But,, It aligns closely with what I was thinking early on,, So,, Im down with it,,

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2020/05/selfinflicted_destruction_of_ame...

I don't like this 1 bit. I am pro shutdown. But this virus has very very low fatality rate among the otherwise healthy. It hurts me to say it, but shutdown is stupid unless you're in a high density population area like NYC, and in that case you need to get the fcuk out of the place and go to Montana or something.

Cool.
Srinath.

The thing that’s behind the spirit of this article and many others is it WAS obvious very early on a clearly defined demographic group of victims who would require hospitalization was well established. Think of the difference had all the money spent would have been devoted to protecting those groups at risk. I personally know two people who killed themselves and I’m positive the isolating effects of a lockdown and/or the constant projections of doom for anyone at random, played a role. Death, was in their ill minds which they learned to live with for their entire life, an easy way out of a bleak future.

Everyone should be terrified of the power of the media to force politicians into actions with dreadful consequences and suffer no consequences.

WebsterMark wrote on 05/25/20 at 05:57:14:




There are a few (or more than a few - I only heard of a few) hospitals where the number of suicide cases outnumber the China virus cases by a factor of 10. They've seen a years worth of suicides in a month. Bigger factor, the suicides are people in their teens and 20's while china virus cases are in their 70's and up. This is china's attempt to take out an entire generation and cripple us to complete their world domination.

On the bright side, drug busts are apparently getting bigger and better and easier.

Cool.
Srinath.

"And of course you defend WHO, CDC, State Health org's, in every possible way."

 Except for the instances where I say they are misleading, incorrect, or using poor protocol, but lets leave that part out just like we will leave out the parts about gun control where I worked, successfully, to recall politicians that implemented tighter restrictions so you can say I am pro-gun control.  Just like there can only be one reason to alter the wording of the 2nd Amendment, it's impossible to word it in any capacity that would favor the US citizen, so I must be pro-gun control.

 So since I ask people to actually read the sources they cite and inform us how they are arriving at their outcomes I must be pro-CDC, WHO, and Stay at Home right?  Misquoting reports and leaving out parts of a study can't possibly be what I am bringing up.



"In this case, even early on, the 'Information' was purposely ALTERED, to make people believe, "The Sky is Falling"."

 Can you reference some?  So far all I see are excerpts from larger articles that exclude the actual math, and cut apart quotes from separate articles and quotes.  Just like the Fauci paper that excluded the part where he said stay at home orders would be probable.  Or Facebook checklists that are even more ridiculous and inaccurate.

 I haven't seen a single CDC report predicting millions of deaths.

 In any case this will be a case of confirmation bias and circular reasoning.  Stay-at-home worked that's why we didn't see the huge death toll.  Nope.  The disease wasn't that bad, that's why we didn't see the huge death toll.  Nope.  Stay at home worked, that's why.  Nope.  It wasn't that bad, that's why.

"You keep running and hiding behind
I havent seen a single Cdc report"

 Hiding?  You don't think there's an issue when somebody says "JoG said he is pro-gun control." and reference a forum post that you either didn't post in, or didn't say anything like what is claimed?  Then when you challenge the accuracy they say "Well Eegore mislead me, blame Eegore, and stop running and hiding behind the fact that the post I claimed doesn't even exist."  

 It's Eegore's fault I thought JoG was pro-gun control, and JoG is hiding behind the fact that no forum post exists.



 As for recalls:

 In 2013 CO State Senate President John Morse and State Senator Angela Giron were successfully removed from office by utilizing the CO State Constitution.  We had attempted to remove 4 officials but initial ballots were only enough to remove 2.

 The implementation of various gun-control measures conflicted with the desires of the constituent majority.  Every step of the way was of course a battle but we managed to get Morse to concede with an eventual 1.7% (estimated) loss and Giron's polling numbers (facilitated by local media) indicated she would win by over 6%, while real math by real analysts indicated she would lose by 10% or more.  She lost by just over 11%.  This was the only successful recall in CO, and it didn't require one person marching in the streets with guns, one park protest with cardboard signs, or anything like that.  We followed law, procedure and covered our @sses for the inevitable appeals process.  For instance State law gave 10 days for recounting/confirmation but the State Constitution allows 15.  We proved that the State Constitution will trump State law but only by very specific means.  Their argument was "color" of law and ours was "letter" as in what the words say.

 They had a budget of over 3-million and we separated funds among three groups totaling just over 500k.  Brains over brawn.    

 19 States allow this and I am amazed more people won't fight for recall measures in their State.  

https://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/recall-of-state-officia...

"I dont know how you managed to get into a position to have time to spend in actual action in the political arena.. But Im glad you did."


 Modern technology for the most part.  I don't drive all over the state to meetings, we had them on conference calls.  Most of the work was done weekday evenings and weekends that didn't involve direct legal work, which was done by lawyers who of course have all day.

If a state disavows federal law enforcement, why not ust finish it and secede?