago, Hayduke1 said: I see. So, you are a constitutional lawyer now. Internet style. LMFAO. Pray tell, how would it be "unconstitutional"? Will you and the other internet constitutional lawyers get together and throw out seat belt laws, drinking and driving laws, health department codes for restaurants, etc? This should be interesting. Try and keep up Skippy. From Dementia Joe. Quote On Thursday, Mr. Biden took a different view. “I cannot mandate people wearing masks,” he said. But he added that he did have the authority to enforce mask-wearing on federal property and could institute a fine if people did not do so. “I can do that on federal property,” he said, about a mask mandate. “As president, I will do that. On federal land, I would have the authority. If you’re on federal land, you must wear a mask. In a federal building, you must wear a mask. And we could have a fine for them not doing it.” There is some question whether it would be an over reach or not. Quote Joe Biden, however, would demand a vast federal power over health, and he would locate it in the executive branch. But that would be a mistake. It is true that the Constitution gives significant power to the president over foreign affairs. There, as Alexander Hamilton observed in Federalist No. 70, “[e]nergy in the Executive is a leading character in the definition of good government.” But on the domestic front, the Constitution sends Congress to the fore. Justice Robert Jackson once argued in his famous concurrence in the so-called steel seizure cases that presidential power in domestic affairs would reach its zenith when the president acted according to Congress’s authorization, and it would hit its nadir when the president acts contrary to Congress. There is a middle zone where the president is neither acting in accord or against congressional authorization, and so must rely solely on whatever executive power the office has. There is nothing, however, that authorizes a President Trump now, or a President Biden tomorrow, to mandate face coverings nationwide via executive power. Congress has not enacted any such law for the president to enforce. Masks do not fall under the president’s power as commander-in-chief, nor do they plausibly come within any of his other executive authorities, such as granting pardons or nominating officers.
SIOUXFAN97 Posted September 18, 2020 Posted September 18, 2020 22 minutes ago, AlphaMikeFoxtrot said: Then don't "fix" my posts if you can't back it up. can't help...almost all of your posts are easily fixed....u never have any rebuttals?
Goon Posted September 18, 2020 Posted September 18, 2020 19 minutes ago, Frozen4sioux said: Flower Power.
The Sicatoka Posted September 18, 2020 Posted September 18, 2020 26 minutes ago, Hayduke1 said: Weak. https://www.chicagotribune.com/opinion/commentary/ct-opinion-coronavirus-mask-mandates-constitutional-20200723-53dpqip7lff55o5fp444mql6cm-story.html As the article title says, that is wonderful Commentary; but, until the issue is argued and adjudicated in the courts it is just that ... commentary (aka opinion). 1
Hayduke1 Posted September 18, 2020 Posted September 18, 2020 2 minutes ago, The Sicatoka said: As the article title says, that is wonderful Commentary; but, until the issue is argued and adjudicated in the courts it is just that ... commentary (aka opinion). Nope. Goon said it was unconstitutional. So, there you have it. Lol
Hayduke1 Posted September 18, 2020 Posted September 18, 2020 19 minutes ago, Goon said: Try and keep up Skippy. From Dementia Joe. There is some question whether it would be an over reach or not. Fair enough. He shifted positions a bit. I just went off memory of an earlier speech. However, it is in question whether it would be constitutional. In the meantime, I am going drinking and driving, not wearing seat belts. The heck with speed limits too. Because.. freedom! 1
AlphaMikeFoxtrot Posted September 18, 2020 Posted September 18, 2020 24 minutes ago, SIOUXFAN97 said: can't help...almost all of your posts are easily fixed....u never have any rebuttals? Me: simpsons' depiction of nuclear power ruined public perception of it You: it was the Media! Me: do you have any examples of this? You: *lists liberal media outlets rather than examples* Me: again, actual examples? You: look it up yourself Not sure how I'm supposed to have a rebuttal to that. I'm more than willing to back up my assertion about the Simpsons.
Recommended Posts