Latest Coronavirus - Yikes

#79,601
#79,601
hog88 said:
It goes back to my statement about the BORs supersedes states limitations. Vaccines are not covered in the BORs
Click to expand...

So you're for the state controlling restricting opportunities for individuals so long as you can get some giggles out of it from the state not playing friendly with the feds. Wtf. I dont get your stance.
 
#79,602
#79,602
allvol123 said:
You know every citizen of CA wants their governor to do this?

And those that do, they need a governor to restrict use of a medicine in order for to keep said medicine out of their body?
Click to expand...

Elections have consequences and the majority of CA voters chose Gavin, it doesn't violate the BORs so CA voters are getting what they wanted. Why complain?
 
#79,603
#79,603
hog88 said:
Elections have consequences and the majority of CA voters chose Gavin, it doesn't violate the BORs so CA voters are getting what they wanted. Why complain?
Click to expand...

I never said it violated anything. I am arguing for personal responsibility. So if you're on the losing side of a state election....so what...you get what you deserve?????
 
#79,604
#79,604
allvol123 said:
So you're for the state controlling restricting opportunities for individuals so long as you can get some giggles out of it from the state not playing friendly with the feds. Wtf. I dont get your stance.
Click to expand...

I'm for states choosing their own paths through state decisions and not fed mandates. The voters of CA need to do do a better job of picking their leadership if they are unhappy with Newsome's decision.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NurseGoodVol and tennvols77
#79,605
#79,605
allvol123 said:
So you're for the state controlling restricting opportunities for individuals so long as you can get some giggles out of it from the state not playing friendly with the feds. Wtf. I dont get your stance.
Click to expand...
The feds are already doing this. They have a say in who gets what medicine with the FDA. Seems like that is interference with the rights of the people too.
 
#79,606
#79,606
allvol123 said:
I never said it violated anything. I am arguing for personal responsibility. So if you're on the losing side of a state election....so what...you get what you deserve?????
Click to expand...

I move or work harder to get someone else elected if I can't stand what's happening.

We have state governments for a reason.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tennvols77
#79,607
#79,607
LouderVol said:
Why cant the person go out of state to get the vaccine?
Click to expand...

They can. Why should it have to get to that point?

And is that easy for every person to do? I mean are you arguing this is a good move by the governor? More parenting by elected officials. How disgusting.
 
#79,608
#79,608
allvol123 said:
They can. Why should it have to get to that point?

And is that easy for every person to do? I mean are you arguing this is a good move by the governor? More parenting by elected officials. How disgusting.
Click to expand...

Newsome is doing what he thinks the people that elected him want him to do, he's representing his constituents. If he's wrong they vote him out next time.
 
#79,609
#79,609
LouderVol said:
The feds are already doing this. They have a say in who gets what medicine with the FDA. Seems like that is interference with the rights of the people too.
Click to expand...

I agree, I dont like the FDA power that we as a society have promoted. Separate from that, I see nothing to celebrate in what the governor is proposing.
 
#79,612
#79,612
hog88 said:
Newsome is doing what he thinks the people that elected him want him to do, he's representing his constituents. If he's wrong they vote him out next time.
Click to expand...

How do you know this? Maybe he is doing what he believes is best, regardless of what any constituent thinks.

And using that line of thought, every decision is great if said decision maker is doing what he thinks is best.
 
#79,614
#79,614
allvol123 said:
How do you know this? Maybe he is doing what he believes is best, regardless of what any constituent thinks.

And using that line of thought, every decision is great if said decision maker is doing what he thinks is best.
Click to expand...

If the voters of CA disagree they vote him out next election. Democracy!
 
#79,615
#79,615
allvol123 said:
They can. Why should it have to get to that point?

And is that easy for every person to do? I mean are you arguing this is a good move by the governor? More parenting by elected officials. How disgusting.
Click to expand...
Vaccines arent state provided.

As far as parenting this is decent parenting. It's not an outright ban, or requirement for it. That makes it down right moderate in this atmosphere. The parent wants to have some extra research before they leave it out on the counter for the kids.
 
#79,616
#79,616
golfballs said:
So to review.... Blue states have a higher unemployment rate and death rate than red states. And the handling of COVID is supposed to be a winning topic for Dems?
Click to expand...
Well democrats are 99.9% intentionally low-information feelings-based voters, so it's not even relevant to their base.
 
#79,617
#79,617
allvol123 said:
I agree, I dont like the FDA power that we as a society have promoted. Separate from that, I see nothing to celebrate in what the governor is proposing.
Click to expand...
I dont think anyone is celebrating the specific decision outside of the fact that its thumbing the nose at the feds. A little independence by the states would be a good thing imo.
 
#79,619
#79,619
hog88 said:
It goes back to my statement about the BORs supersedes states limitations. Vaccines are not covered in the BORs
Click to expand...

I hear what you're saying but I think a case can be made that our Constitution does give you a right to medicines so I wouldn't be so quick to say otherwise.
 
#79,620
#79,620
LouderVol said:
Vaccines arent state provided.

As far as parenting this is decent parenting. It's not an outright ban, or requirement for it. That makes it down right moderate in this atmosphere. The parent wants to have some extra research before they leave it out on the counter for the kids.
Click to expand...

How do you know the governors approval methods are better or more legitmate than the feds?

It is a ban until as long as you cant access it.
 
#79,621
#79,621
LouderVol said:
I dont think anyone is celebrating the specific decision outside of the fact that its thumbing the nose at the feds. A little independence by the states would be a good thing imo.
Click to expand...

It isnt thumbing at the feds, it is thumbing at your own citizens.

It would be thumbing at the feds when the feds say you have to put this in your body.
 
#79,622
#79,622
allvol123 said:
How do you know the governors approval methods are better or more legitmate than the feds?

It is a ban until as long as you cant access it.
Click to expand...
How do you know it's worse?

And as pointed out people can leave the state to a clinic in a nearby state for the shot if they are desperate. If I believed it was the difference in a life and death situation I am not complaining about a 6 hour drive.
 
#79,623
#79,623
LouderVol said:
How do you know it's worse?

And as pointed out people can leave the state to a clinic in a nearby state for the shot if they are desperate. If I believed it was the difference in a life and death situation I am not complaining about a 6 hour drive.
Click to expand...

Neither would I complain about the drive. I would complain aboit the dumbassery involved by someone banning it knowing I could drive 6 hours to get it.

That said, I am upper middle class, pretty easy for me to work around this. Everyone cant say that. But F them, we were able to flip the bird to the FDA. Or so I am told.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top