Posted on by Californiacontrarian

Diktats . . . Constitutional ?

The “COVID police” continue to try to enforce arbitrary diktats made up by  . . . who? . . . based on what? . . . with exceptions seemingly pulled out of thin air.

The following was spoken earlier this week by the mayor of a coastal town north of San Diego, “Local laws need to be consistent with state and federal constitutions, and should not infringe on anyone’s freedom.” 

Wow, now that is a novel idea! Follow the constitution . . . why didn’t someone else think of that?! Why are those who are arbitrarily pronouncing these diktats apparently choosing to follow some arbitrary “made-up” sets of rules. What Constitution, they ask? Here in California, there are a gazillion rules on just about everything, the the next stages of reopening are being defined by some arbitrary rules. For instance: A county can end up on the Governor’s watchlist if the number of new COVID cases is above 100-per-100,000 residents. The esteemed Dr. Fauci is constantly talking about controlled studies … can anyone show me a controlled study defining this arbitrary tipping point?

 My gym cannot be opened because apparently a single gym was the source of “an outbreak,” which is defined as three cases not from the same family, from a single source somewhere in the county. In this situation if a single gym is the source of three cases, then close it down. That at least makes some sense, but to close down hundreds of gyms because three cases were found to stem from one gym, utter insanity!

There are also other “pull-the-rabbit-out-of-the-hat” hocus-pocus examples … for instance, fourteen day moving averages, used magically to place people, churches, parks, and businesses on or off some list. . . abracadabra!”

All arbitrary . . . formulated by whom?

Businesses are going under. Suicides are up. Mass masking is begetting chaos, as Karens are all in a tizzy. All because of some arbitrary criteria and lists. Have any of these mambo-jumbo dictums been validated by a Fauci double-blind controlled study?  . . . Not a spatial-distancing chance!

Soon we will start to see more cases about infringement of our constitutional liberties, and these cases will eventually make their way to the Supreme Court. So far the only case that I am aware of is one from Nevada where a church wanted the same spacing rules, etc. as casinos. The church lost that case because John Roberts for some inexplicable reason, voted to squash religious freedom. Now you might say “who cares about some hodunk-podunk church in Nevada?” We should all care because this case points out that Justice John Roberts is merely a pseudo-conservative, and certainly should not be thought of as one who will reliably follow the Constitution. This becomes even more critical since, if Biden wins the presidency, the Supreme Court will again be a non-Constitutional left-leaning quagmire. Another reason to “vote Trump!”

( My upcoming novella, “The Keneally Chronicles” will deal with some of these non-constitutional diktats, and their impingements on our Constitutional liberties.)

120 Replies to “Diktats . . . Constitutional ?”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.