Bill Barr threatens to join lawsuits against stay-home orders

originally posted by: Serdgiam

Right?

Thank you! Right!!!

I mean, we are throwing trillions (..literally..) of dollars in the air, why not actually direct it?

Exactly. It's like throwing spaghetti at the wall to see if it sticks. Maybe it will... maybe it won't. That's not good enough. That's not practical. That's not effective. That's not getting the job done.

Im a much bigger fan of the idea of delivering the tools for decentralized self-sufficiency and autonomy to each household.

Yes. Not just households, but businesses as well.

If we want folks to work from home, help them fund the necessary equipment they need to do so. If we need masks and gowns and scrubs, help textile companies to switch their operations to producing the appropriate fabrics, and help clothing manufacturers and seamstresses and tailors convert their operations to producing the garments. If we need more hospital space to treat the ill, then help find/create spaces for them to do so.

We can identify and address the specific problem areas with specific solutions.

This has always been a power grab.

Sadly, yes. Its the same thing we have seen repeated in every crisis in my lifetime at least. This time though.. Its on quite an impressive scale.

It sure is. We expect this crap from government critters... but I'm just sick at how many people are cheering it on. And worse. Much MUCH worse.

a reply to: Boadicea

It starts to veer off topic (maybe?) and I yammer on about it all the time anyway..

But full blown decentralization of the tools to meet basic needs provides a foundation and framework where things like masks are a moot point. We need 'em? We make 'em. We need ventilators? Send out the files and we print 'em en masse.

The tools to achieve this are my life's work, so might be a wee bit biased, but the technology would not only do things like return our manufacturing base.. It would do it in a way that is nearly incapable of disruption.

Making all those tools scalable just means the same stuff can be used at many levels, but it starts with the individual and their household.

I think that while all this other stuff is going on, as bad as it is, there are worse moves being made in the background to ensure the foundation for a global technofascist "state."

And yes, its being cheered on and Spread by many of the very people they wish to subjugate. Always felt that the Constitution should be amended to include any organization, corporation, etc. taht could influence and direct the population in the same capacity as a government. Kinda going in the other direction though.

I do feel that moves like this from Barr might throw a bit of a wrench in the works, but until folks see the "real" fight.. It will always be ongoing. A MindWar, a cross-civilization Wetiko Virus even, that is marching towards total corporate dependency.

*sigh* /rant

a reply to: Serdgiam

It's not off topic at all. In fact, it's all quite pertinent to this discussion, in terms of where and how our resources are allocated, and trying to do the best and most with what we have.

I think of it in terms of power vs force:

Is the government empowering and enabling the people to be resourceful, self-sufficient and able to take care of themselves?

Or is the government forcing and imposing their will on the people to make them dependent, subservient and beholden to government authority?

The former embiggens all of us... the latter destroys us.

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: Sillyolme

Baloney. All they gotta do is open the door and go outside.

Because of course no one has any health issues or disabilities or any other factor that would prevent them from doing so, right??? No such thing as wheel chairs and walkers... much less bedridden, right???

Of course you know better. You know damn well that people are being harmed, and yes, even dying, because of these Draconian orders. But you will minimize, mock and belittle those that you trample for your own protection. The weakest and most in need of compassion and assistance.

Your depraved heart is showing.

Ive seen my share of wheelchairs, walkers, shower benches, gait belts, catheters and the like. Many people are able to stay in their own homes because of in-home health care. I don’t know how these businesses are operating under this lockdown.

a reply to: Serdgiam

a reply to: Sookiechacha I dont think its the general concept of stay-at-home that bothers some of us.

Yes, like telling people how to social distance in their own homes and such. It’s getting out of hand, but so far I didn’t hear anything about authorities boarding up people inside their homes like they did in Communist China. Still, would they do it if they could get away with it? Certain people and groups seem to always be pushing the envelope.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: CriticalStinker
What rights?
The right to spread infection?

The right to live life as I see fit and peovide for myself and my family. My rights do not end because of unfounded fear.

a reply to: Boadicea



I’m hoping that I don’t have to explain what I meant about the left and the second. I know the 10th is an amendment that doesn’t come up too often so I can understand ignorance when someone mentions it. So here is the text as it appears in our constitution “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” In 2014 the congressional research service when there were concerns about Ebola said that the “the power to take quarantine measures is reserved to the states under the 10th Amendment”

So statements like this "When somebody is the president of the United States, the authority is total. And that's the way it's got to be. It's total." Which was made on April 13th. Are not accurate. Hey I’m a trump supporter, but the man is not without his flaws and needs to be called on inaccuracies like this. As does any other politician. Yes he backed down the next day and I am very happy he did. The president does have many powers in a national emergency. However he does not have the power to undo public health decisions made by a states governor.

We do have rights and those are protected by the 5th and 14th. Due process and and equal protection. So they can’t impose conditions which are arbitrary, oppressive, or unreasonable. The stay at home orders that are in place grant us access to what we need. We can still get food, medicine, and other things we may need. I agree some are going too far such as making gardening supplies unavailable. But unless a state is imposing arbitrary, oppressive, or unreasonable measures then the federal government needs to stay out of the states affairs and leave it between that states government and that states people.

Perhaps destroy was the wrong choice of words, but they are definitely entering an area with loose footing.

AG BARR is also cracking down on SEX for RENT intimidation during this manufactured crisis.

nypost.com...

a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

Ive seen my share of wheelchairs, walkers, shower benches, gait belts, catheters and the like.

Bummer. I'm sorry to hear that.

Many people are able to stay in their own homes because of in-home health care. I don’t know how these businesses are operating under this lockdown.

I'm not sure they are functioning now. At least not well. They should be considered essential everywhere, but I've read anecdotal accounts here and there of short staffing, with less frequent visits and others not showing up at all. I'm sure they are doing their best, but I'm not sure how much they can do with current circumstances.

I've read that because of this problem, some people/places are using a system for seniors and the vulnerable of flash cards in windows to let others know if they're okay, or if they need help. Green for "all good," yellow for "please help but not urgent," and red for "emergency."

I love the innovative and creative solutions, but it's very troubling that it's needed at all.

a reply to: starlitestarbright

The right to live life as I see fit and peovide for myself and my family. My rights do not end because of unfounded fear.

They shouldn't end because of well founded fear either. That's when we need them most.

Along with courage. And courage isn't possible without fear.

originally posted by: Somethingsamiss
a reply to: Boadicea

We do have rights and those are protected by the 5th and 14th. Due process and and equal protection. So they can’t impose conditions which are arbitrary, oppressive, or unreasonable. The stay at home orders that are in place grant us access to what we need. We can still get food, medicine, and other things we may need. I agree some are going too far such as making gardening supplies unavailable. But unless a state is imposing arbitrary, oppressive, or unreasonable measures then the federal government needs to stay out of the states affairs and leave it between that states government and that states people.

Perhaps destroy was the wrong choice of words, but they are definitely entering an area with loose footing.

Thank you for expanding -- much appreciated!

The concern is real. I don't expect any better of the Pubs as a whole than I do the Dems. And I'm rather disgusted with those who invoke "2nd amendment remedies" before invoking 1st amendment remedies.

I'm not sure what to make of Trump and his "power" statement. In many ways, it seemed that Trump and the governors were talking at each other and over each other but neither really clarified that Trump has absolute power granted over things federal, and governors have absolute power over state affairs. Is that because they were just being stubborn jackasses? Or because they really don't know where their legitimate powers start and end? I don't know.

For our purposes -- as in you and me and We The People purposes -- Trump's voters will not let him get away with that kind of crap. He learned that, and changed his tune. Whether Trump was arrogant or ignorant (or that dangerous combination of both!), I don't know. But his voters are the ones most likely to rebel at such arrogance.

But the 10th reserves to the states those rights and powers NOT explicitly granted to the Feds. States are required not to violate our Constitutional rights, and all federal laws, so Trump and the Feds do have a place in ensuring states do not overstep their bounds.

It's certainly not the first or the last time Federal powers will clash with states' rights!

a reply to: Boadicea

The wording of the tenth does not say “explicitly” and not trying to be abrasive, but adding words to the amendment is like the left saying that the second doesn’t allow for
ar-15’s.

Thus far as to my knowledge there have been no constitutional violations. If you have examples of violations I’d like to hear them.

originally posted by: Somethingsamiss
a reply to: Boadicea

The wording of the tenth does not say “explicitly”...

You're right, the word "explicitly" is not used. But that is exactly what the 10th defines:

“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

We can quibble over semantics, but the intention is clear. If it is not specifically... explicitly... expressly... whatever... "delegated" nor "prohibited" "by the Constitution" then it is up to the states.

And this is far more than semantics. The powers of the Federal government are enumerated. They have no powers beyond what is explicitly granted to them. Without that very specific limitation, there would be no limits on their power. And there would be nothing left to the states.

Likewise, whatever powers are not specifically... explicitly... expressly... whatever... granted to the Feds, are in fact the rights of the states. Without that distinction, the states would have no independent rights at all.

... and not trying to be abrasive, but adding words to the amendment is like the left saying that the second doesn’t allow for ar-15’s.

There is a very big difference between adverbs and nouns. The adverb only describes the "thing." The noun is the "thing."

Thus far as to my knowledge there have been no constitutional violations. If you have examples of violations I’d like to hear them.

Hmmmmm.... no constitutional violations at all? Or no Constitutional violations that you have a problem with???

For example, let's take the example in the OP: The Constitutional right to freely exercise one's religion, which was violated by the Governor's orders.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

This is obviously and necessarily a violation of one's right to worship freely. Communion and unity are very much tenets of Christianity (and all the Abrahamic religions), so denying the worshippers to congregate is in fact and in deed a violation of their right to worship according to their faith.

It is also, necessarily, a violation of the "right of the people peaceably to assemble" -- for any and all purposes.

Now, you can rationalize it or attempt to justify this violation, but the violation is clear and obvious. And nowhere did the founding fathers qualify these rights. Nowhere in the Constitution or Bill of Rights does it provide an exception or exemption for pandemics. And the founding fathers were quite familiar with plagues and the damage they could inflict on a population.

It seems to me, rather, that the founding fathers so well understood how such matters could be exploited by government that they did not provide exceptions or exemptions, but declared these rights absolute and inalienable.

originally posted by: starlitestarbright

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: CriticalStinker
What rights?
The right to spread infection?

The right to live life as I see fit and peovide for myself and my family. My rights do not end because of unfounded fear.

It's an individual thing. Some people are consumed by fear, some people are not. This event shows that.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Boadicea

These shutdown orders "deny and disparage" BOTH our enumerated and Natural rights.

How so? None of this is permanent.

What? For heaven’s sake, Constitutional Rights don’t have intermissions...we’re not talking about Gone with the Wind.

a reply to: Boadicea

Oh, my bad, I though you said Bill Burr. You should really check him out!

originally posted by: ColoradoJens
a reply to: Boadicea

Oh, my bad, I though you said Bill Burr. You should really check him out!

I asked my husband if he had heard of him, and he said the same!

I guess I will one of these days...

a reply to: Boadicea


I’m am not familiar Catholicism. I do know that it is mandated that they attend church on Sundays as well as other holidays. However they have canceled all weekly masses until further notice in an attempt to flatten the curve.

Now onto what I do know. In romans chapter 13:1-7 Paul was talking about Gods law and mans law. In this passage he says this. “Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, for he is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God's wrath on the wrongdoer. Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God's wrath but also for the sake of conscience.”

So because God has appointed our leaders and we are to follow what our leaders command. There are times that Mans law contradicts Gods law. An example is from Acts 4:13-31 and Acts 5:27-42. The take away from these passages is that when governments conflict with Gods commands we must obey God over man. (There are things I want to add but I’m trying to keep it somewhat short) Just as the apostles did in Acts.

The Bible also says this as to gathering and prayer. In Matthew 18:20 it reads “For where two or three gather in my name, there am I with them.” So we don’t need to go to a church in order to be in his presence. Besides a building doesn’t make a church. With the guidelines that have been put in place we can’t gather in large groups. However with technology today we don’t need to be in large groups. Classes are being taught to groups online, business meetings are conducted on line. A church that I had previously been involved is live streaming Sunday service with the pastor and congregation at there homes. There are options out there where you can still have freedom of worship while following the guidelines put in place. So from a biblical stand point. No these guidelines are not stopping worship.

As to the right to peacefully assemble. I do see there is most definitely overstepping when it comes to worship. A church in Mississippi who had a their congregations sitting in their cars received a 500 dollar ticket. Even though they were following the guidelines. Those who enforced that do need to be held accountable. There are some other examples out there. But again there are options.

originally posted by: carewemust
AG BARR is also cracking down on SEX for RENT intimidation during this manufactured crisis.

nypost.com...

Rent is due

a reply to: JAGStorm

oh my god I love her