Oregon...the latest revolt against oppression.

[Cardinal]

Who says we are endangering other people? If you are worried stay home and bolt the doors and windows. The rest of us will move on. Your sides problem is you want this to go on indefinitely. If you guys want to start a civil war...this is a fantastic way to start one.

Who says drinking and driving endangers other people? Some people truly are unable to grasp that kind of thing.

 

[maxparrish]

I'm sorry are you being forced into you're cozy little house at gun point? These people getting arrested for going to the park, could you send me the link to these articles so I can see how long they were put in federal prison. Most people are getting fined at the most. 92,000 people have died and the main focus here are the two to three people getting detained a little while?

School isn't canceled, they took online class. More than half of america wants to stay working from home after this is over, so how are you gunna pretend most people are as whiny as you? This a long vacation for anyone in the middle class. The only injustices this has pointed out are how the government would rather spend money on the rich than the people, and the money it takes to survive this country for a month just happens to be more than a lot of people are getting.

I realize your attitude towards home detention for 330,000,000 and the loss of 36,000,000 of their work is being "whiny". I'm sure think this has been "one long vacation" for the shut-in kids, and I am sure you think borrowing trillions of dollars to pay people to avoid leaving the house won't have serious economic costs and repercussions. And hey, who cares it the average 401K loss in 20% (so far) and if people are also dieing because hospitals have shut-out non covid cases deemed "unessential". And because you don't care, you think no one else should.

We get it...we ALL get it.

You shouldn't be trying to get random liberals killed with "violent action," wee could have avoided this lock-down if we had responded properly, but you would rather give up than improve the situation. ...When people die fast the economy go poo-poo, so please don't pretend trying to stop a deadly virus is less important than your boring job.

We all want to go back to work, but we would rather keep our old and sick family members alive. That shouldn't have been an ultimatum in the richest nation on earth.

Also who are the people who pushed too far? The people trying to live or the people who could have done something but didn't? All this anti-lockdown bs is completely misguided. We could have avoided a lockdown but it's too late to just pretend everything is fine.

And I see your first concern listed, is 'get(ting) some random liberals killed', followed by discursive that there couldn't have been any other choice UNLESS there is a way you can blame Trump. Fact is, we should blame not only Trump BUT THE ENTIRE panic porn industry of the deluded that sold a lie to millions of others into thinking this would be an existential threat to humanity, rather than a really bad flu for old people.

If you really think this lockdown is such a nightmare than please tell me about your safe alternative. Because I'm not going to get a haircut until I feel safe, most people won't. Those businesses we need to open won't have any customers if we don't have a plan in place, which we currently don't. Sorry not everybody is as willing to sacrifice our friends and family, but surely you have a plan that might convince us that your precious hair salon is safe to visit.

My "plan" was and is simple. Freedom. Freedom to choose if you wish to shop, dine, or participate in crowds. Freedom to prioritize your own life, be it family, job, or location. Freedom to worship...or not. Freedom to go to a movie...or not. Freedom to hide in terror, call others with more spine "whiners", and to live in a cave and grow your beard and hair as long as you want.

And the ONLY group that should have been isolated should have been willing old people, over 65. Hell, it would have been cheaper to lease every resort in America and provide all the seniors A-1 service and summer long vacations in isolation than try to 'in shelter' 330,000,000 and borrow trillions to fund an economic disaster.

So don't worry about some 'random liberal'; none need to be harmed if the oppressive governments wake up and let the people go. But there are more than a few egotistical autocrats that are determined to destroy their states will ridiculous "opening" criteria before they will grant freedom and rights to their populace.

While they would be insane to keep their states shut-down throughout the summer, their time is running out.

 

[JasperL]

Like so many COVID hotspots, grassroots and informal groups of citizens have arisen asserting their right to free. Much to the shock and resentment of many autocratic governors that have declared themselves to be unaccountable, unlimited, and untouchable for as long as they please (using the magic words "of this is a health emergency") the citizen patriots and public interest groups have had enough from their new overlords - they are under the impression that America is supposed to be a free Republic, one that rejected tyranny of the autocratic and royal sovereigns in 1776.

This isn't an arcane issue, its a fundamental challenge to the entire basis of the US Constitution that rejects the legitimacy of any government that operates under the assumption that the "the state" and its officials are the supreme source of divine and legitimate power. At its root, it is a battle between those who believe in the unalienable rights of man and of a government of and by the sovereign people, and those who thrill at bending the knee to a tyrant of absolute rule over a powerless legislature, civil society, community, and family.

Not four months ago the degree of power seized by state governors would have been unthinkable, even in a major national war. Nothing less than a civil war in the union could have begun to suggest that people could be incarcerated in their homes without trial, denied a source of living, arrested for looking at a sunset or for strolling through a park. And never has it been made illegal to go to school, or to go to church, or to give or obtain a haircut.

So far society has yet to confront the full implications of this oppression, both in human rights and in the destruction of civil society. But the recent suit in Oregon by many Churches and others against an arrogant governor is emblematic of this struggle. Like the governors of Minnesota, Michigan, and Wisconsin (among others) upon expiration of that state's 28 day time limit of the health emergency powers, she (like her peers) simple ignore the elected representatives and decree new powers of unlimited duration (even Hitler had to get permission to have such power by a vote from the Reichstag). And also like her peers, she has mined the law and found highly dubious unspecific "authorization" for her seizure of power so as to negate democracy...not unlike the methods of Maduro in Venezuela.

That's just crap. There's a legitimate legal dispute that is playing out in the courts as we speak, perfectly consistent with constitutional government, the way out system is designed. The governor lost at the local court level and appealed that decision to the Oregon Supreme court, which stayed the decision and will hear the case and decide on the merits. I'm quite sure if the governor loses at the SC level, she'll abide by that ruling.

It's just bull**** to compare what's happening in Oregon with Maduro in Venezuala, or to Hitler!!! for goodness sake.

Mind you, this is not the most fundamental debate (which must be addressed) over Constitutional rights of the individual. But it is over democracy...the right of the people's representatives and signed laws to check the power of the single autocrat that issues whatever "executive orders" and criminal penalties she likes.

Yeah, the governor is invoking powers authorized by "signed laws" that give her those powers. It's how laws work!

So as "liberalism" has now become the ideology of repression and state worship, we must fight... for now in courts and under the law. But if people want their freedoms back, it may well take more violent action - if so, it will be on the head of those who pushed the people too far.

Sheesh, she's trying to save lives, which is the new Hitler concentration camp I guess.

 

[JasperL]

Fighting a tyrannical government is exactly what the second amendment was written for. To call people fighting tyranny, terrorists is imbecilic.

What's so stupid about this line is it wasn't apparently "tyrannical governments" that imposed various restrictions in almost every state back in March and April, including a bunch of red states, like here in Tennessee, and favored by Trump, but those governments that extend them a little longer than right wingers prefer IS TYRANNY!!!! REVOLUTION!!!

The victimhood complex on the right wing is so fascinating and so idiotic sometimes.

 

[JasperL]

Please point out where I supported "terrorism"? Unless you think all violent action against the ruling state is the definition of "terrorism" then no, I don't support terrorism.

Moreover my criteria for personal violent action requires EXACTLY what our founders required:



When either the King of England or Governor Brown without the consent of the governed becomes destructive to the rights of liberty and continue with a long train of abuses and usurpations, one that evinces a design of absolute despotism it is the people's right AND duty to throw off such government.

You call that "terrorism", I call that the most magnificent event in Human History...the Declaration of Independence.

Can you show she doesn't have the consent of the governed? Does a poll result tell you when to take up arms? Why weren't you advocating taking up arms to overthrow this horrible despot and others back in early April? Same tyrants in action, including almost all Republican governors, but you just didn't care back then because you might have agreed with the tyranny, but when you no longer agree, it's different, or something, and if the people violently rise up because the gov. kept restrictions in place a week or two too long, for their liking, it's like the American Revolution!!

 

[Izzy]

I realize your attitude towards home detention for 330,000,000 and the loss of 36,000,000 of their work is being "whiny". I'm sure think this has been "one long vacation" for the shut-in kids, and I am sure you think borrowing trillions of dollars to pay people to avoid leaving the house won't have serious economic costs and repercussions. And hey, who cares it the average 401K loss in 20% (so far) and if people are also dieing because hospitals have shut-out non covid cases deemed "unessential". And because you don't care, you think no one else should.

Why would we have needed to borrow a few trillion? It would take less than the 1.5 trillion that's done almost nothing. Congress has projected that they may spend another 2 trillion, so why would it have been a bad idea to just spend 1.32 trillion and give those 330 million people $4,000 to spend a while inside? Make it $3,000 and it's even less. We didn't need to go bankrupt to have done better, we just needed to make a plan, be ducking organized about this. Other nations spent less money and did better.

Fact is, we should blame not only Trump BUT THE ENTIRE panic porn industry of the deluded that sold a lie to millions of others into thinking this would be an existential threat to humanity, rather than a really bad flu for old people.

They aren't dying of a "bad flu" they are DROWNING IN THEIR OWN SALIVA. Even young people are coming out of this with lung problems that are potentially permanent. We all understand that there is a 99% survival rate, the issue is you can't understand the weight of losing 1 out of every 100 people you know. Pick someone you know you'd give up to a week of choking for air followed by death, it won't be that person. We don't get to choose which old fart dies but we can chose to act like a human and try to prevent spreading covid-19.

The government giving out gloves & masks and requiring that you wear them to go outside would not be panic, it wouldn't be unconstitutional, it wouldn't hurt anyone at all but it may have saved lives.

My "plan" was and is simple. Freedom. Freedom to choose if you wish to shop, dine, or participate in crowds. Freedom to prioritize your own life, be it family, job, or location. Freedom to worship...or not. Freedom to go to a movie...or not. Freedom to hide in terror, call others with more spine "whiners", and to live in a cave and grow your beard and hair as long as you want.

And the ONLY group that should have been isolated should have been willing old people, over 65. Hell, it would have been cheaper to lease every resort in America and provide all the seniors A-1 service and summer long vacations in isolation than try to 'in shelter' 330,000,000 and borrow trillions to fund an economic disaster... So don't worry about some 'random liberal'; none need to be harmed if the oppressive governments wake up and let the people go. But there are more than a few egotistical autocrats that are determined to destroy their states will ridiculous "opening" criteria before they will grant freedom and rights to their populace.

We didn't isolate the old people early enough though did we? Now it's being spread by young people like you, brave souls who have so much spine they don't care about leaving some sweat on a door handle that may end up killing gran gran. We had a deadly virus in 1918, people tried the FREEEDUUUMB rout and they McDuckin died. The second wave was bigger than the first, a lot bigger. You aren't being original for thinking the solution is to let everybody cough where they like, the issue is that that doesn't work, it never has. We need to take this seriously if you want to go back to work.

Criteria for going outside isn't oppression. We sell our freedoms for safety all the time. The seat-belt oppresses my chest but you don't see me complain. The difference here is that it's temporary, unlike the freedoms we sold after 9-11, the government can still look at my nudes if they want. We just need to limit the freedom of our bodily fluids for a little while then we're fine. The goal is to make this last as long as possible so people don't all get infected now and flood the hospitals even more.

Maximum freedom doesn't flatten the curve, united efforts at protecting each other will.

We had the opportunity to come together and do our best to slow this down. We could be outside right now if we were just wearing some masks. We could have made companies put masks on their essential workers instead of putting out a "thanx a lot" ad campaign. Instead we let it spread for like two months before some of us stayed inside a while.

 

[ldsrptcvt]

Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.

those who would not give up temporarily a little "essential" liberty to purchase life for fellow Americans do not deserve citizenship

 

[Helix]

are teabillies in Oregon screaming at cops while not wearing masks? i have zero patience for that bull****.

 

[ldsrptcvt]

Please point out where I supported "terrorism"? Unless you think all violent action against the ruling state is the definition of "terrorism" then no, I don't support terrorism.

Moreover my criteria for personal violent action requires EXACTLY what our founders required:



When either the King of England or Governor Brown without the consent of the governed becomes destructive to the rights of liberty and continue with a long train of abuses and usurpations, one that evinces a design of absolute despotism it is the people's right AND duty to throw off such government.

You call that "terrorism", I call that the most magnificent event in Human History...the Declaration of Independence.

don't be so dramatic; it's a temporary inconvenience to help save the lives of your neighbors.

 

[ldsrptcvt]

Science and medicine cannot answer political questions

When the arm of the state is being used to impose a scientific worldview, that becomes a political question

"impose a scientific worldview"? It's called reality.

 

[ldsrptcvt]

I never signed any social contract giving you a right to not get sick

Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. If you deny Life you deny our founding principles

 

[ldsrptcvt]

But I don't hate to point out that a close reading of my arguement is not based on a single premise, or a few hundred or thousand protestors as a confirmation of democratic legitimacy.

First, as noted many governors (except Brown in Oregon) are being sued by THEIR OWN LEGISLATURES. Moreover, those filing the suits are predicated on the power and consent of the people, through their legislatures, to make laws, which are supposed to be executed by an executive.

Refuse to enforce those laws and refuse to obtain the consent of the governed is not local governance "doing just fine".

In sum: "so far society has yet to confront the full implications of this oppression, both in human rights and in the destruction of civil society. But the recent suit in Oregon by many Churches and others against an arrogant governor is emblematic of this struggle. (over consent)" even if "this is not the most fundamental debate (which must be addressed) over Constitutional rights of the individual."

Second, it is a battle between those who believe in the unalienable rights of man as well as for a government of and by the sovereign people, (versus) those who thrill at bending the knee to a tyrant of absolute rule over a powerless legislature, civil society, community, and family. Inotherwords, this is a conflict between those who believe in human rights as well as in democracy, versus those whose actions are inimical to either of those ends.

This, at the moment, in the courts the battle is over the consent of the governed as established in action and law. However, a more fundamental issue is that regardless of the consent, people have constitutional rights that supersede even majoritarian wishes (e.g. freedom of assembly).

Even a few hundred "bad apples" have unalienable rights to liberty - an issue that is not yet ripe but will be.

Again with the drama; like a teen-aged girl - "I'll just die if I can't have a car!"

 

[RAMOSS]

Great, another “freedom” thread... forget science and medicine, looks like we are going with more bumper sticker thinking from “conservatives.”

In other news, the Right to Drive drunk groups are organizing against unreasonable laws preventing them from going out to bars and then driving home.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

"impose a scientific worldview"? It's called reality.

No, it’s not. The real world works far differently then how technocrats think it does.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. If you deny Life you deny our founding principles

You do not have a right to life at the expense of others liberties.

I actually really like you people. If your side keeps everyone locked down until the end of summer Trump is going to crush the election in a landslide

 

[Phys251]

Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.

Ben Franklin's Famous 'Liberty, Safety' Quote Lost Its Context In 21st Century : NPR

Don't embarrass yourself by quoting Franklin's famous quote out-of-context like that.

 

[ldsrptcvt]

No, it’s not. The real world works far differently then how technocrats think it does.

scientists are not 'technocrats'; the former work in labs, the latter in politics. The scientific worldview is learning that the earth isn't flat, the sun doesn't orbit the earth, laws of physics, chemistry, biology, that the moon causes tides, how plants grow, what causes diseases, etc.

"scientific worldview" = "how the world works" = REALITY

 

[Grand Mal]

Fighting a tyrannical government is exactly what the second amendment was written for. To call people fighting tyranny, terrorists is imbecilic.

That's just what the press releases said about the 2nd amendment. Actually it was written so the founders could hoist a couple and make jokes about the huge comedy the drama queens would make out of it.
You've all exceeded their fondest, funniest imaginings.

 

[JasperL]

I realize your attitude towards home detention for 330,000,000 and the loss of 36,000,000 of their work is being "whiny". I'm sure think this has been "one long vacation" for the shut-in kids, and I am sure you think borrowing trillions of dollars to pay people to avoid leaving the house won't have serious economic costs and repercussions. And hey, who cares it the average 401K loss in 20% (so far) and if people are also dieing because hospitals have shut-out non covid cases deemed "unessential". And because you don't care, you think no one else should.

We get it...we ALL get it.

What we "get" is the economic impacts happened with or without government shut down orders. When it's not safe to travel, people don't. The NCAA and NBA didn't need government to tell them gathering massive crowds of people during a pandemic wasn't going to work, would kill people, sicken more, spread the virus in the crowds, and send infected off all over the country. We went to a movie before the shutdowns were ordered and the theater was empty. Etc. We also "get" that all that's going on here is a policy dispute that you've elevated to a freedom versus tyranny argument.

FWIW, the SP500 is down about 10.2% so far in 2020.

And I see your first concern listed, is 'get(ting) some random liberals killed', followed by discursive that there couldn't have been any other choice UNLESS there is a way you can blame Trump. Fact is, we should blame not only Trump BUT THE ENTIRE panic porn industry of the deluded that sold a lie to millions of others into thinking this would be an existential threat to humanity, rather than a really bad flu for old people.

Why does the severity of the virus matter? If it was more dangerous than you perceive, it's no longer TYRANNY? How does that work exactly? When does a virus or health emergency transition from government doing what they were elected to do, which is protect the citizens from a deadly virus, versus despots robbing people of their god-given freedoms?

And no one claimed it was an existential threat to "humanity" just perhaps a deadly threat a million or so Americans that might be saved, not be dead, with public policy.

It's also relevant that the people through their representatives, in every state, authorized the government to declare states of emergency and impose these restrictions. You seem to think that exercise is illegitimate somehow, but I don't see how it can be.

My "plan" was and is simple. Freedom. Freedom to choose if you wish to shop, dine, or participate in crowds. Freedom to prioritize your own life, be it family, job, or location. Freedom to worship...or not. Freedom to go to a movie...or not. Freedom to hide in terror, call others with more spine "whiners", and to live in a cave and grow your beard and hair as long as you want.

And the ONLY group that should have been isolated should have been willing old people, over 65. Hell, it would have been cheaper to lease every resort in America and provide all the seniors A-1 service and summer long vacations in isolation than try to 'in shelter' 330,000,000 and borrow trillions to fund an economic disaster.

It's nice you have preferences, like we all do. What's a mystery is why you think you have a RIGHT to demand your own preferences from government. Grow up a little bit. Sometimes we don't get what we want. It's life in the big city.

So don't worry about some 'random liberal'; none need to be harmed if the oppressive governments wake up and let the people go. But there are more than a few egotistical autocrats that are determined to destroy their states will ridiculous "opening" criteria before they will grant freedom and rights to their populace.

While they would be insane to keep their states shut-down throughout the summer, their time is running out.

It's possible the governors just have a difficult choice to make and are making decisions you do not like, while weighing public health versus the economy.

 

[PIPEWRENCH]

I hate to destroy your argument in one quick fell swoop, but you premise it upon the "power of governance derives from the governed".

Well, several hundred or even several thousand protesters is such an infinitesimally scant number in relation to the many millions that do not protest, that it is clear to me that by your premise our local governance is doing just fine!

We just have a few hundred or few thousand bad apples.

You need a better premise, one that fits your scenario.

The American Revolution started with a few bad apples and whole lot of people talking in private. You have yet to hear from the rest. You might be surprised at how these few are treated could start a whole lot more people to join in. Just a thought.

 

[AlphaOmega]

Who says drinking and driving endangers other people? Some people truly are unable to grasp that kind of thing.

Drinking and driving does endanger and kill people..following your logic we should ban cars to keep us safe.

 

[AlphaOmega]

What's so stupid about this line is it wasn't apparently "tyrannical governments" that imposed various restrictions in almost every state back in March and April, including a bunch of red states, like here in Tennessee, and favored by Trump, but those governments that extend them a little longer than right wingers prefer IS TYRANNY!!!! REVOLUTION!!!

The victimhood complex on the right wing is so fascinating and so idiotic sometimes.

Sorry but the predicted two foot snowstorm never happened. You can stop being terrified. We are heading into summer, you can take your winter hats off now. The snowstorm isn't going to happen.

 

[AlphaOmega]

That's just what the press releases said about the 2nd amendment. Actually it was written so the founders could hoist a couple and make jokes about the huge comedy the drama queens would make out of it.
You've all exceeded their fondest, funniest imaginings.

I just have one question. Do you actually believe what you just wrote?

 

[AlphaOmega]

Ben Franklin's Famous 'Liberty, Safety' Quote Lost Its Context In 21st Century : NPR

Don't embarrass yourself by quoting Franklin's famous quote out-of-context like that.

The quote stands despite your imbecilic left winger out of context blurt.

 

[AlphaOmega]

those who would not give up temporarily a little "essential" liberty to purchase life for fellow Americans do not deserve citizenship

Cuomo sent infected people back into nursing homes where more people were infected and killed. Unless you have a post calling him out Spare us your purchase life BS.
Governor Baker sent known faulty masks into nursing homes. Again...where is your purchase life BS?
If you are afraid of viruses and wish to hide from them, you are on the wrong planet.
Also, to further prove your BS, I bet you don't have one post blaming China for kiing fellow Americans do you?
Make me feel better and prove me wrong. Show me that post at least.