You mean we do not know how to spell people?

Thinskin

 

Just consider the source, truthful. Just consider the source.

 

Another incompetent or dishonest fuck for you idiots to vote for!



Thinskin

 

One of the most laughable things in the world is seeing treasonous conservative/Republicans trying to say any other president was arrogant after 4 years of sucking Trump's dick.


Covid in California vs. Florida by the numbers


Here’s an interesting Twitter thread by a medical researcher who has crunched the numbers and compared California with Florida, both states in the southern latitudes and both with very diverse populations.

The upshot? Florida has failed. Badly. Turns out the “Let ‘er rip” policy is far worse than the “Mask-up, social distance” policy. Who woulda thunk it, huh?




Ashish K. Jha, MD, MPH
@ashishkjha
Given COVID is now a largely vaccine-preventable disease We can judge how well states are managing once vaccines became plentiful So lets look at two big states: California and Florida And see what we see in the data In a nutshell, bad news for Floridians Thread
10:27 PM · Sep 7, 2021

For those without Tweeter:

Given COVID is now a largely vaccine-preventable disease
We can judge how well states are managing once vaccines became plentiful
So lets look at two big states: California and Florida And see what we see in the data
In a nutshell, bad news for Floridians

So why compare FL and CA? Two large states in southern half of US (less seasonal confounding), both with diverse populations
But with very different approaches
CA continues masking, testing, pushing vax
FL? Not so much.
So how have people of CA and FL done?

We could examine cases but might be affected by testing (CA does more!)
So lets focus on deaths per capita
Here are daily deaths in CA, FL
They track closely from April through mid-July
Then, FL took off while CA rose slowly
Now, per capita, FL has 6 times daily deaths of CA


Another way to look at it is to examine cumulative deaths (per capita)
To answer: what proportion of people died after vaccines were widely available?
So here is the shocker:
Nearly 3 in 10 Floridians who has died of COVID19 -- died after April 1, 2021
Only 1 in 10 in CA


In fact, cumulatively, CA and FL had similar death rates until April 2021
The states then started separating
Now, cumulative deaths 30% higher (per capita) in FL than CA
Why these differences in deaths in CA vs FL?
Its not about vaccines: 56% of CA fully vaxxed vs 53% in FL

Instead, its abrogation of other public health measures
FL banning mask mandates and doing far less testing than CA
Why? Because FL listening to @gbdeclaration "let it rip" clowns
Which has thus caused enormous, unnecessary suffering and deaths for people of Florida
Fin

So there it is. The data is irrefutable: public health measures enacted in California are SAVING LIVES while DeathSantis’ policy of “Let ‘er rip” is killing people. And Republicans are LITERALLY trying to recall Governor Newsom ostensibly because of those very same public health measures that are saving lives (though given the fact that the recall effort started in early 2019 it’s obvious that this is just a temper tantrum by Republicans who cannot handle losing).

This is the hill that DeathSantis has chosen to die upon but unfortunately he’s taking a LOT of people with him.

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2021/9/9/2051255/-Covid-in-California-vs-Florida-by-the-numbers

 

Good old stumbler.

I do not use his language.

Sometimes I am glad somebody does.

 

A victory for common sense!



Thinskin

 

DeSantis suffers another major courtroom defeat as judge blocks enforcement of his new anti-riot law

Michael Moline, Florida Phoenix
September 10, 2021



Florida governor Ron DeSantis. (Photo by Gage Skidmore)


A federal judge has barred enforcement of one of Gov. Ron DeSantis signature legislative achievements this year — HB 1, his Black Lives Matter-inspired crackdown on protests —ruling that its redefinition of “riot" is vague enough to cover perfectly legal behavior.

This article was originally published at Florida Phoenix

In another major courtroom defeat for the governor, U.S. District Judge Mark Walker in Tallahassee ruled Thursday that the law's definition of the word is so vague that people can't understand what they'd need to do to avoid arrest if a demonstration gets out of hand.

Additionally, police would be unleashed to apply their own interpretations, chilling First Amendment rights, he said.

“Gov. DeSantis cannot credibly argue that this new definition of 'riot' was not intended to empower law enforcement officers against those who may criticize their legal authority, as he has referred to the proposed legislation that led to HB 1 as 'the strongest anti-rioting, pro-law enforcement piece of legislation in the country, and referred to HB1's critics as 'anti-police'" Walker wrote.

“Gov. DeSantis further promised to have 'a ton of bricks rain down on' those who violate the law when he unveiled HB 1's preceding proposed legislation. Through this new definition of 'riot,' he appears to have done just that, using a threat of selective enforcement as his rain clouds."

Walker added that, if allowed to take effect, the statute could prove a double-edged sword.

“Though plaintiffs claim that they and their members fear that it will be used against them based on the color of their skin or the messages that they express, its vagueness permits those in power to weaponize its enforcement against any group who wishes to express any message that the government disapproves of," he wrote.

Walker ruled that the state may not apply the law's definition of “riot" pending appeal. But he specified that the injunction applies only to the defendants named in the case — DeSantis, Broward County Sheriff Gregory Tony, Duval Sheriff Mike Williams, and Walt McNeil of Leon County.

Those are jurisdictions in which the civil rights groups behind the lawsuit — The Dream Defenders, The Black Collective, Chainless Change, the Black Lives Matter Alliance of Broward, the Florida State Conference of the NAACP, and the Northside Coalition of Jacksonville — allege the statute has chilled their First Amendment rights.

The state will remain free to protect the public under laws that existed before the new statute was enacted, Walker said. The groups, however, would suffer significant damage to their constitutional rights absent an injunction. And the state has no authority to violate the Constitution that the courts are obliged to respect, he said.

Walker's ruling came one day after a state trial judge sitting a few blocks away barred enforcement of DeSantis' policy of allowing parents to opt out their children from school district mask mandates for any reason pending an appeal already before the Florida 1st District Court of Appeal.

A shrug
During a news conference Thursday afternoon in New Port Richey, DeSantis essentially shrugged at the news.

“That's a foregone conclusion in front of that court. So, we will win out on appeal, I guarantee you we will win that on appeal. Just like we'll win the parent's rights one on appeal, just like we won almost anything out of Tallahassee on appeal, that's just kind of the way the cookie crumbles," the governor said.

Florida Democrats welcomed the ruling. During impassioned debate during the regular legislative session last spring, they'd argued the governor was attempting to criminalize protest.

“Judge Walker came to the same conclusion we did back in March, that this law is vague and open to abuse," Hillsborough County House member Fentrice Driskell said in a written statement.

“Our First Amendment rights are sacred and must be protected, but this would allow bad actors in government or law enforcement to persecute and punish people who they disagree with. It was written to score political points with their base, not to make Florida a safer or freer place to live."

As for the plaintiff organizations, they issued a joint statement:

“H.B.1 was passed as a direct response to racial justice protests in 2020 and appears designed to target those who protest police violence. Among other concerning provisions, the law risks criminalizing peaceful protest and shields those who injure or kill protesters — for example, by ramming their vehicles into protesters — from civil penalties. As states around the country threaten to pass similar legislation, today's decision serves as a powerful reminder that such unjust and unconstitutional efforts cannot stand."

In promoting the legislation, DeSantis insisted it would apply to riots led by groups of any political persuasion. But the proposal arrived soon after protests against police brutality broke out across the country last summer, sometimes devolving into significant violence at the hands of protesters, counter-protesters, and police alike.

In a footnote, Walker observed:" The state of Florida was no stranger to these largely peaceful protests. In defendant DeSantis's own words, protests following the murder of George Floyd were 'largely peaceful.' Moreover, the governor's office reported that the Florida Department of Law Enforcement 'had not received reports of widespread property damage, commercial or residential.'"

History, grammar lessons
Walker opened his 90-page ruling by recollecting Florida's history of civil-rights protests, including the 1956 Tallahassee Bus Boycott. “What's past is prologue," the judge observed.

The new law includes this definition of “riot":

“A person commits a riot if he or she willfully participates in a violent public disturbance involving an assembly of three or more persons, acting with a common intent to assist each other in violent and disorderly conduct," which results in “injury to another person … damage to property … or imminent danger of injury to another person or damage to property."

Previously, the Florida Supreme Court had defined the term as when “three or more persons acted with a common intent to mutually assist each other in a violent manner to the terror of the people and a breach of the peace."

Violations of the new law would bring felony penalties and DeSantis designed the measure to make it harder for accused people to bail out of jail. Anyone who hits a protester with a vehicle could claim self-defense.

The opinion includes an extensive disquisition on the statute's grammatical construction, even reproducing sentence diagrams submitted by both sides, in which they disagreed entirely on what it means. Walker concluded that the statute is a grammatical mess that an ordinary person would have a hard time figuring out — and risk serious criminal penalties if he or she gets it wrong.

“Defendants' proposed interpretation strains the rules of construction, grammar, and logic beyond their breaking points, and requires this court to ignore the plain text of the statute and blithely proclaim that 'everyone knows what a riot means,' notwithstanding this new definition that the Florida Legislature enacted. Under both separation of powers and federalism principles, this court cannot rewrite the statute to conform it to constitutional requirements," Walker wrote.

“In short, defendants' preferred construction is neither reasonable nor readily apparent given the plain language of the statute. Instead, it reduces much of the verbiage to surplusage and invites this court to fill in the blanks that the Florida Legislature left behind. To accept that invitation would usurp the powers of the Florida Legislature."

The language is so confusing that someone would read it “and not be sure of its real-world consequence," Walker wrote.

“She would not know if this law meant that she had to merely avoid sharing a common intent to assist two others in violent and disorderly conduct, or if she had to avoid participating in any public event where such violent and disorderly conduct could occur," he continued.

“The vagueness of this definition forces would-be protesters to make a choice between declining to jointly express their views with others or risk being arrested and spending time behind bars, with the associated collateral risks to employment and financial well-being. A vague law is no law at all, and certainly neither is one that can lead to multiple opposing interpretations. That type of law is simply a trap for the innocent."

Chilling effect
Walker cited declarations by the plaintiffs that they have sharply curtailed their activism since the law took effect for fear the law “emboldens police to overreach … and also emboldens civilians to hit protesters with their cars."

Those fears were based in reality, the judge said, pointing to a declaration by the leader of the police reform group Chainless Change regarding a demonstration in October outside the Broward County Sheriff's Office HQ.

The group “was met by agitators who spit on [their] staff and made efforts to attack one of [their] members, according to the declaration. “Officers nearby took no action to remove the agitators," but instead “harassed [their] members and set up barricades to prevent [them] from accessing areas of downtown."

In another episode, police deployed tear gas during a May 2020 Black Lives Matter protest in Fort Lauderdale after counter demonstrators disrupted the gathering. Under the statute, that potentially could subject organizers to criminal sanctions, the judge said.

“Plaintiffs' organizational and associational injuries, including their diversion of resources and self-censorship, are sufficiently concrete and particularized" to demonstrate that the law is causing them harm, Walker concluded.

He rejected evidence presented on DeSantis' behalf documenting plans for a “Juneteenth Black Joy Celebration" in West Palm Beach. The suggestion was that organizers showed no fear of gathering in public.

“It should go without saying that a public gathering of Black people celebrating 'Black joy' and release from bondage does not automatically equate to a protest — or something that the governor apparently implies should be chilled by the new riot law," he wrote.

Those harms are directly traceable to DeSantis, who has touted his power to call in the Florida Department of Law Enforcement and Florida Highway Patrol to police crowds and to remove sheriffs who don't meet his standards for crowd control, Walker wrote.

He also pointed to evidence that Florida sheriffs' deputies have responded over-zealously to demonstrations and stood by during disruptions by counter-demonstrators. None of the sheriffs named in the lawsuit refuted that evidence, he said.

“Accordingly, this court finds plaintiffs have demonstrated that defendant sheriffs' enforcement authority causes plaintiffs to self-censor and divert resources based on their well-founded fears that [the law] will be enforced against them."

He rejected arguments by DeSantis' attorneys that the groups could only challenge the law after it is enforced against them.

“Decades of binding Supreme Court and Eleventh Circuit precedent has held that pre-enforcement review is available for plaintiffs in facial vagueness and overbreadth challenges in the First Amendment context," Walker wrote.

Additionally, the governor's lawyers argued the federal court should invoke the “abstention doctrine" — meaning defer to state courts adjudicating challenges to statutes. Walker replied that there are no pending state court challenges to the law and that the U.S. Supreme Court has given federal trial judges plenty of room to decide First Amendment cases.

“The practical effect of Gov. DeSantis's request to abstain is that many individuals who seek to protest would stay home due to the chilling effect of a vague and overbroad statute (as evident from plaintiffs' declarations), and those brave enough to go protest may not understand whether their actions conform to the bounds set forth by the statute and risk being arrested," he wrote.

“What is more, even if a person who is arrested acted within constitutional bounds, he or she may have to spend time in custody before a state court dissects the statute to discern its meaning and determine whether that person was lawfully arrested," he added.



Florida Phoenix is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Florida Phoenix maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Diane Rado for questions: [email protected]. Follow Florida Phoenix on Facebook and Twitter.


https://www.rawstory.com/judge-blocks-desantis-from-enforcing-governor-s-anti-riot-law/

 

DeSantis Just Completely Dismantles Biden’s Dictatorial Vaccine Mandate

Florida Governor Ron DeSantis was one of the governors who immediately came out after Joe Biden announced his unconstitutional vaccine mandate plans and said no, we will not comply, and we will stop your illegal actions, to Biden.

But DeSantis wasn’t done with Biden yet. He was asked at an event about Biden making an oblique reference to him during the announcement about his vaccine mandate plans.

DeSantis blasted Biden for taking unconstitutional actions threatening the jobs of the people in Florida, saying he was going to stand up for them and protect their jobs from Biden’s federal overreach. Additionally, DeSantis chastised Biden for wanting to do away with parents’ rights and allowing school boards to force five-year-olds to wear masks all day long.

“Here he comes from Washington, D.C., instituting an unprecedented mandate, even his own people acknowledged is unconstitutional,” DeSantis declared. “That’s not leadership. And the the problem I have with Joe Biden is – this guy doesn’t take responsibility for anything. He’s always trying to blame other people. Blame other states.”

“This is a guy who promised when he ran for president that he was going to shut down the virus,” DeSantis said. Then he eviscerated Biden, “If you look now, there’s 300% more cases in this country today than a year ago when we had no vaccines at all. So his policies are not working.”

“He’s doubling down on things that are going to be very destructive for the livelihoods of many, many Americans and obviously going to be disruptive to our constitutional system and the rule of law. And so, these are times, you believe in that Constitution, you gotta stand up. And obviously, the substantive issue is important, because there are places that are going to toss aside people – they’ve worked this whole time throughout COVID. Now, all of sudden, they should be tossed aside? They were working when nobody had vaccines. You don’t know their history. You don’t know why they’re making the decisions they are making.”

DeSantis raised the incredibly important issue that Biden completely ignores in all this — natural immunity.

“Many of these people have already recovered and they have immunity. The idea that somehow you have someone that gets a Johnson and Johnson vaccine can work, but someone who has natural immunity somehow can’t? That natural immunity is strong. So, it’s not based on science.”

DeSantis then took on the dictatorial nature of Biden’s speech and the harmful effects the mandates would cause.

https://republicandaily.com/2021/09...ismantles-bidens-dictatorial-vaccine-mandate/

 

Republican daily?

Is that like the hillbilly gazette?

Thinskin

 

Easy tourist...why do you criticize opposing views?

 

It is a simple question ace's not a criticism!

Feeling a little tender this morning are we?

Coffee and fresh croissants here....

Thinskin

 

Dont care much for croissants, got biscuits tourist?

For some odd reason my computer switched the search engines, initially I was pissed, not so much now tho.

Seems BING has more conservatives sites on the first page...I'm confident that will change soon enough.

However in the moment, I'll take advantage of it as long as it lasts...quite refreshing tourist...quite refreshing indeed.

 

I am not baking biscuits!

Thinskin

 

Ron is not running afterall!



Thinskin

 

So... does that mean you hack fucks will be searching out another targeted conservative to discredit?.... probably not huh?

 

Not unlike how the Republicans choose their target...

 

Ron is far too much fun!

He could fuck up a cup of coffee!

Thinskin

 

Oh no, deplorable target choices are so much easier;

AOC; so radically leftist she embarrasses her own party of leftists.
The muslim bunch; Americans are religiously tolerant, well, at least deplorables are, but even intolerant despicables wonder who let this bunch into office.
Nancy Antoinette; perhaps the most corrupt politician in america's history.
The power rangers; Nancy Antoinette's gang
biden/harris; nuff said.

 

AOC is hot as fuck though!

Thinskin

 

Suppressing data is the same as lying!



Thinskin