Authoritarians Seem Upset Over All The COVID Lawsuits

They really do not like the notion of the People fighting for their freedom

‘It’s a tsunami’: Legal challenges threatening public health policy
Court battles over Covid-19 safety measures and recent court rulings will impact the government’s ability to keep Americans safe, experts warn.

Mounting legal challenges to pandemic public health rules — and judges’ increasing willingness to overrule medical experts — threaten to erode the influence of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and other government health authorities.

In the last year, four court rulings against the CDC, including one from the Supreme Court, have forced the agency to stop or change its pandemic mitigation orders. Most recently, a Florida district judge ordered a national injunction ending the agency’s mask mandate on public transport.

“Litigation invites litigation invites litigation,” said Wendy Parmet, faculty co-director at the Center for Health Policy and Law at Northeastern University. It’s a cycle that “creates enormous uncertainty about what CDC could do going forward should the pandemic worsen again, or should another pandemic or even a more regional outbreak arise.”

The high-profile challenges to the CDC sit atop thousands more lawsuits against state and local health authorities that have been filed during the pandemic, experts say, seeking to end localized social distancing and mask orders, vaccine mandates and business closures.

The vast majority of these lawsuits are aimed at state, local, and federal Executive branches, as they were the ones implementing all sorts of restrictions on their own without legislation from the duly elected legislative branch. Or using barely related or un-related legislation passed long ago to take on new powers.

The constant threat of being dragged into court is having a chilling effect on local health officials that may last well beyond the Covid-19 crisis, leading health commissioners or board of health members to think twice about enacting public safety measures.

“It’s a tsunami,” says James Hodge, a law professor at Arizona State University’s Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law. “Anything that limits you as an American from doing something you don’t want to do … It all got a challenge.”

The flood of legal challenges is part of a profound antagonism many in the U.S. have felt toward public health officials since the early days of the pandemic, when the rapid spread of Covid-19 put government authority and America’s fierce defense of individual freedoms on a collision course.

Well, gee, who would have thought that Americans would be averse to having the government put restrictions on their lives, especially when we see the politicians and elites not doing the same? When the rules seem arbitrary and capricious? When they make no sense and really do not help in stopping COVID? When they seem to want to keep them just for the sake of keeping them, while excluding themselves?

Political meddling in the CDC’s Covid-19 response and the agency’s own unforced errors in testing and communication stiffened many Americans’ resistance to the government’s involvement in their personal health, even as nearly one million Americans have died. In addition to lawsuits, bills have been introduced in state legislatures across the nation to limit public health authorities’ power, and scores of public health officials have left their jobs in frustration.

Well, let them leave. They are not rulers. They aren’t dictators. We have laws, and we have a federal Constitution, alone with state constitutions. What they, and all the politicians using mandates (mostly Democrats, with a smattering of Republicans), are upset is that they will have a tough time slapping more restrictions on the lives of ordinary citizens.

In Washington state, Secretary of Health Umair Shah says this litigious atmosphere, and particularly a decision like the Florida injunction against the CDC’s travel mask mandate, “has ramifications for public health policy across the nation.”

He says it’s part of a broader landscape of “anger and vehemence” against public health officials and public health policies that is making it harder for them to do their jobs.

People get rather angry when the government implements mandates that negatively affect their lives and businesses. Their earnings. Especially when the mandates do not work. How well did masking work? We knew the masking was foolish from the beginning. We knew it wouldn’t work. Yet, there were all the mandates, which the politicians and elites blew off themselves. There would be little reason for all the lawsuits if government didn’t overreach. Sure, in the first couple of months it is understandable with most freaking, citizens and politicians. We had a pretty good idea within a few months of what needed to be done, but, the Powers That Be wanted their power.

Read: Authoritarians Seem Upset Over All The COVID Lawsuits »

Doom Today: World Could Maybe Breach 1.5C In 5 Years

So, what happens if this doesn’t happen? Who gets blamed for the scary prognostication? Who pays the penalty?

World on track to breach key 1.5°C threshold in next 5 years: Report

There is a 50% chance that, during the next five years, the global average surface temperature will exceed 1.5°C above the preindustrial average for the first time in an individual year, the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) reported Monday.

Why it matters: Under the Paris Agreement, countries are seeking to limit global warming to 1.5°C of warming compared to preindustrial levels, in order to minimize the potential for devastating climate change impacts.

Studies show that if global warming were to exceed 1.5°C above preindustrial levels and remain there, the odds of widespread damage would greatly increase.

Between the lines: The new report, which provides climate projections for the five-year period between 2022 and 2026, does not indicate that the 1.5-degree target will be breached over the long-term, which is the target’s meaning under the Paris Agreement.

Ah, they’re hedging their bets. Also, Axios couldn’t even do the easy research to know that Paris was about keeping the world below 2C, which caused lots of heartburn for diehard Warmists.

The big picture: Climate studies have shown that if warming were to exceed 1.5°C as a long-term average, then far more severe consequences would ensure, such as the loss of warm water coral reefs, flooding of small island nations and an increase in deadly heat waves around the world.

Computer models have shown that a minor 1.5C increase in over 170 years, which has happened in multiple Holocene warm periods, will be doom.

Read: Doom Today: World Could Maybe Breach 1.5C In 5 Years »

Hot Take: Pro-Life Feminists Say It’s Not Time To Ditch Roe

Oh, look, the news found the one “pro-life” group that says Roe v Wade needs to stay

Self-described ‘pro-life feminist’: ‘We’re not ready to overturn Roe’

With the Supreme Court poised to overturn its 1973 landmark Roe v. Wade ruling that legalized abortion in the United States, an activist who describes herself as a “pro-life feminist” believes that the country is not ready for such a change.

“We’re not ready to overturn Roe,” Destiny Herndon-De La Rosa, founder of New Wave Feminists, an anti-abortion group that advocates support for mothers before and after birth, said in an interview with Yahoo News. “Legally, I understand it is a very, very big deal. But at the heart of the matter, is it going to actually help women choose life? I don’t know that it will. Because the systems that are currently in place are not set up to support women in the future. And that is a really, really scary thing.”

Herndon-De La Rosa, 38, said her organization believes that “human beings should be free from violence for the duration of their lifetime.”

“And that means we are womb-to-tomb pro-life,” she said. “A lot of times in the pro-life movement, it feels like it’s really focused on the politics of just restricting abortion, but in the mind of a terrified woman who is in a desperate situation, she doesn’t care what her congressman thinks about abortion. She doesn’t care what her senator thinks. She doesn’t even really care if it’s legal, because she feels absolutely trapped and terrified. And so the only antidote to that is actually making sure that we resource women well.

“It’s making sure that these systems [are] changed so that that woman’s life is not over with an unintended pregnancy,” she continued. “And that child is going to grow up and thrive, not just survive, because it is living below the poverty line with no access to education or health care or any of these other things that are vital for their development.”

Quite frankly, it is a small group, but, the Credentialed Media likes them because they claim to be pro-life but tend to stick with Democrats. They are very much into helping illegals and

There are also two large meeting spaces where we envision holding pregnancy & birthing classes, as well as post-abortion recovery groups, fertility awareness classes, and lactation talks.

If you’re working on post-abortion recovery groups, you aren’t pro-life.

Herndon-De La Rosa, a Texas native, said that she supported Democrat Beto O’Rourke for U.S. Senate in 2018 over incumbent Republican Sen. Ted Cruz because she thought O’Rourke was the more “pro-life” candidate, despite his support for abortion rights.

“He was the one talking about making a society that was more equitable for sustaining life,” she said. “And no group, any group — feminists, pro-lifers, Republicans, Democrats — they’re not monoliths.”

So, the group’s view of pro-life is very different from the greater pro-life group. Beto wants zero restrictions on abortion.

“My biggest fear is that if Roe is overturned, it simply goes back to the states. It’s not like abortion disappears,” she added. “We’re going to have a lot of states that have very strong restrictions and other states that have zero restrictions.

“Now is the time that you actually have to be engaged and get out there and help women because, unfortunately, there are going to be so many women who have had one option taken away and are incredibly desperate at this point.”

Contraception. The option you’re looking for is contraception. Oh, and teaching smart sex. Not people engaging in risky, unprotected, irresponsible sex. How many more “pro-life” Conservatives will they try and trot out who aren’t really conservative?

Read: Hot Take: Pro-Life Feminists Say It’s Not Time To Ditch Roe »

Quick Review: AA Wireless Android Auto Device

I’d been thinking of getting a device that makes Android Auto wireless for a while now, I ordered the AA Wireless dongle while I was waiting for my Civic Hatchback EXL to come in (it finally did, have had it since April 5th. Maybe I’ll do a quick review on that later.). Been using it for about two weeks so far. Here are my impressions

  • Not quite as easy as plug -n-play, have to make sure you get it linked into WiFi connection with your phone, but, it has worked like a champ since, no glitches at all.
  • Sound quality, speed, exactly the same as if wired AA connection
  • One interesting thing is that MP3s/WMAs on my phone often play just a bit louder, I guess it is not limiting volume via Bluetooth (phones, headsets, etc usually limit loudness so they do not get sued. I have an older stereo BT headset and it is much louder
  • It’s small and lightweight, takes up little space.
  • Takes around 20 seconds to connect, a little longer than plugging direct, but, that’s OK.

Now, charging is interesting. If I’m puttering around town, I will usually not plug in, which is a benefit of wireless AA. You may not want that extra charge. You might not want those extra times wearing out the port. However, wireless charging in a car can be a challenge. I didn’t want to use the tray in front of the shifter, because that’s for Stuff. I tried one on a flexible arm attached to the side of the console on the passenger side. Which made it easy to see the phone screen if I needed to. Thing is, wireless charging warms up the phone, right? And if you’re passing gobs of data it gets very warm. Now you’re in a car, where it can be warm, even hot, before you even start. This is why the wireless chargers manufacturers put in cars are slow chargers. They aren’t going to do a whole lot, just a bit more in for power than going out.

If I want to charge, I plug the cable in that’s attached to the “cigarette lighter” port.

Regardless, I’ve enjoyed it. You can almost not get the Motorola one, since individuals and stores buy them all out, then resell. Should be $89.99, the least expensive is now $203. Most reviewers seem to like the AA one. Just might take a bit to get, couple months. If you have Apple, well, no idea. I’ve read some reviews, but, since I only have Android, haven’t tried.

Read: Quick Review: AA Wireless Android Auto Device »

Hot Take: We Can Beat Bidenflation By Taking On ‘Climate Change’

OK, let’s run a scientific study. Warmists will be the experimental group, Skeptics the control group. Every Warmist needs to give up their use of fossil fueled travel, move into tiny homes, stop eating meat, handwash their clothes, pay to install heat pumps and solar, and only buy second hand clothes. Oh, and give up their money and freedom to government. Skeptics will continue to live a 21st Century lifestyle. Let’s see if this makes any difference

To fight inflation, we must fight climate change

Next week we receive the latest figures on inflation. No doubt the dramatic, almost overnight, shift in consumption from in-person services to remote-ordered goods are part of the problem. So are mangled supply chains, as key workers miss work due to the coronavirus, here and overseas. And Russia’s brutal invasion of Ukraine has impacted global food and energy supplies.

Largely ignored as an inflationary driver, however, has been climate change. Like the pandemic, climate change is a global problem manifesting itself in countless waysmany well-hidden. Unlike the pandemic, it will get worse, not better, for the foreseeable future.

If we wish to control inflation, we must address climate change now.

Sherman Potter Bull Cookies

There’s lots and lots of scaremongering and doomsaying throughout the piece, with lots and lots of links, like the above excerpt. And the only solutions provided? Get rid of fossil fuels and go to renewables. I’m sure that David A. Super, a professor of law at Georgetown Law, doesn’t want to really give up his own big carbon lifestyle. Anyhow, it just goes to show that the climate cult will attempt to hijack any issue and put it under their banner.

Read: Hot Take: We Can Beat Bidenflation By Taking On ‘Climate Change’ »

If All You See…

…is a jungle that will soon disappear from too much carbon pollution, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is 90Ninety Miles From Tyranny, with a post on the 90 Miles Mystery Box. What’s in it?

Read: If All You See… »

White House Doom Mongers On Fall/Winter Chinese Coronavirus Infections

They could be right, they could be wrong. I know of a bunch of people right now who’ve gotten COVID, possibly the latest variant going around, which also seems to evade boosters. The question now becomes “does the Let’s Go Brandon admin attempt to use this for their benefit, and will they attempt to reinstall masking and vaccine mandates?”

Here’s what the White House’s grim coronavirus warning means for you

“You don’t make the timeline, the virus makes the timeline.”

That was Dr. Anthony Fauci’s message for an anxious nation when the novel coronavirus first began to spread across the US. More than two years later, his words have new relevance in the face of a disturbing warning from the White House.

CNN’s Kaitlan Collins reportsThe Biden administration is issuing a new warning that the US could potentially see 100 million Covid-19 infections this fall and winter, as officials publicly stress the need for more funding from Congress to prepare the nation.

The projection of 100 million potential infections is an estimate based on a range of outside models that are being closely tracked by the administration and would include both the fall and winter, a senior administration official told CNN. Officials say this estimate is based on an underlying assumption of no additional resources or extra mitigation measures being taken, including new Covid-19 funding from Congress, or dramatic new variants.

So, if you don’t allow Government to implement restrictions, this is All Your Fault. And you need to give them a lot of money to fight this in the future, string free cash. The rest of the piece is an interview with  Dr. Syra Madad, an epidemiologist at NYC Health + Hospitals, actually not that bad. Here’s one I’ve been sitting on for a few days

Point: There’s No Evidence That Masks Work

Joe Biden proclaimed, “Wearing masks is not a political statement, it is a scientific imperative.” He was wrong. There is little evidence supporting generalized use of masks.

A pre-COVID systemic review of interventions to combat the spread of respiratory viral diseases by the highly regarded Cochrane Library found that medical/surgical mask wearing makes little or no difference to the outcome of influenza or influenza-like illnesses compared to not wearing a mask.

A recent review of the literature reported two randomized controlled clinical trials of the effectiveness of masking in COVID-19. One failed to demonstrate a statistically significant benefit. The second found small, marginally statistically significant reductions in viral transmission for surgical masks but not for cloth masks. Thirteen of 14 tests assessing mask-wearing in non-COVID respiratory infections failed to find a statistically significant benefit for masks.

In other words, unless you did wear an N95 or KN95 mask, there was almost no benefit, which is why we saw huge spikes from Delta and Omicron. The Powers That Be forgot to continue the initial, important, wise messaging: don’t touch, keep your distance, wash your hands, don’t touch your face.

Early in the pandemic, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the World Health Organization, British health authorities, and the European Center for Disease Prevention and Control all refrained from recommending widespread mask usage, often discouraging it. Dr. Anthony Fauci emailed in February 2020 that the typical mask “is not really effective in keeping out virus, which is small enough to pass through the material.” In a March 8 interview on “60 Minutes” he said that “there’s no reason to be walking around with a mask.”

Nevertheless, the CDC in April 2020 began recommending mask wearing, including cloth masks. A CDC Science Brief relied on observational masking studies where the evidence suggested benefit, while highlighting the limitations rather than outcomes of studies that suggested the absence of benefit or even harm.

So, why’d they push people to wear masks that really do not work? I’ll let you work that one out

Endorsing cloth masks was disconcerting since an RCT of hospital workers showed far higher infection rates with cloth masks than medical masks.

For one thing, those masks do not get washed very often, much less daily. People wore them because they were forced. How soon till government attempts more mask mandates if the current variant starts infecting a lot of people?

Read: White House Doom Mongers On Fall/Winter Chinese Coronavirus Infections »

Climate Cult Attempts To Blame High Food Prices On Climate Crisis (scam)

Oh, sure, part of it is the war in Ukraine and the Wuhan flu aftermath, but, mostly it’s you driving a fossil fueled vehicle

As Conflict and Climate Change Bite, Are High Food Prices Here to Stay?

climate cowFood prices around the world have soared to record levels this year as the Russia-Ukraine war slashes key exports of wheat and fertilizer from those countries, at the same time as droughts, floods and heat fueled by climate change claim more harvests.

Wheat prices hit a 14-year peak in March, and maize prices reached the highest ever recorded, the International Panel of Experts on Sustainable Food Systems (IPES) said in a report released on Friday.

That has made basic staples more expensive – or harder to find – for families in many countries, especially the poorest.

Climate change, widespread poverty and conflicts are now combining to create “endemic and widespread” risks to global food security – which means higher food prices may be the new normal, unless action is taken to curb the threats, IPES noted.

It suggests not only cutting emissions swiftly to limit climate change but also tackling commodity speculation, giving debt relief, cutting reliance on chemical fertilizers, reshaping trade and shoring up national grain reserves.

See? Those other things are happening, but, that whole 1.5F increase in global temperatures since 1850 is the apocalypse.

Since the last food price crises of 2007-2008 and 2011-2012, “governments have failed to curb excessive speculation and ensure transparency of food stocks and commodity markets,” said Jennifer Clapp, a professor specialized in food security at Canada’s University of Waterloo.

Oops. The war has disrupted a pretty big chunk of global wheat supplies, but, the U.S. is doing just fine. We grow more than enough for ourselves, along with other products. Perhaps having basic food stuffs traded as commodities isn’t the brightest idea. Regardless, it damned sure isn’t ‘climate change.’

Meanwhile, the Let’s Go Brandon admin is going to make appliances and air costs more expensive, which will increase the price of other goods

Read: Climate Cult Attempts To Blame High Food Prices On Climate Crisis (scam) »

NY Times Nothing Has Done More For Women In The Workplace Than Unfettered Abortion

Most 1st world nations have some restrictions on abortion. Most do not allow late term abortion except for actual, real medical emergencies. Most are reasonable, it’s barely an issue in most 1st World nations. Here in the U.S., though, the Democratic Party has made abortion their Number One Belief, to the point where they will tell average Dem voters that they cannot be a Democrat if they aren’t sufficiently pious in push abortion with zero restrictions. If they aren’t celebrating abortion. And the will say, and do, anything to protect it, hence this nutty NY Times piece

How Roe Shaped the World of Work for Women
Many factors drove women into the work force in greater numbers in the 1970s. Scholars argue that abortion access was an important one.

When Barbara Schwartz looks back at her younger days working as a Broadway stagehand, she remembers the electricity of it: the harried dancers slipping into their costumes backstage, the props people shoving past with flashlights between their teeth.

She was able to throw herself into that high-pressure career, she said, because of a choice she made in 1976. She got an abortion at a clinic she found in the Yellow Pages. It was three years after the Roe v. Wade ruling established the constitutional right to an abortion; to Ms. Schwartz, the world seemed full of new professional opportunities for women. She got a credit card in her own name, became one of the first women to make it into the local stagehand union and joined the throngs backstage at shows including “Cats” and “Miss Saigon.”

Perhaps she should have a little smarter and responsible with her sexual activities.

To women like Ms. Jelatis, who entered adulthood in the early 1970s, the world of work and opportunity was changing rapidly. Women’s labor force participation went from about 43 percent in 1970 to 57.4 percent in 2019. Many different factors drove women into the work force in greater numbers in those years, but scholars argue that abortion access was an important one.

“There’s no question that legal abortion makes it possible for women in all classes and races to have some control over their economic lives and ability to work outside the home,” said Rosalind Petchesky, a retired professor of political science at Hunter College, whose research was cited in the Supreme Court’s 1992 ruling in the case Planned Parenthood v. Casey, which reaffirmed Roe.

Yes, some unhinged supporters of killing babies do believe so much in abortion on demand that they think it made a difference. And will defend it along these line. And, while it might have played a small part, the important ones are different

(Brookings Institute) Between the 1930s and mid-1970s, women’s participation in the economy continued to rise, with the gains primarily owing to an increase in work among married women. By 1970, 50 percent of single women and 40 percent of married women were participating in the labor force. Several factors contributed to this rise. First, with the advent of mass high school education, graduation rates rose substantially. At the same time, new technologies contributed to an increased demand for clerical workers, and these jobs were increasingly taken on by women. Moreover, because these jobs tended to be cleaner and safer, the stigma attached to work for a married woman diminished. And while there were still marriage bars that forced women out of the labor force, these formal barriers were gradually removed over the period following World War II. (snip)

By the 1970s, a dramatic change in women’s work lives was under way. In the period after World War II, many women had not expected that they would spend as much of their adult lives working as turned out to be the case. By contrast, in the 1970s young women more commonly expected that they would spend a substantial portion of their lives in the labor force, and they prepared for it, increasing their educational attainment and taking courses and college majors that better equipped them for careers as opposed to just jobs.

These changes in attitudes and expectations were supported by other changes under way in society. Workplace protections were enhanced through the passage of the Pregnancy Discrimination Act in 1978 and the recognition of sexual harassment in the workplace. Access to birth control increased, which allowed married couples greater control over the size of their families and young women the ability to delay marriage and to plan children around their educational and work choices. And in 1974, women gained, for the first time, the right to apply for credit in their own name without a male co-signer.

The piece is written by Janet Yellen. Yes, that Janet Yellen. Contraception was certainly a factor in the 70’s

(HuffPost) A big part of this is our own culture, which hasn’t changed very dramatically, according to Norma Carr-Ruffino, an expert on women in management who has taught at San Francisco State University’s College of Business. She has also authored multiple books on women and diversity in the workplace. “The culture is important and it affects corporate culture,” she said. She noted that the change in terms of women’s participation in the workplace began in the 1970s when a single-income household could no longer support a comfortable, middle-class lifestyle.

Those aren’t exactly right wing sources. In fact, most articles I’ve found speak of the same exact things. Women becoming more educated, stretching beyond the typical menial, secretary, and educator type jobs, and needing to work to make ends meet.

Contraception and wise life choices are a good thing. Abortion is not contraception, and should be done simply because people were irresponsible. Taken properly, birth control pills are 99% effective. Show some self control. Yes, yes, I know other bad things happen, but, most cases are simply irresponsible sexual behavior.

Read: NY Times Nothing Has Done More For Women In The Workplace Than Unfettered Abortion »

If All You See…

…are flowers which soon die out because ‘climate change’ is killing all the bees, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Lid, with a post on a detailed analysis of Biden’s Ministry of Truth.

It’s tight jeans week!

Read: If All You See… »

Pirate's Cove