Biden already has an antagonist-in-chief. It's Ron DeSantis, the Florida GOP governor Democrats have tagged as 'Trump's errand boy.' https://www.businessinsider.com/ron...biden-florida-governor-2022-covid-plan-2021-2
Biden wins and you finally came to your senses and echo my biggest anti lockdown argument. I have been saying exactly this about lockdowns and particularly Newsome for months and months.. Multiple times in response to my arguments about Newsom not customizing his lockdowns to the actual data and science you said things like CA provides the data on the website. You were such a deceptive snake about this subject... I hope you realize how many kids lives have been destroyed by fear mongers like you. My wife knows 6 people who have lost kids to suicide during Covid. I know two of them. One woman worked for me as in independent contractor about 10 years ago. I can't state strongly enough how much damage you fear mongers have done to families. The entire time the proper thing to do was to examine the data and directly protect those in the high risk groups.
I’m going to check up on your 6 kids story and they better be attributed to COVID Lockdown.I hope to hell you’re not bullshitting. This could be the lowest you’ve gone with your anecdotal B.S.
The situation in California is very different than in Florida. In California, the COVID data has been transparently published and reviewed by universities. In late November as ICU's got overwhelmed, Governor Newsom decided to move from a county-by-county system for POLICY to a 5 region system. However the policy decisions that were being done for the 5 regions by the Newsom administration were out-of-sync with the California raw data, models, and earlier policy statements. He was quite rightfully called out on this. Now California has reverted to its earlier county-by-county system with each county getting a color code rating associated with applied COVID restrictions. The complaints about policy being out-of-sync with the data have effectively stopped since the reversion back to the earlier county-by-county system. In Florida, Governor DeSantis has been deliberately hiding COVID data including reports from the federal coronavirus task force. Of course, he moved forward with implementing policies for political purposes that were out-of-sync with proper public health practices in a pandemic. Being less than transparent with health data in a middle of a public health crisis undermines public trust in government. DeSantis should be held accountable for his deliberate hiding & lack of transparency with public health data and continuous misinformation. On the next topic, the teen suicide and overall suicide rate in the U.S. has not greatly increased during the COVID pandemic. In fact the yearly rate of growth which has been increasing over the past decade has slowed. The actual suicide data has demonstrated the earlier alarmist articles over teen suicides increasing greatly due to COVID restrictions are absolutely false. Statistically trying to tie teen suicides in the U.S. to COVID restrictions is simply absurd when the data is looked at Your family is much more likely to know someone who died of COVID in 2020 than a teenager who committed suicide. In fact -- at this point --- nearly every family in America personally knows someone who died of COVID. Why don't your think about all the families and friends of the deceased COVID victims -- victims of a failed national COVID policy leading to the largest death toll of any nation.
It took 300 pages, but you finally make a correct statement! Please note left scale. And this is with California completely locked down and a 9.0 unemployment rate!
Who the fuck are you? I do not lie asshole. You do not have to look very far to understand the mental health crisis this is causing for kids. https://www.npr.org/sections/health...-pandemic-may-be-driving-up-kids-suicide-risk https://abc7news.com/suicide-covid-19-mental-health-teen-coronavirus/8079510/
"DeSantis for the win" - Ron's constitutional knowledge is a joke edition... Gov. DeSantis’s Proposed Law Penalizing Social Media Companies for De-Platforming Politicians Is ‘Hilariously Unconstitutional’ https://lawandcrime.com/high-profil...-politicians-is-hilariously-unconstitutional/ Despite his degree from Harvard Law School, Florida’s Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis’s latest fusillade against Silicon Valley has left legal observers wondering whether he has read the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. The pro-Trump Republican zealously advocated for a series of self-styled anti-censorship laws that three legal experts contacted by Law&Crime noted amount to unconstitutional compulsory speech for private companies—in direct contravention of U.S. Supreme Court precedent. And DeSantis could have learned as much by reading a famous high court case involving his hometown paper. In a last-minute press conference largely focused on denouncing “Big Tech” and “cancel culture,” DeSantis unveiled a proposal to penalize social media companies that suspend or block candidates for political office with hefty fines. “We’ve seen the power of their censorship over individuals and organizations, including what I believe is clear viewpoint discrimination,’’ DeSantis said. “Under our proposal, if a technology company de-platforms a candidate for elected office in Florida during the election, a company will face a daily fine of $100,000 until the candidate’s access to the platform is restored again.” DeSantis made his announcement on the same day that attorneys for Donald Trump formally argued that the former president’s false claims of election fraud and the role his words played in inciting his supporters to storm the U.S. Capitol were protected by the First Amendment. The governor even specifically cited Twitter’s decision to permanently suspend Trump from its platform as a reason why his proposal was vital to upholding vital free speech principles. But legal experts were quick to point out that DeSantis’s proposal was itself an unequivocal attack on constitutionally protected free speech. “Governor DeSantis’ proposal is neither novel nor constitutional. It raises the same issue as a previous Florida law which required newspapers that criticized a political candidate to publish that candidates response,” First Amendment attorney Ari Cohn said in an email to Law&Crime. That 1974 case, Miami Herald v. Tornillo, was cited by all three experts Law&Crime contacted. “The Supreme Court struck down the law, ruling that it violated the newspapers’ First Amendment right to choose which content to run or not run,” Cohn said. “In invalidating that law, the Court expressly rejected the very same argument people make for regulating content moderation today: that concentration of ownership and ‘monopoly of the means of communication’ justifies forcing private parties to carry certain speech. But the Court found it unconstitutional then, and it remains unconstitutional now.” Professor Daxton “Chip” Stewart, a media law expert who referred to the proposal as “hilariously unconstitutional,” said that DeSantis exhibited a fundamental misunderstanding of corporations’ rights. “Basically, DeSantis seems to forget that private companies like Facebook and Twitter have First Amendment rights, too,” Stewart noted. “The government can’t force them to host speech they don’t want to, or threaten punishment like these absurd fines for refusing to give platforms to people they find intolerable. Just as a platform can remove accounts of terrorists or the KKK or a cabal that conspires to violently overthrow the government, they can remove accounts of any other individual.” Stewart also noted that the Tornillo decision provided astute guidance on the matter. “The [Tornillo] logic carries over to this kind of situation – platforms, as private companies, are allowed to make editorial decisions. The state of Florida could no more fine Facebook for refusing to host a racist or fascist politician than it could force a newspaper to publish an op-ed by that politician,” he wrote. “Sure, they may be shielded from liability for making those decisions under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, but that’s a different law for a different situation. It doesn’t alter the First Amendment at all. It seems that a lot of the time that these politicians complain about Section 230, what they really don’t like is that platforms have free speech protections just like regular citizens do. And you can’t undo that by repealing or changing Section 230.” First Amendment attorney Marc J. Randazza lauded DeSantis’s overall objective, but said the proposed measure was not a viable means of achieving those ends. “I respect what DeSantis is trying to do, but unconstitutional acts engaged in for a good reason do not transform them into constitutional acts,” he wrote, adding that the governor should start by “re-reading Miami Herald v. Tornillo.” DeSantis did not immediately respond to an email requesting comment.
You’re a fvckn disgrace. Should be disbarred for 20yrs of trafficking B.S. on here. You 3 idiots having been going back n forth on this stupid thread for almost a year. Same argument every day. The owner of this site should give the 3 of yous a free box of tampons. Eat Shit Tsing! You’re a bigger disgrace.