COVID-19 (Aka China Virus)

[Pooter]

9 hours ago, HossHarris said:

Pretty simple…somebody sued the federal govt and/or cDc and/or TSA and/or Dot and won. 

Yeah I get that, I'm more confused how a single federal judge (there are 1700+) can overrule the executive branch thereby reversing nationwide policy. And if all we had to do was find a single federal judge who didn't like the rule and sue in that court why tf did it take this long. 

[tac airlifter]

27 minutes ago, Pooter said:

Yeah I get that, I'm more confused how a single federal judge (there are 1700+) can overrule the executive branch thereby reversing nationwide policy. And if all we had to do was find a single federal judge who didn't like the rule and sue in that court why tf did it take this long. 

I’m surprised you’re confused— judges did this numerous times to overturn various POTUS policies during the previous administration.

The reason it took so long in this case is psycho democrats enabled by an aligned media and risk-averse doctors did all they could to stop it.  Make no mistake: masks were always ineffective and the science never said otherwise.  This was political all along.  Some of us are taking a bit longer to figure that out.

[HeloDude]

26 minutes ago, Pooter said:

Yeah I get that, I'm more confused how a single federal judge (there are 1700+) can overrule the executive branch thereby reversing nationwide policy. And if all we had to do was find a single federal judge who didn't like the rule and sue in that court why tf did it take this long. 

Just curious, is your confusion new or has it always been there regarding a single federal judge’s ability to strike down a federal law/rule?  Reason I’m asking is because this has been happening as long as I’ve been following politics and I’m kind of old.

As for why did it take this long, who knows.  If I had a guess it’s because of the standard bureaucracy of our government, but I’m sure it also has to do with the mood of the country, the timeline of the mandates, etc.

[disgruntledemployee]

17 hours ago, Prozac said:

Appears airlines are running with this ruling. Will be very difficult for the Biden admin to put the genie back in the bottle at this point. 

This feels like a Berlin Wall moment.  Way too much momentum to change it back and if they try, by the time they do, data will probably show no difference.  Someone will probably show the executive branch, "look, the people are happy," change it back and you will lose elections.   

[BashiChuni]

Just now, BashiChuni said:

 

I dunno pretty clear masks did work /s

[EnriquePallazo]

 

yeah, good luck with that

[brickhistory]

7 hours ago, pawnman said:

The Supreme Court reversed an earlier decision and gave power back to the Pentagon to enforce vaccine mandates. 

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/3272130-supreme-court-wont-shield-airman-from-punishment-over-vaccine-refusal/

Are you happy about this?

[HeloDude]

22 minutes ago, brickhistory said:

Are you happy about this?

Last year the dude literally said if he were a commander he would seeks out and look forward to giving out Art 15s to those members who weren’t wearing a mask but had not had the covid shot (back when that was a thing).  Take this as you will…

[brickhistory]

I remember which is why I asked him if he's happy that another unnecessary mort is occurring due to the goatrope that ensued.  The ending of the mask mandate (mostly) is just a last gasp of the stupidity that occurred.

Lest we forget...

 

[HeloDude]

2 hours ago, brickhistory said:

I remember which is why I asked him if he's happy that another unnecessary mort is occurring due to the goatrope that ensued.  The ending of the mask mandate (mostly) is just a last gasp of the stupidity that occurred.

Lest we forget...

 

Go read some FB comments concerning the news story on the “mainstream news outlets”…the progressives are upset at the ruling and believes that this will kill people.  Oh and they say that the federal judge shouldn’t even be a judge (was “unqualified”), people that won’t wear masks are selfish, blah blah blah.  Same nonsense people have been spewing on here for the last 1.5-2 years.

[HossHarris]

9 hours ago, Pooter said:

Yeah I get that, I'm more confused how a single federal judge (there are 1700+) can overrule the executive branch thereby reversing nationwide policy. And if all we had to do was find a single federal judge who didn't like the rule and sue in that court why tf did it take this long. 

I’d guess that the vast majority of judges actually take their profession seriously …. 

[pawnman]

14 hours ago, brickhistory said:

I remember which is why I asked him if he's happy that another unnecessary mort is occurring due to the goatrope that ensued.  The ending of the mask mandate (mostly) is just a last gasp of the stupidity that occurred.

Lest we forget...

 

I'm happy that this idiot who has equated getting the covid shot with a religion is gone, yes.

I continue to be baffled that a group of military aviators seems to think lawful orders can be disregarded based on your personal opinions, but here we are.

[dream big]

19 hours ago, disgruntledemployee said:

This feels like a Berlin Wall moment.  Way too much momentum to change it back and if they try, by the time they do, data will probably show no difference.  Someone will probably show the executive branch, "look, the people are happy," change it back and you will lose elections.   

They can’t go back now, there would be rebellions across the country.  Some of my leftist friends are confused why people are making such a big deal about masks. “It isn’t that inconvenient?” It isn’t about the damn mask, it’s about government overreach, which has to stop.

[BashiChuni]

2 hours ago, pawnman said:

I'm happy that this idiot who has equated getting the covid shot with a religion is gone, yes.

I continue to be baffled that a group of military aviators seems to think lawful orders can be disregarded based on your personal opinions, but here we are.

Are you still wearing a mask on planes? We all want to know. 

[pawnman]

17 minutes ago, BashiChuni said:

Are you still wearing a mask on planes? We all want to know. 

Not without the mandate.

What a nerd, following aviation rules and regulations, right?

[BashiChuni]

But I don’t understand if you think these mandates are morally correct and Keeping people safe it makes sense that you’d be firm in your belief and continue wearing a mask according to your convictions!

[pawnman]

9 minutes ago, BashiChuni said:

But I don’t understand if you think these mandates are morally correct and Keeping people safe it makes sense that you’d be firm in your belief and continue wearing a mask according to your convictions!

I don't have a conviction to wear a mask. I'm thrilled the mandates are being dropped. But I also haven't tied my whole personality to the idea that mask mandates are tyranny.

[BashiChuni]

The entire COVID mandates were absolutely tyranny. “Take this shot or lose your job.” Tyranny.
 

the fact is this vax has been proven to NOT stop the spread of COVID. It has lowered the chance if you catch COVID it will be severe. For military members who are young and healthy they had a 99.998….% chance of having a very mild reaction. Why the need for a mandate? What a stupid order. 
 

much like the masks. What a stupid mandate that was PROVEN to do NOTHING. These mandates did nothing at all, and smart thinking citizens rightfully questioned them. It’s healthy and wise to maintain a level of skepticism when big government attempts to dictate terms to its citizens. 

it’s also healthy to question why big pharmacy is pushing their product on a population demographic who has been PROVEN to not be at risk from the disease. 

Edited April 20, 2022 by BashiChuni

[tac airlifter]

Pawn, I like you and I think you’re smart, so please indulge me in this long reply.   There are three schools of thought with rule following:

1. Follow them all, all the time.  They are right, rule breakers are wrong.

2. Follow only those which are right and just.  I am the sole arbiter of deciding what is right.

Those are two extreme and opposite sides.  There’s a third, middle way:

3. Follow rules, but recognize those which don’t make sense and work to change them.  Comply if you must, resist when & how you can. 
 

1 is almost always wrong.  Schools love it, because it’s blind obedience.  Dictators love it too.  I don’t love it, I don’t even like it when people obey my rules without critical thought, because eventually they hit a situation where following those rules leads to a worse outcome than the rule was designed to prevent.  Example: stand in this line.  Circumstance: now there’s a fire.  Outcome: standing in that line is obviously a terrible idea; would we support yelling at people to get back in line under those circumstances? No.  Judgment and critical thought are implied.

2 is interesting.  At first glance it seemingly leads to chaos.  Within the right cultural context though, it has historically been a common mechanism of governance in developing societies.  “Lex iniusta non est lex” is the Latin expression for the ancient concept that an unjust law is no law at all.  Surprisingly, even rule following early  societies like feudal China had a similar concept.  Once a ruler passed a threshold of capriciousness, he was said to have “lost the Mandate of Heaven” and a coup was justified.  However I concede that in modern democratic societies, and certainly in the modern American military, 2 is an impractical way of operating.

 3 covers the full gamut from “I will comply while working this lawsuit through the system using established legal means” all the way to “I will not comply with this specific thing but I will rigorously comply with everything else thereby convincing you that I’m not a rebel, this certain thing is just wrong.” Think about the civil disobedience mechanism Martin Luther King Jr utilized in championing the civil rights movement.  Has there been a better example than 1960s America of people who were justified in noncompliance with laws, and conducted their noncompliance righteously?  

All that background to say this: the spectrum of 3 is where most of us were for COVID mandates, while you are stuck on 1 despite thinking we are advocating 2.  Hopefully this long post adds clarity to these various reactions you’re observing.  It’s easy to look at the situation and say, I am following a lawful order why is there even a discussion about this?  Those discussions dance around the concept of questioning if the order itself was lawful. And of course the people giving it will say yes, but is it? There might be a deeper authority than the whims of dictates by transient management.

[Boomer6]

In regards to the vax effectiveness discussion. I know two fighter squadrons that have had 95% of their ppl contract COVID at one point or another. Around 50% contracted it at some point prior to getting vaccinated. After being fully vaccinated + boosted about 60% have contracted it. All of those that have contracted it twice (before and after being vaccinated) have had no change in symptoms from the pre/post vaccinated cases. You can make the argument that the symptoms weren’t as bad the second time because they had antibodies, and to be honest that doesn’t really matter. It doesn’t matter because the trope were being pushed is we need to get vaccinated to maintain readiness. When 60% of the bros contract COVID after being fully vaccinated + boosted and get taken down for 10 days of quarantine the readiness argument doesn’t hold up. The vaccine is not effective at preventing our demographic from contracting it, which is all that matters for the readiness discussion.

[pawnman]

51 minutes ago, Boomer6 said:

In regards to the vax effectiveness discussion. I know two fighter squadrons that have had 95% of their ppl contract COVID at one point or another. Around 50% contracted it at some point prior to getting vaccinated. After being fully vaccinated + boosted about 60% have contracted it. All of those that have contracted it twice (before and after being vaccinated) have had no change in symptoms from the pre/post vaccinated cases. You can make the argument that the symptoms weren’t as bad the second time because they had antibodies, and to be honest that doesn’t really matter. It doesn’t matter because the trope were being pushed is we need to get vaccinated to maintain readiness. When 60% of the bros contract COVID after being fully vaccinated + boosted and get taken down for 10 days of quarantine the readiness argument doesn’t hold up. The vaccine is not effective at preventing our demographic from contracting it, which is all that matters for the readiness discussion.

Well, there's also the ability to base in countries that are requiring vaccines to cross their borders.  I'd call that one a readiness issue.

[Standby]

44 minutes ago, pawnman said:

Well, there's also the ability to base in countries that are requiring vaccines to cross their borders.  I'd call that one a readiness issue.

That’s not a readiness issue, that’s a political issue…easily conflated.

[08Dawg]

There's been an amusing amount of leftist pearl clutching and reaching for smelling salts over the speed at which the mandate went away.  The Vice article I read last night had the headline "the World's Worst People Partied Mid-Flight" (linked here for your reading amusement). 

[HeloDude]

2 hours ago, 08Dawg said:

There's been an amusing amount of leftist pearl clutching and reaching for smelling salts over the speed at which the mandate went away.  The Vice article I read last night had the headline "the World's Worst People Partied Mid-Flight" (linked here for your reading amusement). 

From the article

“Here we are, trapped in the sky with our 8-month-old unmasked baby (you can’t actually mask a baby that young) under the supposition that everyone who can be masked would be masked, and the flight 325 crew has taken our choices away from us,” one Twitter user said. “Very very angry about this.”

So apparently, if you give people the choice to wear masks or not, you’re actually “taking away choices” from others.  This only makes sense if you’re a progressive.

[BashiChuni]

Biden administration going to appeal the mask ruling. I hope this is political suicide for the democrats this fall