Intelligent Design

Newsweek: Lockdown “Clumsy” and “Heavy-Handed”

Spread the love

To our progressive interlocutors: When even Newsweek bails on you, it is time to abandon your narrative.

MOST U.S. HOSPITALS ARE EMPTY. SOON THEY MIGHT BE CLOSED FOR GOOD

instead of merely preserving hospital beds and other resources, this heavy-handed injunction has created a burden of its own design: a historic number of empty beds in systems left untouched by the pandemic.

Those hospitals have resorted to unprecedented levels of furloughs to stave off temporary budget shortfalls, but industry and economic trends point to more lasting outcomes unless immediate action is taken.

9 Replies to “Newsweek: Lockdown “Clumsy” and “Heavy-Handed”

  1. 1
    Seversky says:

    Hindsight is great but if authorities had done nothing and let things rip can you imagine the howls of outraged protest that would have erupted about how the government was doing nothing to protect us.

  2. 2
    AaronS1978 says:

    If nothing was done at all, no media, just calm slow prevention, would anything have really happened. It seems that the virus was under our radar for quite sometime longer than we have thought and hardly anyone noticed

    Yes you can say we underestimated the deaths (honesty not the case consult WHO)
    but if we did, we surely underestimated the extent of the infection way more, which appears to be the case.

    So did we do the right thing? Not sure, and I agree this was to extreme

    One thing is certain China lied to us and they have made it perfectly where they stand when it comes to the worlds safety

  3. 3
  4. 4
    Seversky says:

    I’m sure we’ll find we got a lot of things wrong and I never expect the Chinese (or Russian or North Korean) authorities to tell the truth but I suspect this is a foretaste of pandemics to come. We would do well to learn from this so we are better positioned to cope when the next one comes along.

  5. 5
    BobRyan says:

    That which governs least has a tendency to govern best. When SARS hit close to 20 years ago, it was the same dire warnings, but nothing was shut down and freedoms were not curtailed. No state violated the Commerce Clause. It came and went with a cost of billions to the global economy, which was a small bump in the road. People continued to work and continued to do the things they did to relieve stress, such as go to a bar or out with friends.

    Instead of looking at how SARS was handles as the format of how to handle SARS-2, which is what this is, we through the format out the window along with everything known about viruses and responses to viruses of this nature. The actions will cost trillions and will not be a small bump in the road, but a gaping canyon that will take years to recover from.

    What was known is China lies and the WHO never questions China’s numbers. They didn’t question them with SARS, bird flu, SARS-2. Whatever number China gives is simply reported as fact by the WHO and used to base their information on.

    What was known was the effect of illegally shutting down businesses in states, which is a clear violation of the Constitution and there is nothing in the Constitution to allow any state to violate the Constitution for any reason, and mass quarantining would have serious negative implications.

    What was known was there would be an increase in suicides, domestic abuse, obesity, limited heard immunity, depression, fear. There are small businesses that have declared bankruptcy and the owners have lost everything. There are people who do not know how long it will be until they have a job, which was not an issue a little over a month ago. There are people who are wondering how they are going to feed their families.

    One size fits all government always results in the spreading of misery to the masses of those who are not privileged. The misery that is happening now was a known factor and ignored. Socialists only claim to care about suffering, but they lie.

  6. 6
    john_a_designer says:

    As I have already pointed out on another thread: “Everyone thinks they have 20-20 hindsight. But the fact is nobody has 20-20 foresight. Like the fog of war there is a fog which comes with every crisis.

    The so-called models have turned out to be in most cases wrong to very wrong but does anyone believe that we would be okay if we had done nothing?”

    In other words, obviously we know more now (4/28/20) than we did six to eight weeks ago when it looked like the health care system in several areas of the country was on the verge of being overwhelmed. People needed to keep things in the correct historical perspective before they begin down the could have been, would have been, should have been path. I think caution and prudence at the beginning of this pandemic was much warranted.

  7. 7
    PaV says:

    The ONLY rationale for the “lockdown” was its potential swamping of our healthcare system, with a concomitant rise in additional deaths other than from the novel corona virus.

    And, now, the “lockdown” is on the verge of breaking down our food supply system and the hospital care system. IOW, the lockdown might accomplish the very thing it was intended to stop. What irony!

  8. 8
    PaV says:

    Seversky:

    If Governor Cuomo had urged caution sooner, and had he not “contaminataed” nursing homes and assisted living homes with those discharged from hospitals who had the novel corona virus, then New York and New Jersey might not have been nearly effected as badly as they have been, and the lockdown would not have been necessary in the first place.

    Had Cuomo not “targeted” the ‘target population,’ and had, instead, protected them like DeSantis did in Florida, things could have been very different.

    Let’s point out some numbers. The average world-wide deaths due to the “flu” is estimated to be between 291,000 and 680,000 each year. Total CoVid-19 deaths worldwide is 217,000. We’ve lost our minds—or, at least, our politicians have.

    Two to three weeks of shutdown was justified at first. Why? Because we didn’t know what the numbers would be and we had to protect the healthcare system. But, after two to three weeks of data, it was abundantly clear we were not dealing with the Spanish flu. We have a president who has ceded his authority to academicians: the perennial ‘recipe for disaster.’ And now we are on the precipice of an unimaginable disaster.

    I live in California. People go to the beach after they hear that UV light kills the novel corona virus. And our governor threatens force. This in a state of 40 million people that has less than 2,000 deaths due to the virus. Assuming, per Stanford, that 6% of the population has been infected, that’s 2.5 milliion people who have had the virus, and less than 2,000 deaths. That means that the CFR, the mortality rate, is less than that of the seasonal flu.

    And what if, as I suspect, the percentage of those affected by the virus is higher than 6%? Then the lethality of the virus will end up being much less deadly than the common cold.

    We are living through insanity. I predicted weeks ago that Gavin Newsome would hang onto the lockdown well past there being any reason for it. Why? Because he is a foolish man. His politics have made him so.

  9. 9
    BobRyan says:

    Smallpox, yellow fever, cholera, scarlet fever, typhoid, Spanish flu, diptheria, polio. The United States has seen all of these and never reacted the way we are today. The American Revolution was fought during an outbreak of smallpox, which impacted both sides of the war. When the Constitution was written, they did not write it on the basis that things like smallpox existed and will continue to exist.

    Article VI, paragraph 2 of the US Constitution is called the Supremacy Clause. No state can do anything to violate any part of the Constitution for any reason. The paragraph below shows there are no exceptions to the Constitution.

    This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.

    Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 is the Commerce Clause, which includes interstate commerce. This is the reason no state can put an undue burden on interstate commerce without violating the Commerce Clause. There is no exception listed.

    To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;

    Only Congress can do anything in regards to interstate commerce. States that have shut down businesses are committing acts of rebellion. They have chosen to violate the Constitution and should never been allowed to get this far. The Attorney General’s office should have made it clear to all states, they do not have the power to shut down business.

    The question is not what should have been done, regardless of unknowns and projections, but what can be done legally.

Leave a Reply