All things CoronaVirus

[seacoaster]

https://www.swacca.org/news-events/sixt ... id-19-ets/

Curious....what do your spidey-senses think will happen if it heads to SCOTUS?

It’s increasingly hard to prognosticate with Gorsuch, who doesn’t appear to care about precedent.

YA, I apologize for the short, maybe snarky-looking response.

Here is the whole decision:

https://www.opn.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinio ... 87p-06.pdf

As you can see, the preamble states it starkly: we are in trouble, on new ground, and workplaces need to be safe to return Americans to their jobs safely. The court then runs through OSHA's statutory mandate, and turns to the Petitioners' -- the states etc., opposing the mandate (my own included) -- arguments and mows them down one by one. I cannot say or really guess on how the SCOTUS would or will rule without really digging into law and arguments. But the decision seems sound and well-reasoned.

Gibbons's brief concurrence, beginning at page 38 is a worthwhile read. She (Reagan appointee from Tennessee) talks about the limited role the courts should play in the development and effectuation of widespread policies affecting broad swaths of the populace. This is -- or was -- an absolutely central tenet of conservative legal thinking in all of my lifetime. We'll see if it catches the eye and brain of Gorsuch and Alito and Thomas, in particular, whose adventuring on the and from the bench is now a basic expectation among court watchers.

Interesting panel: three women; Reagan, Obama and Trump appointees. Trump appointee dissenting.

We shall soon see if the mandate survives.

Thank you...did not interpret your post as snarky.

I like Larson's argument on page 39, seems more logical in nature, and as you say she "mowed down" the nuances, then locked in on "just the facts" as it relates to law.

Looked her up.....no wonder I like her, she worked for Scalia, so she may carry with her that originalists line of application.

But then there is this idiot:

https://twitter.com/DanCrenshawTX/statu ... 1098412039

[MDlaxfan76]

https://www.swacca.org/news-events/sixt ... id-19-ets/

Curious....what do your spidey-senses think will happen if it heads to SCOTUS?

It’s increasingly hard to prognosticate with Gorsuch, who doesn’t appear to care about precedent.

YA, I apologize for the short, maybe snarky-looking response.

Here is the whole decision:

https://www.opn.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinio ... 87p-06.pdf

As you can see, the preamble states it starkly: we are in trouble, on new ground, and workplaces need to be safe to return Americans to their jobs safely. The court then runs through OSHA's statutory mandate, and turns to the Petitioners' -- the states etc., opposing the mandate (my own included) -- arguments and mows them down one by one. I cannot say or really guess on how the SCOTUS would or will rule without really digging into law and arguments. But the decision seems sound and well-reasoned.

Gibbons's brief concurrence, beginning at page 38 is a worthwhile read. She (Reagan appointee from Tennessee) talks about the limited role the courts should play in the development and effectuation of widespread policies affecting broad swaths of the populace. This is -- or was -- an absolutely central tenet of conservative legal thinking in all of my lifetime. We'll see if it catches the eye and brain of Gorsuch and Alito and Thomas, in particular, whose adventuring on the and from the bench is now a basic expectation among court watchers.

Interesting panel: three women; Reagan, Obama and Trump appointees. Trump appointee dissenting.

We shall soon see if the mandate survives.

Thank you...did not interpret your post as snarky.

I like Larson's argument on page 39, seems more logical in nature, and as you say she "mowed down" the nuances, then locked in on "just the facts" as it relates to law.

Looked her up.....no wonder I like her, she worked for Scalia, so she may carry with her that originalists line of application.

But then there is this idiot:

https://twitter.com/DanCrenshawTX/statu ... 1098412039

Pander bear.

[Brooklyn]

Washington state Sen. Doug Ericksen dies after battle with COVID


OLYMPIA -- State Sen. Doug Ericksen, a stalwart conservative voice in the Legislature, former leader of Donald Trump's campaign in Washington and an outspoken critic of COVID-19 emergency orders, has died, his family said Saturday. He was 52.

Ericksen said last month that he had tested positive for the coronavirus while on a trip to El Salvador, although his cause of death was not immediately confirmed this weekend.



https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-ne ... ith-covid/



The so called hoax claims another right wing delusional.

[PizzaSnake]

Washington state Sen. Doug Ericksen dies after battle with COVID


OLYMPIA -- State Sen. Doug Ericksen, a stalwart conservative voice in the Legislature, former leader of Donald Trump's campaign in Washington and an outspoken critic of COVID-19 emergency orders, has died, his family said Saturday. He was 52.

Ericksen said last month that he had tested positive for the coronavirus while on a trip to El Salvador, although his cause of death was not immediately confirmed this weekend.



https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-ne ... ith-covid/



The so called hoax claims another right wing delusional.

C’est la mort.

[a fan]

https://www.swacca.org/news-events/sixt ... id-19-ets/

Curious....what do your spidey-senses think will happen if it heads to SCOTUS?

It’s increasingly hard to prognosticate with Gorsuch, who doesn’t appear to care about precedent.

YA, I apologize for the short, maybe snarky-looking response.

Here is the whole decision:

https://www.opn.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinio ... 87p-06.pdf

As you can see, the preamble states it starkly: we are in trouble, on new ground, and workplaces need to be safe to return Americans to their jobs safely. The court then runs through OSHA's statutory mandate, and turns to the Petitioners' -- the states etc., opposing the mandate (my own included) -- arguments and mows them down one by one. I cannot say or really guess on how the SCOTUS would or will rule without really digging into law and arguments. But the decision seems sound and well-reasoned.

Gibbons's brief concurrence, beginning at page 38 is a worthwhile read. She (Reagan appointee from Tennessee) talks about the limited role the courts should play in the development and effectuation of widespread policies affecting broad swaths of the populace. This is -- or was -- an absolutely central tenet of conservative legal thinking in all of my lifetime. We'll see if it catches the eye and brain of Gorsuch and Alito and Thomas, in particular, whose adventuring on the and from the bench is now a basic expectation among court watchers.

Interesting panel: three women; Reagan, Obama and Trump appointees. Trump appointee dissenting.

We shall soon see if the mandate survives.

Thank you...did not interpret your post as snarky.

I like Larson's argument on page 39, seems more logical in nature, and as you say she "mowed down" the nuances, then locked in on "just the facts" as it relates to law.

Looked her up.....no wonder I like her, she worked for Scalia, so she may carry with her that originalists line of application.

But then there is this idiot:

https://twitter.com/DanCrenshawTX/statu ... 1098412039

When is Logan going to challenge the FORCE vaccinations that are already on the Texas Books, guys?

Put your money where your mouth is. If you think the State shouldn't compel vaccines----let's bring back measles, mumps, rubella, and Polio. All it takes is one Republican talking head to tell Republican voters that these laws are on the books (clearly they don't know about these laws).....and they'll take it from there.

Show the world just how "free we are", right? Let's bring back polio!!!

[youthathletics]

When is Logan going to challenge the FORCE vaccinations that are already on the Texas Books, guys?

Put your money where your mouth is. If you think the State shouldn't compel vaccines----let's bring back measles, mumps, rubella, and Polio. All it takes is one Republican talking head to tell Republican voters that these laws are on the books (clearly they don't know about these laws).....and they'll take it from there.

Show the world just how "free we are", right? Let's bring back polio!!!

Logan?

your satire at equivalency is your own trap. At least the measles , mumps, rubella, and polio vaccines work far better. But wait, universities are damned near 100% vaccinated and still want to shut down. At some point, and I suppose we just aint there yet......we are going to have to grind through this.

The high vaccination rate is not working as expected....this is what brought forth my comment last week about Biden doing nothing. In a sense, by him not telling the people to hunker down, to shut things down....speaks volumes; its time to move on and get busy living..

[a fan]

When is Logan going to challenge the FORCE vaccinations that are already on the Texas Books, guys?

Put your money where your mouth is. If you think the State shouldn't compel vaccines----let's bring back measles, mumps, rubella, and Polio. All it takes is one Republican talking head to tell Republican voters that these laws are on the books (clearly they don't know about these laws).....and they'll take it from there.

Show the world just how "free we are", right? Let's bring back polio!!!

Logan?

Crenshaw....no clue where Logan came from, my bad

your satire at equivalency is your own trap. At least the measles , mumps, rubella, and polio vaccines work far better.

Utter buffalo bagels. NO ONE is arguing that they shouldn't be compelled by the State to take a vaccine "unless it works really well".

They're arguing against State compelled vaccinations, full stop. Read it for yourself, especially for this Logan guy.

But wait, Universities are damned near 100% vaccinated and still want to shut down. At some point, and I suppose we just aint there yet......we are going to have to grind through this.

Private companies, YA. We can't compel them to do anything, right?

And I'll say, I agree with you. But I'm not running Harvard, and it ain't my call.

The high vaccination rate is not working as expected

It's nowhere CLOSE to a "high vaccine rate". So we have no way of knowing.

....this is what brought forth my comment last week about Biden doing nothing. In a sense, by him not telling the people to hunker down, to shut things down....speaks volumes; its time to move on and get busy living..

I agree with you and Biden....vaxx is available to anyone who wants it....time to get on with our lives. My only quibble is that BIden is enabling the anti-vaxx crowd by continuing Federal Covid aid.

[SCLaxAttack]

https://www.swacca.org/news-events/sixt ... id-19-ets/

Curious....what do your spidey-senses think will happen if it heads to SCOTUS?

It’s increasingly hard to prognosticate with Gorsuch, who doesn’t appear to care about precedent.

YA, I apologize for the short, maybe snarky-looking response.

Here is the whole decision:

https://www.opn.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinio ... 87p-06.pdf

As you can see, the preamble states it starkly: we are in trouble, on new ground, and workplaces need to be safe to return Americans to their jobs safely. The court then runs through OSHA's statutory mandate, and turns to the Petitioners' -- the states etc., opposing the mandate (my own included) -- arguments and mows them down one by one. I cannot say or really guess on how the SCOTUS would or will rule without really digging into law and arguments. But the decision seems sound and well-reasoned.

Gibbons's brief concurrence, beginning at page 38 is a worthwhile read. She (Reagan appointee from Tennessee) talks about the limited role the courts should play in the development and effectuation of widespread policies affecting broad swaths of the populace. This is -- or was -- an absolutely central tenet of conservative legal thinking in all of my lifetime. We'll see if it catches the eye and brain of Gorsuch and Alito and Thomas, in particular, whose adventuring on the and from the bench is now a basic expectation among court watchers.

Interesting panel: three women; Reagan, Obama and Trump appointees. Trump appointee dissenting.

We shall soon see if the mandate survives.

Thank you...did not interpret your post as snarky.

I like Larson's argument on page 39, seems more logical in nature, and as you say she "mowed down" the nuances, then locked in on "just the facts" as it relates to law.

Looked her up.....no wonder I like her, she worked for Scalia, so she may carry with her that originalists line of application.

But then there is this idiot:

https://twitter.com/DanCrenshawTX/statu ... 1098412039

Someone doesn’t givva rat’s about the oath of office he took.

[Typical Lax Dad]

When is Logan going to challenge the FORCE vaccinations that are already on the Texas Books, guys?

Put your money where your mouth is. If you think the State shouldn't compel vaccines----let's bring back measles, mumps, rubella, and Polio. All it takes is one Republican talking head to tell Republican voters that these laws are on the books (clearly they don't know about these laws).....and they'll take it from there.

Show the world just how "free we are", right? Let's bring back polio!!!

Logan?

your satire at equivalency is your own trap. At least the measles , mumps, rubella, and polio vaccines work far better. But wait, universities are damned near 100% vaccinated and still want to shut down. At some point, and I suppose we just aint there yet......we are going to have to grind through this.

The high vaccination rate is not working as expected....this is what brought forth my comment last week about Biden doing nothing. In a sense, by him not telling the people to hunker down, to shut things down....speaks volumes; its time to move on and get busy living..

You are too negative. Live your life.

[youthathletics]

Very informative video.....he has been quite helpful throughout this:

[tech37]

Very informative video.....he has been quite helpful throughout this:

Yep, been listening to Campbell for a while. I like his demeanor. Straight forward, trustworthy in his instructive way, and he's not beholden to the bureaucratic overlords.

+1

[cradleandshoot]

NYS has been handing out millions of rapid test kits all over the state. A girl I work with says the test kits are coming back with a lot of false negatives. A false negative is bad news.

[wgdsr]

NYS has been handing out millions of rapid test kits all over the state. A girl I work with says the test kits are coming back with a lot of false negatives. A false negative is bad news.

i wouldn't sweat it. asymptomatic and pre-symptomatic spreaders likely a lot more.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Very informative video.....he has been quite helpful throughout this:

Jesus.....that guy!

[Bart]

NYS has been handing out millions of rapid test kits all over the state. A girl I work with says the test kits are coming back with a lot of false negatives. A false negative is bad news.

Rapid tests are tests that are designed to test when vital loads are high. When s person is infectious and can infect others. NYS is handling out Binax now tests that are quite good when viral loads indicate infectious. A person could test positive with pcr and be V- or not infectious.

[a fan]

Very informative video.....he has been quite helpful throughout this:

Yep, been listening to Campbell for a while. I like his demeanor. Straight forward, trustworthy in his instructive way, and he's not beholden to the bureaucratic overlords.

He worked for the Socialists of the UK Socialized Health Care System, teaching other bureaucrats how to nurse in a socialized health system.

He was LITERALLY one of the bureaucratic overlords, Tech. FFS, man.

If you like what he says, great. But geez, pay attention.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Very informative video.....he has been quite helpful throughout this:

Yep, been listening to Campbell for a while. I like his demeanor. Straight forward, trustworthy in his instructive way, and he's not beholden to the bureaucratic overlords.

He worked for the Socialists of the UK Socialized Health Care System, teaching other bureaucrats how to nurse in a socialized health system.

He was LITERALLY one of the bureaucratic overlords, Tech. FFS, man.

If you like what he says, great. But geez, pay attention.

You mean he was part of the "medical establishment"?

[kramerica.inc]

Corey Booker and Lizzy Warren test positive.

They say they are vaccinated and boosted. But are still symptomatic.

[tech37]

Very informative video.....he has been quite helpful throughout this:

Yep, been listening to Campbell for a while. I like his demeanor. Straight forward, trustworthy in his instructive way, and he's not beholden to the bureaucratic overlords.

He worked for the Socialists of the UK Socialized Health Care System, teaching other bureaucrats how to nurse in a socialized health system.

He was LITERALLY one of the bureaucratic overlords, Tech. FFS, man.

If you like what he says, great. But geez, pay attention.

Laugh all you want. The guy is an independent voice. But you know that

[youthathletics]

Yep, been listening to Campbell for a while. I like his demeanor. Straight forward, trustworthy in his instructive way, and he's not beholden to the bureaucratic overlords.

He worked for the Socialists of the UK Socialized Health Care System, teaching other bureaucrats how to nurse in a socialized health system.

He was LITERALLY one of the bureaucratic overlords, Tech. FFS, man.

If you like what he says, great. But geez, pay attention.

I am confused afan...can you explain where you are coming from please. You layout nonstop how we are already a socialist society here in the US, then come at him simply explaining medical papers and the current virus. What exactly are you trying to convey....that what he is saying is inaccurate and misleading b/c he is a dr. in a country of socialized medicine?