Vaccine

[crush]

You: spouts off something thinking you understand it (like the two yellow cards thing)
Me: hmmm…does he understand it? Probably not but let’s give him benefit of the doubt. What about this?
you: doesnt understand it. Goes off on a tangent
Me: nope. He doesn’t get it. Surprise surprise.
You: look at me understanding this. Look at me I’m a debate master
Me: sighs. We aren’t even debating…why does he think that?
you: answer my question
Me: no thanks. You don’t understand your own question
You: look at you being all evasive. I must be winning. She always gets evasive when I’m winning and make her feel uncomfortable
Me: snorts
You: look at you laughing. That’s a sign you are uncomfortable. I’m winning
Me: shakes head as you crash

it’s why we call you Magoo dude.

Grace, you won!!!

 

[crush]

Never have I posted that two yellow cards does not equal a red. But you should stick with that at least for today - it's a clever obfuscation. And it has nothing to do with why you won't (or can't?) answer a simple question.

Loser!!!

 

[espola]

It has everything to do with you you lose treads and are magoo. You jumped straight to dissent=red and even asked surf ref a question about it straight up. You never stopped to consider the possibility that two yellows = a red and yet here you are on a soccer forum.

More argument by assertion. I assume you know what that means.

 

[espola]

More argument by assertion. I assume you know what that means.

 

[met61]

Take the L!

 

[EvilGoalie 21]

No video Evil

Yeah I think your "I am Wallace" link broke during reply. I try not to post too many videos, gifs, images, etc. On my end that sort of stuff ends up just being hard to distinguish from the pop up ads. I image with the premium thing you get a more seamless user experience. But seeing how its Friday and it's a good tune, what the heck. Plus, in this time of ratty t-shirt lock down fashion, these matching tailored double-breasted maroon jackets deserve a moment of admiration.

 

[Grace T.]

More argument by assertion. I assume you know what that means.

Go ahead. Try everything to cover up your own ignorance

 

[Grace T.]

So you failed that class, too?

Now you are just trolling…that’s not even clever…troll away

 

[espola]

Go ahead. Try everything to cover up your own ignorance

Here's a question for you (and a chance to display knowledge superior to mine) -- Who is driving up the costs of N95 masks?

 

[Grace T.]

Here's a question for you (and a chance to display knowledge superior to mine) -- Who is driving up the costs of N95 masks?

And back to square 1…thanks for playing

 

[crush]

Yeah I think your "I am Wallace" link broke during reply. I try not to post too many videos, gifs, images, etc. On my end that sort of stuff ends up just being hard to distinguish from the pop up ads. I image with the premium thing you get a more seamless user experience. But seeing how its Friday and it's a good tune, what the heck. Plus, in this time of ratty t-shirt lock down fashion, these matching tailored double-breasted maroon jackets deserve a moment of admiration.

 

[EvilGoalie 21]

Here's the Wallace pic from-lots of pages ago at this point. It appears to me that his head injury has impaired his cognitive state. Of course, that's nothing compared to the fate that awaits him. Here's the thing though. check out the two dudes sharing a sword. Against this orgy of rugged manly individualism the director has chosen to sneak in the withering effects of creeping collective action. Eroding from within. I suppose one could argue that an army is the quintessential form of collective action. Or maybe they just ran out of swords for the extras. But why derail a good metaphorical train just as its leaving the station.

 

[GoldenGate]

Hey EOTL. How yah been? Long time, huh? Whatcha been up to? Still playing amateur counsel?

1. Wow way to distort my position. Dad4: see this is a deliberate mischaracterization of position in an attempt to lie....when you post the study itself and invite people to read it themselves, I'm not attempting to distort anything. EOTL: The legal issue is not just livestock...it's whether the counties have authority to undertake actions which exceed the enumerated powers set out in the statute, considering no one contemplated such powers at the time the statutes were drafted. It is entirely possible that a court would agree with you and say and statute was not intended to be limiting. It is also entirely possible that the courts could say certain actions undertaken (the relevant one was the shuttering of churches and virtually all economic commerce which was the issue at the time) exceeded the powers granted by the statutes. The emergency decree was a belt and suspenders approach to give the counties more leverage. Newsom facing a political recall made a tactical decision to leave that in place to allow the counties maximum flexibility to do what they thought they needed to do while at the same time not taking any actions himself (such as a state wide indoor mask mandate) that might make him accountable during the recall.

2. My position that the states should have maximum flexibility is because of the US constitution and the states are sovereign entities. As you know, the Constitution doesn't care if California is several multiples the size of Rhode Island. My position that states should be allowed to control their own pandemic responses is based on my belief of a limited interstate commerce clause and that nowhere in the Constitution does it give the federal government power over public health, therefore reserving such right to the states. The counties, of course, have no such sovereign claim, and therefore are subordinate to the state and have such powers only as the state governments delegate under their respective constitutions.

3. Liberals loved the distinction of sovereign powers while Trump was president. Otherwise, Trump would have ordered Newsom and Cuomo and the other blue state governors to open up. Now Republicans love the distinction because DeSantis can give Biden the finger. Having recently returned from the Dakotas, it sets up a hilarious and nonsensical situation that you need to wear a mask to enter a national park there, but pretty much no one else is wearing a mask.

4. At first you had me going (even the reference to Golden Gate) that you are an actual legal scholar but your failure to understand the distinction in 2, the vocab you use and the quasi legal understanding and failure to understand legal nuances (few lawyers take absolutist legal positions....it's beaten out of us in law school) points to you being my old friend EOTL. Missed yah (not).

1. Where is the language in the statute that says a local health agency's authority to take action in response to a pandemic is limited to burning livestock? It doesn't exist. The statute is painfully clear that a local health agency has broad authority to do what it wants to limit the negative impact of infectious diseases. The local ordinances that do so specifically reference this section. There is literally nothing that supports your "theory" that it is Newsom's fault that local agencies have implemented their own ordinances because they only have that authority that local agencies may not implement their own pandemic rules unless the governor has declared a state of emergency. That is just a lie no matter how many words you use to obfuscate that.

2. States are not "sovereign". They have only powers not granted to the federal government, which you would know if you read the Constitution or were an attorney. Second, you are correct that the Constitution doesn't care if LA is bigger than Rhode Island. But do you know who does? The "sovereign" state of California, which decided by state statute using its state power that it would allow its local jurisdictions to decide how to handle pandemics in their jurisdictions as they decide are best unless and until the state decides it must intervene. So just as the federal Constitution allows the federal government to delegate certain matters to the states, which it does all the time, the state Constitution allows the state to similarly delegate things like authority to handle a pandemic, to local jurisdictions unless and until it decides otherwise. There is no practical reason why L.A. should have less ability to make decisions about how best to handle a pandemic in its jurisdiction than Rhode Island, and there is also no legal reason either given that the "sovereign" state of CA has elected to use its state power to let local jurisdictions decide what is best for them. This provides by far the best flexibility for everyone because places like LA County obviously have different needs than Butte County, but the state can certainly intervene using its state power if it decides one of them is fucking it up. Honestly, you sound like someone who went to law school and took constitutional law but completely failed to learn anything about a state's "sovereign" power, which includes its "sovereign" ability to establish how government in its state works.

3. This is just made up bs.

4. As I have asked before, where is the legal authority that says the Health and Safety Code section that provides local jurisdictions with authority to implement their own rules and regulations in a pandemic is limited to burning clothes and livestock, as you claimed? I actually cited the statute that is directly on point, which is not "quasi" law. The only "quasi" legal discussion here was your bs nonsense about a county's authority being limited burning livestock and something to do with measles based on a vague penumbra that you can't support with a citation to anything.

I had not made any personal attacks on you, yet here you are doing exactly that, probably because that is the only thing you can do in response to the fact that your "legal" opinion that counties only have the authority to implement mask and other mandates if a state of emergency is declared - or is limited to some nonsense about burning livestock - is simply a lie. You don't practice law and probably never have, that is clear. And although that is not a requirement to understanding how the federal, state and local governments interact and what authority they have, it is very obvious that you have no idea what you are talking about. You are so clueless that you're talking about the US Constitution on an issue that is governed by the California Constitution because, you know, the "sovereign" state of California gets to decide what its local jurisdictions can and cannot do.

 

[dad4]

It still doesn't explain why you wear them.

1) you are vaxxed
2) you are fairly young
3) you are fairly health
4) you have claimed now for over a year that surgical masks will do the job.

There is a difference between universal masking and one person donning a mask. The first has a considerably larger impact than the second- not simply because one involves more people, but because one is more effective at changing the rate of growth of the virus.

But, to understand this, you’d have to be willing to think of covid as a societal problem instead of as an individual one. As I said before, you are either unwilling or unable to make that cognitive leap.

 

[Grace T.]

1. Where is the language in the statute that says a local health agency's authority to take action in response to a pandemic is limited to burning livestock? It doesn't exist. The statute is painfully clear that a local health agency has broad authority to do what it wants to limit the negative impact of infectious diseases. The local ordinances that do so specifically reference this section. There is literally nothing that supports your "theory" that it is Newsom's fault that local agencies have implemented their own ordinances because they only have that authority that local agencies may not implement their own pandemic rules unless the governor has declared a state of emergency. That is just a lie no matter how many words you use to obfuscate that.

2. States are not "sovereign". They have only powers not granted to the federal government, which you would know if you read the Constitution or were an attorney. Second, you are correct that the Constitution doesn't care if LA is bigger than Rhode Island. But do you know who does? The "sovereign" state of California, which decided by state statute using its state power that it would allow its local jurisdictions to decide how to handle pandemics in their jurisdictions as they decide are best unless and until the state decides it must intervene. So just as the federal Constitution allows the federal government to delegate certain matters to the states, which it does all the time, the state Constitution allows the state to similarly delegate things like authority to handle a pandemic, to local jurisdictions unless and until it decides otherwise. There is no practical reason why L.A. should have less ability to make decisions about how best to handle a pandemic in its jurisdiction than Rhode Island, and there is also no legal reason either given that the "sovereign" state of CA has elected to use its state power to let local jurisdictions decide what is best for them. This provides by far the best flexibility for everyone because places like LA County obviously have different needs than Butte County, but the state can certainly intervene using its state power if it decides one of them is fucking it up. Honestly, you sound like someone who went to law school and took constitutional law but completely failed to learn anything about a state's "sovereign" power, which includes its "sovereign" ability to establish how government in its state works.

3. This is just made up bs.

4. As I have asked before, where is the legal authority that says the Health and Safety Code section that provides local jurisdictions with authority to implement their own rules and regulations in a pandemic is limited to burning clothes and livestock, as you claimed? I actually cited the statute that is directly on point, which is not "quasi" law. The only "quasi" legal discussion here was your bs nonsense about a county's authority being limited burning livestock and something to do with measles based on a vague penumbra that you can't support with a citation to anything.

I had not made any personal attacks on you, yet here you are doing exactly that, probably because that is the only thing you can do in response to the fact that your "legal" opinion that counties only have the authority to implement mask and other mandates if a state of emergency is declared - or is limited to some nonsense about burning livestock - is simply a lie. You don't practice law and probably never have, that is clear. And although that is not a requirement to understanding how the federal, state and local governments interact and what authority they have, it is very obvious that you have no idea what you are talking about. You are so clueless that you're talking about the US Constitution on an issue that is governed by the California Constitution because, you know, the "sovereign" state of California gets to decide what its local jurisdictions can and cannot do.

You so are EOTL man, or his otherwise his clone. EXACT SAME SCHTICK.

 

[crush]

Here's the Wallace pic from-lots of pages ago at this point. It appears to me that his head injury has impaired his cognitive state. Of course, that's nothing compared to the fate that awaits him. Here's the thing though. check out the two dudes sharing a sword. Against this orgy of rugged manly individualism the director has chosen to sneak in the withering effects of creeping collective action. Eroding from within. I suppose one could argue that an army is the quintessential form of collective action. Or maybe they just ran out of swords for the extras. But why derail a good metaphorical train just as its leaving the station.

View attachment 11618

Weak!!!

 

[crush]

You so are EOTL man, or his otherwise his clone. EXACT SAME SCHTICK.

EOTL is Satan's side kick. This is where I go deep into rabbit hole and most stay at the top because no one wants to look at all the evil that the likes of this man and his crew has done to folks like you and me Grace. EOTL kills and lies and threatens dads and their children not to go around his campus.

 

[espola]

1. Where is the language in the statute that says a local health agency's authority to take action in response to a pandemic is limited to burning livestock? It doesn't exist. The statute is painfully clear that a local health agency has broad authority to do what it wants to limit the negative impact of infectious diseases. The local ordinances that do so specifically reference this section. There is literally nothing that supports your "theory" that it is Newsom's fault that local agencies have implemented their own ordinances because they only have that authority that local agencies may not implement their own pandemic rules unless the governor has declared a state of emergency. That is just a lie no matter how many words you use to obfuscate that.

2. States are not "sovereign". They have only powers not granted to the federal government, which you would know if you read the Constitution or were an attorney. Second, you are correct that the Constitution doesn't care if LA is bigger than Rhode Island. But do you know who does? The "sovereign" state of California, which decided by state statute using its state power that it would allow its local jurisdictions to decide how to handle pandemics in their jurisdictions as they decide are best unless and until the state decides it must intervene. So just as the federal Constitution allows the federal government to delegate certain matters to the states, which it does all the time, the state Constitution allows the state to similarly delegate things like authority to handle a pandemic, to local jurisdictions unless and until it decides otherwise. There is no practical reason why L.A. should have less ability to make decisions about how best to handle a pandemic in its jurisdiction than Rhode Island, and there is also no legal reason either given that the "sovereign" state of CA has elected to use its state power to let local jurisdictions decide what is best for them. This provides by far the best flexibility for everyone because places like LA County obviously have different needs than Butte County, but the state can certainly intervene using its state power if it decides one of them is fucking it up. Honestly, you sound like someone who went to law school and took constitutional law but completely failed to learn anything about a state's "sovereign" power, which includes its "sovereign" ability to establish how government in its state works.

3. This is just made up bs.

4. As I have asked before, where is the legal authority that says the Health and Safety Code section that provides local jurisdictions with authority to implement their own rules and regulations in a pandemic is limited to burning clothes and livestock, as you claimed? I actually cited the statute that is directly on point, which is not "quasi" law. The only "quasi" legal discussion here was your bs nonsense about a county's authority being limited burning livestock and something to do with measles based on a vague penumbra that you can't support with a citation to anything.

I had not made any personal attacks on you, yet here you are doing exactly that, probably because that is the only thing you can do in response to the fact that your "legal" opinion that counties only have the authority to implement mask and other mandates if a state of emergency is declared - or is limited to some nonsense about burning livestock - is simply a lie. You don't practice law and probably never have, that is clear. And although that is not a requirement to understanding how the federal, state and local governments interact and what authority they have, it is very obvious that you have no idea what you are talking about. You are so clueless that you're talking about the US Constitution on an issue that is governed by the California Constitution because, you know, the "sovereign" state of California gets to decide what its local jurisdictions can and cannot do.

I liked the part about "if you...were an attorney".

 

[espola]

You so are EOTL man, or his otherwise his clone. EXACT SAME SCHTICK.

Argument by assertion. Haven't we discussed this already?

 

[crush]

I liked the part about "if you...were an attorney".

I know you are and so is the EOTL/Golden Gate bridge avatar lawyer dudes. You guys stole youth soccer and lied doing it. What a bunch of losers who use girls to make a buck. Losers!!!!