Printable View
Trump, via twitter:Quote:
Originally Posted by PawDawg
For the purpose of creating conflict and confusion, some in the Fake News Media are saying that it is the Governors decision to open up the states, not that of the President of the United States & the Federal Government. Let it be fully understood that this is incorrect....
....It is the decision of the President, and for many good reasons....
What is being said that since the declaration of the national emergency was issued, to all 50 states, that changed the matter, the authority. Before the declaration it was left entirely to the states to decide, and would have been still, if not for DNE. I don't know how true that position is, but the administration is not having it both ways. They say the circumstances have changed. Now, if that is not correct i.e. the DNE does not grant the WH such authority, then fine, make that argument. But Trump is NOT trying to have it both ways.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
So what stopped Trump from declaring a national emergency and using the power to shut down things in the first place?Quote:
Originally Posted by dawg80
Other than his head being up his ass.
You have lost it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
So, why does any POTUS declare a national emergency? Sometimes hurricanes hit somewhere, there is some damage, even a few deaths, but the damage is not so widespread that it warrants federal intervention. Other times hurricanes create havoc such that it overwhelms that state and other states' capacity to deal with the aftermath, and the POTUS declares the emergency. It takes evaluation and a recommendation....sometimes a governor initiates the declaration by asking for one.
In this case, there was not originally an emergency that rose to that level. Maybe a DNE could have been done sooner, maybe last week, maybe two weeks ago...and I am not so sure that one exists even now. What is the emergency that is not being dealt with in a way that this declaration improves? No governor, not one, asked for one. They sure do when a hurricane slams their state, or tornadoes do, or an earthquake does.
The only one with his head up his ass is you.
Thousands of lives were lost because Trump didn’t act sooner. And we are still not close to being in the clear, so if he starts overriding the states declarations then even more blood will be on his hands.Quote:
Originally Posted by dawg80
As "Bennie" would say to gussie "Your proctologist found your head":laugh:
I got distracted by Goosey's latest TDS episode...lost track of what I really wanted to say.
I don't agree that any POTUS, including Trump, has the right to make the states do anything, in this situation. Yes, there is a fine line as it pertains to the nation as a whole. POTUS' can issue executive orders when there is a imminent danger to the nation as a whole, and as CIC he can order the military to take immediate action to deal with a specific threat. And there are some other circumstances that warrant action from the POTUS. But, I am not sure this is one of them. As I mentioned in my post above, what is the national emergency that now exists that didn't exist before? Given that governors can turn down federal assistance in "disasters" even though I don't think any ever had, means they can defy federal declarations. They certainly have the authority to error on the side of greater caution. In this case, I think governors can choose to maintain the strictest measures vs. lifting lockdowns and bans.
The 10th Amendment has been trampled by evil libtards...actually it was crushed by Abe Lincoln and his radicals, but that is a story for another time. I am consistent...even though we haven't discussed the 10th Amendment much here...and lean toward the states being able to make more determinations for themselves WHEN IT IMPACTS THEM and DOES NOT OVERFLOW INTO THE REST OF THE NATION. In this case, I think each state needs to evaluate what is going on in their own states, health risk vs. the sagging economy. Now, in his defense, Trump has said that very thing many times, and he says he will still consult with the governors. That's what he says...
So what do we do stay in the house for the next year, year and a half. Please in your infinite wisdom tell me how long. This was never about saving everyone from specifically dying due to the Coronavirus. If that was the case we'd do this social distancing all the time to prevent flu death, car deaths, etc. As promoted this was about flattening the curve (you remember the one with the 90% uncertainty) so that we wouldn't run out of hospital beds and ventilators thus resulting in not being able to treat them for the virus. Those that have died, died being treated (at least for the most part) for the virus. Unless we wait for Gates to release his vaccine (may a year or more) then we'll never be totally protected. However by then I don't see there being much to go back to as we'll then be a socialist country since everyone will be dependent on the government for everything.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
Had we shut down a few weeks sooner and had testing rolled out, we could already be going back to work.
Going back to work will look differently for a while (staggered schedules, more remote working where possible, restrictions around retailers) and the principles of social distancing will still apply - most likely until the spread is well under control (which will still be a function of testing, in the absence of a vaccine).
It will have to be handled the same way it is being handled in China or we will quickly find ourselves having to shut down everything again to not overwhelm the healthcare system.
"testing rolled out" is such a liberal TDS buzz phrase. Testing hasn't happened anywhere to the extent it eventually needs to happen and won't until the "rapid test" is "rolled out".
BTW, the healthcare system was not overwhelmed to the extent you and the media wanted us to believe. It appears the only two areas that ever got even close to being overwhelmed were New York State (Really NYC) and New Orleans. It turns out both had plenty of beds and vents, but both were using the STUPID ASS model as a go to for how many they MIGHT need. Two Million deaths! 200,000! MUCH closer to 20,000 actual deaths from the China virus.
Told ya it would be the Trump supporters complaining about to few deaths to justify the actions taken! Easiest prognostication I have ever made!Quote:
Originally Posted by PawDawg
Nah, many of us were calling BS on the models day one. Many of us told you that only those with preexisting conditions were in danger of dying. Turns out to be true with very few exceptions. 98% survival rate and we shut down an economy over it. Looks like it was indeed in California back in December and the reason California was never in the kind of danger New York was in. Yes, I'm sure density had something to do with it, but density does not explain it all. I predict we'll find out that thousands were/are asymptomatic, had it, and never knew it. We will know soon enough when those rapid test "roll out".Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
Gawd you are stupid! :laugh:Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
The reason there are "few" deaths is the great job Trump has done from the very beginning. Later YOU will say there were too many deaths. Yet, here it is for all to see forever, you admitting "too few deaths...".
Now, that's your viewpoint. While I think, Trump and everyone else, including Dem governors in the states hit the hardest...yeah, uh huh...did and have done the best they could have given this is a brand new virus and the Chicoms, propped up by WHO, lied! I still think too many Americans have died. Mostly because WHO failed us, and the world, and that should not be tolerated anymore.
I am with you 100% on this one.Quote:
Originally Posted by PawDawg
Told you, techman05. It was always gonna be the Trumphards that weren’t gonna be satisfied by the body count, and all the bodies haven’t even been counted yet.Quote:
Originally Posted by DawgyNWindow