Ser Scot A Ellison Posted May 20, 2020 Share Posted May 20, 2020 3 minutes ago, Triskele said: This is totally confusing. Hasn't this already come to a head with church services and whatnot? In some states. Federally, no. Bottom line is that there needs to be a content neutral reason for restrictions on speech and assembly. If you target for what is being said that is “prior restraint” of speech by the State. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 20, 2020 Share Posted May 20, 2020 5 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said: In some states. Federally, no. Bottom line is that there needs to be a content neutral reason for restrictions on speech and assembly. If you target for what is being said that is “prior restraint” of speech by the State. But states could say "no gatherings in excess of X number of people" correct? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted May 20, 2020 Share Posted May 20, 2020 3 minutes ago, The Great Unwashed said: But states could say "no gatherings in excess of X number of people" correct? Yes, but it must be a real not specious reason and it must be enforced for everyone and only for the time absolutely necessary to maintain safety. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 20, 2020 Share Posted May 20, 2020 1 minute ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said: Yes, but it must be a real not specious reason and it must be enforced for everyone and only for the time absolutely necessary to maintain safety. How do you specify a time limit during a pandemic? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted May 20, 2020 Share Posted May 20, 2020 1 minute ago, The Great Unwashed said: How do you specify a time limit during a pandemic? For the duration of the pandemic then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 20, 2020 Share Posted May 20, 2020 1 minute ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said: For the duration of the pandemic then. That works for me. All gatherings need to be limited imo. If Trump cries about it he can go pound sand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Richard II Posted May 20, 2020 Share Posted May 20, 2020 8 minutes ago, The Great Unwashed said: That works for me. All gatherings need to be limited imo. If Trump cries about it he can go pound sand. Oh cmon, you're in OK, you should know, nothing any state says is going to stop idiots from gathering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 20, 2020 Share Posted May 20, 2020 2 minutes ago, Darth Richard II said: Oh cmon, you're in OK, you should know, nothing any state says is going to stop idiots from gathering. Well yeah, but that doesn't mean I don't think they're all morons. The Bible thumpers are going to end up killing us all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Richard II Posted May 20, 2020 Share Posted May 20, 2020 1 minute ago, Triskele said: to bring it full circle then it sounds like there's a major remaining question on this and Trump is totally wanting to get his rallies going. This is very morbid, but it seems like this could quite literally be a shockingly efficient way to infect Trump country in the run up to the election. Does he have any officials that will even be able to tell him this? I've seen this thing kicking around the internet that Trump is more Stalin than anyone else because everyone had to do absurd things to react to the leader like try to plant orange groves in Siberia or something. Well, normally I would not give two shits at this point if those people fall over and die, but its extremely likely they will infect others who aren't as evil/crazy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted May 20, 2020 Share Posted May 20, 2020 1 hour ago, Triskele said: So if I understand it's somewhat legally murky? Not exactly. Legally they could prevent it, but there's no way to enforce it, and to do so would be a bad look. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Richard II Posted May 20, 2020 Share Posted May 20, 2020 Oh, if I lacked empathy ...yeah Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Richard II Posted May 20, 2020 Share Posted May 20, 2020 28 minutes ago, Triskele said: Not you, dude. I understand. Haha no I know. :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DireWolfSpirit Posted May 20, 2020 Share Posted May 20, 2020 Actually I thought Pelosi was being extraordinarily gracious in describing Trump. He is not spoken of in our family without a string of expletives and insults far worse than anything the Speaker mentioned. No mercy should be shown this man, ever. He lost the right to any sort of benefit of doubt or privilege to any decency from me long ago. I know what he is and how he should be named. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IheartIheartTesla Posted May 20, 2020 Share Posted May 20, 2020 PPP just presented a poll where it showed that Obama would beat Trump 54-43 if the election were held today (it had 44-46 split of people who voted Trump-Clinton). Someone should send Trump this poll result. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maithanet Posted May 20, 2020 Share Posted May 20, 2020 32 minutes ago, IheartIheartTesla said: PPP just presented a poll where it showed that Obama would beat Trump 54-43 if the election were held today (it had 44-46 split of people who voted Trump-Clinton). Someone should send Trump this poll result. Joe Biden is the Matt Cassel to Obama's Tom Brady. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Week Posted May 20, 2020 Author Share Posted May 20, 2020 29 minutes ago, Maithanet said: Joe Biden is the Matt Cassel to Obama's Tom Brady. He can deliver a winning season, but he ain't getting to the Superbowl (or even the playoffs). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maithanet Posted May 20, 2020 Share Posted May 20, 2020 3 minutes ago, Week said: He can deliver a winning season, but he ain't getting to the Superbowl (or even the playoffs). Don't forget that one pro bowl appearance! EDIT: The question is whether we have Cassel 2008, ie capable of winning if the rest of his team is good, or Cassel 2015, where even with a strong team he couldn't win anything. Early signs are still pointing to 2008, but we all have doubts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martell Spy Posted May 20, 2020 Share Posted May 20, 2020 Congress sends rebuke of DeVos ‘borrower defense’ rule to Trump’s desk The Democrat-led effort to overturn DeVos’ rule won some Republican votes in both chambers but did not get a veto-proof majority in either chamber. https://www.politico.com/news/2020/05/19/congress-devos-rebuke-270077 Quote The White House previously issued a Statement of Administration Policy threatening to veto the measure, though Trump told GOP senators earlier this year that he was “neutral” on the issue. Several dozen veterans organizations are ramping up their efforts to win over the White House on the issue. They’ll be running an ad on Fox News, starting Wednesday, urging Trump the sign the legislation. The groups include Veterans Education Success, the American Legion, Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America and Vietnam Veterans of America. The Democrat-led effort to overturn DeVos’ rule won some Republican votes in both chambers but did not garner a veto-proof majority in either the House or Senate. Ten Republican senators broke with the Trump administration and joined with Democrats on a 53-42 Senate vote in March. The House passed the resolution in February 231-180, with the support of six Republicans. DeVos’ new policy, which is set to take effect July 1, sets more stringent standards for when the government will wipe out the debt of students who claim that they were misled or deceived by their colleges. The Obama administration initially wrote the regulation in response to a flood of claims for debt relief following the collapse of large for-profit colleges like Corinthian Colleges and ITT Tech. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fragile Bird Posted May 20, 2020 Share Posted May 20, 2020 Lol, now it's the head of the CDC, Dr. Redfield, who looks like he's headed for the firing squad. And apparently his long-time colleague, Dr. Birx, may be one of the movers behind the hit team. I've had a feeling for a long time that she has drunk the kool-aid. I think Trump would like to fire Dr. Fauci as well, but he has protections as a civil servant that would make it complicated, like the grounds for firing being restricted and the rights of appeal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starkess Posted May 20, 2020 Share Posted May 20, 2020 18 hours ago, GrimTuesday said: She could have said that the drug carries a higher risk factor with his health profile, she could have phrased it in a way that didn't sound like she was trying to be insulting, she could have not looked like a cat that has trapped a mouse in pointing out this fact. She didn't sound like she was being blunt to me, she sounded like she thought this was a rhetorical win for her. Trump is going to be what Trump is going to be, he lives in the mud. The issue is that he drags everyone down into the mud with him. You don't win by jumping into the pit. I don't care how this made Trump feel, I care about how this plays into the large media narrative as relates to fat people. I watched the clip, that's exactly what she did. The term "morbidly obese" is not automatically an insulting one. It was relevant and correct in this context. "Overweight" is a separate and distinct category, and using it to soften her words would have been inaccurate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.