Recommended by Ricochet Members Created with Sketch. Rush Caller Prompted a Question

 

Every morning, I read the transcripts from Rush’s show of the previous day. One caller on Tuesday’s show raised a question in my mind. First, the setup to the question.

A lady from Illinois called and talked to Rush about how she thought the extraordinary restrictions put in place to fight the Chinese flu are a massive power grab. She used her own state as an example. She started with citing 101 murders to date in Chicago alone, compared to 73 coronavirus deaths statewide to date. (Note: I have been unable to verify these numbers. The statistics are all over the place.)

Now, the conversation didn’t go in what to me was the obvious direction. My question is, “Why did Illinois go into lockdown for the virus when it didn’t go into a targeted lockdown in Chicago?” Of course, we know the governor wants to stop the spread of the virus, and unfortunately, most governors think the only way to do it is a lockdown, regardless of the economies destroyed. I’ll ask another question:

If a lockdown is effective in stopping the spread of the virus, why didn’t the Mayor of Chicago direct lockdowns in those neighborhoods where 99% of the murders take place? Wouldn’t that stop the gun violence “epidemic” there?

Power corrupts, whether you’re a Democrat or Republican. Although I cannot find a source to cite other than Rush, Andrew Cuomo said, “Sometimes you need an emergency to force change.” Even not knowing the context, people should recognize 1) the truth of those words, and 2) the reason we should take note and be very concerned. The concern is that once this virus blows over and governors (hopefully) relinquish their powers, how many will miss that taste so much, the next time anything resembling a crisis appears, the yoke is put back on their citizens? Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Rush also brought up a comparison of our country’s response to the Spanish flu epidemic (very little), and Sweden’s current approach to the Chinese flu (business as usual, individuals take their own responsibility).

It will be interesting to compare our two countries’ statistics when this epidemic blows over.

Some of my fellow Ricochetti have stated that rights are not absolute. Tell that to God, because natural rights were given to us by Him. However, natural rights can be suspended if exercising those rights violates someone else’s rights. This is where government needs to strike a reasonable balance of civil rights curtailment vs. freedom, not a near-total elimination. We can discuss this while we follow whatever guidelines or dictates our “masters” have directed. But when this thing is over, I expect reviews and discussions at the federal and state levels to find that balance so future actions aren’t so disproportionately severe.

Published in Politics
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

There are 21 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. David Carroll Thatcher
    David Carroll Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Sweden’s approach would be better for me economically, but that is only because I am semi-retired and work from home anyway. My wife and I would and could continue to self isolate. 

    I am not sure it would be better for our younger relatives who would go into a category of likely getting exposed and risking serious illness or death. I am quite sure it would not be good for anyone needing hospitalization for any reason as the hospitals get jammed up. I am also quite sure that it would be bad for the medical professionals who would have to deal with more cases with less personal protective gear (because of increased demand using up supply all over) and fewer available respirators as a percentage of the increased numbers of sick people.

    • #1
    • April 1, 2020, at 7:04 AM PDT
    • 4 likes
  2. Jon1979 Lincoln

    Going the other way, I think the question is how many voters want freedom versus how many want security at a given time. With all the unknowns about the virulence of COVID-19, you’re in a current climate where the vast majority are demanding security, which gives government the power to impose measures that would be considered draconian otherwise. But as time goes on, you’re going to have a cabin fever effect, to where maintaining those draconian controls if the public isn’t seeing the worst-case scenarios in deaths play out, is going to be tougher and tougher to sell.

    Even normally liberal people are going to be wanting some of their quality-of-life freedoms restored, to where instead of politicians facing blowback for not acting strong enough, pols will get blowback for trying to maintain their overreach on control, based on trying to continue to use the worst-case scenario outcomes (liberals want the government to be there to do things for them and pay for it, but they also tend to want to do their own thing, and just want a safety net to cover the negative results of their decisions; the COVID-19 limitations are more than just a $2 trillion safety net, but are telling those people, mostly urbanites, that they can’t engage in their normal lifestyles. Security fears will make that work up to a point, but sooner or later the desire for freedom — even if it’s freedom to be decadent — is going to start to take over).

    • #2
    • April 1, 2020, at 7:04 AM PDT
    • 4 likes
  3. Stina Member

    They should be delegating authority to the lowest common denominator.

    If it’s only a handful of counties or cities in a state with issues, state wide measure are not needed… most cities and counties in the state don’t have a problem… delegate to the lowest authority of county or city authority.

    If it begins to effect more cities and counties, in a state, the state takes over the authority. The federal government need not get involved at all except where it concerns spread coming from outside the US – lock down international travel.

    Where I disagree with the vast majority here, I see nothing wrong with states curtailing interstate travel during a pandemic if that helps keep their citizens free. If NYC has a problem with a disease, FL should absolutely be able to say “stay out”. It protects our freedoms being curtailed by state wide quarantine if we keep people from traveling from a hot bed to a low incidence location.

    I feel the same way about state elections. States should be able to set their own rules on who votes in state wide elections.

    • #3
    • April 1, 2020, at 7:04 AM PDT
    • 5 likes
  4. Stad Thatcher
    Stad

    Jon1979 (View Comment):
    where the vast majority are demanding security

    Sorry, I don’t see this. People are demanding action, but many disagree with the severity of the action.

    • #4
    • April 1, 2020, at 7:06 AM PDT
    • 4 likes
  5. Stad Thatcher
    Stad

    Stina (View Comment):
    I see nothing wrong with states curtailing interstate travel during a pandemic if that helps keep their citizens free.

    The problem is Congress has the power to regulate interstate commerce. Since they’ve made it an unwritten rule that anything can involve interstate commerce, they are the ones who should take action in this area, not the states. However, the Executive Branch may have this authority during a declared emergency, but not the states. Definitely not the states.

    • #5
    • April 1, 2020, at 7:09 AM PDT
    • 1 like
  6. Jon1979 Lincoln

    Stad (View Comment):

    Jon1979 (View Comment):
    where the vast majority are demanding security

    Sorry, I don’t see this. People are demanding action, but many disagree with the severity of the action.

    I’m out in a relatively sparsely-populated area of West Texas, which has seen some limitations — schools, restaurants and banks indoor areas closed, hours curtailed on shopping, etc., but not at the same level as in some of the bigger cities (Lubbock’s the only place out here seeing any concerning COVID-19 spike). And for the most part, the public is willing to accept those levels of restrictions for now, because there are still unknowns about coronavirus. That’s going to become less and less as the new month goes on, and the same people would like to have their regular summer activities, or they’d like to not have a drive-up high school graduation for the senior students. So the freedom desire is going to start to gain more support among the public, unless we see more New Yorks from other metro areas in April, and my guess is even people in the urban areas that normally vote deep Blue are going to have their fill of certain parts of government control if it’s cramping their lifestyles for too long (whether those people will figure out the cramping of their lifestyles is the inevitable end result of the big government they’re always voting for is another question entirely).

    • #6
    • April 1, 2020, at 7:28 AM PDT
    • 4 likes
  7. Bob Thompson Member

    Stad: Andrew Cuomo said, “Sometimes you need an emergency to force change.”

    This is a mere re-phrasing of “Never let a crisis go to waste”.

    • #7
    • April 1, 2020, at 8:20 AM PDT
    • 5 likes
  8. Bob Thompson Member

    Stad (View Comment):

    Stina (View Comment):
    I see nothing wrong with states curtailing interstate travel during a pandemic if that helps keep their citizens free.

    The problem is Congress has the power to regulate interstate commerce. Since they’ve made it an unwritten rule that anything can involve interstate commerce, they are the ones who should take action in this area, not the states. However, the Executive Branch may have this authority during a declared emergency, but not the states. Definitely not the states.

    You are referencing a reliance on Constitutional interpretation of the ‘commerce clause’ but totally ignoring Constitutional protections in the Bill of Rights for individuals. The problem for the federal action is the lack of police power. How do you suggest such federal power be enforced?

    • #8
    • April 1, 2020, at 8:24 AM PDT
    • 2 likes
  9. Ontheleftcoast Member

     From today’s WSJ:

    In hospitals across New York City and elsewhere in the country, nurses and doctors are complaining about a lack of safety equipment, insufficient staffing, murky policies and other challenges. New York City accounts for the largest number of Covid-19 cases in the U.S. On Tuesday morning, the city reported 40,900 cases and 932 deaths.

    In the last few weeks, the 57-year-old Ms. Norstein and other nurses say they have seen freezer trucks out back for dead bodies; four to five patients dying every emergency-room shift; the loudspeaker frequently booming out “codes” for patients whose hearts or breathing stopped. Colleagues who were healthy one day fell critically ill the next.

    Despite multiple alarms raised by workers in the past two months, she and other nurses say the hospital system stumbled in creating protocols to prevent the disease’s spread and is sending its workers out to the battlefield underprepared. Staffers say the hospital is running out of critical supplies—ventilators, dialysis machines, sedation medication, feeding pumps. Ms. Norstein said a doctor told her that physicians are discussing how they would decide who lives as ventilator supplies dwindle.

    Many nurses and doctors have symptoms, like dry coughs, but are being denied tests and remain working, Ms. Norstein and other Montefiore health-care workers said colleagues have told them.

    Friday night, she asked herself: Should she even come back home after her next shift? She feared she would infect her family. One of her daughters has lupus and other autoimmune conditions, putting her at risk. It has been a long time since she has hugged them—it’s against her own rules.

    “I feel overwhelmed with sadness,” said Ms. Norstein, who lives in Pawling, N.Y., with her husband and two of her four children. “It is not just sadness for the patients, it is for their families, for my family. It is for the possibility that I may very well get this.”

    Among New York City’s boroughs, the Bronx has the most reported Covid-19 deaths per capita. It has high rates of asthma, heart disease and diabetes—conditions that make people more vulnerable to becoming severely ill from the virus and ending up in the ICU. Montefiore is a major hospital system there.

    • #9
    • April 1, 2020, at 8:50 AM PDT
    • 1 like
  10. RightAngles Member

    Bob Thompson (View Comment):

    Stad: Andrew Cuomo said, “Sometimes you need an emergency to force change.”

    This is a mere re-phrasing of “Never let a crisis go to waste”.

    When he said that, my blood ran cold. And you should see the people on my local Next Door. One guy posted that he doubts the constitutionality of forcing him to stay indoors, and people replied with “it’s for the greater good” and that its worth it to “keep us safe” etc.

     

    • #10
    • April 1, 2020, at 8:52 AM PDT
    • 2 likes
  11. Bob Thompson Member

    Ontheleftcoast (View Comment):
    Many nurses and doctors have symptoms, like dry coughs, but are being denied tests and remain working, Ms. Norstein and other Montefiore health-care workers said colleagues have told them.

    It difficult to understand any denial of tests for medical workers. The administration announced numerous deliveries of the latest Abbott Labs testing capability that yields positive or negative results in fifteen minutes on-site. ??

    • #11
    • April 1, 2020, at 9:05 AM PDT
    • 2 likes
  12. Stina Member

    Stad (View Comment):

    Stina (View Comment):
    I see nothing wrong with states curtailing interstate travel during a pandemic if that helps keep their citizens free.

    The problem is Congress has the power to regulate interstate commerce. Since they’ve made it an unwritten rule that anything can involve interstate commerce, they are the ones who should take action in this area, not the states. However, the Executive Branch may have this authority during a declared emergency, but not the states. Definitely not the states.

    I think that the commerce clause was an incredible breech on states rights. Again, decisions should be made as locally as possible.

    If a state is concerned about how it affects economic issues, they can make their own exceptions and adjustments.

    • #12
    • April 1, 2020, at 9:07 AM PDT
    • 1 like
  13. Casey Way Member
    Casey Way Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    In Illinois and heard on the radio this AM Chicago is quarantining a certain high crime area. And this article says the ACLU has an issue with it.

    https://m.sfgate.com/news/crime/article/Chicago-cops-restrict-access-to-4-blocks-to-bar-15170349.php

     

    • #13
    • April 1, 2020, at 9:09 AM PDT
    • 2 likes
  14. A-Squared Coolidge

    I use this site to track Chicago murders, and it does show 101 murders YTD in Chicago
    https://heyjackass.com/

    Right now, JHU is showing 100 COVID deaths in IL statewide, but that number would have gone up from yesterday.

    https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/map.html

    • #14
    • April 1, 2020, at 9:13 AM PDT
    • 6 likes
    • This comment has been edited.
  15. Stad Thatcher
    Stad

    Jon1979 (View Comment):
    And for the most part, the public is willing to accept those levels of restrictions for now, because there are still unknowns about coronavirus.

    So true. But prolonged restrictions will eventually wear thin, and people will start to grumble, eventually rebel.

    • #15
    • April 1, 2020, at 12:48 PM PDT
    • 1 like
  16. Stad Thatcher
    Stad

    Bob Thompson (View Comment):
    You are referencing a reliance on Constitutional interpretation of the ‘commerce clause’ but totally ignoring Constitutional protections in the Bill of Rights for individuals.

    I’m not ignoring the protections. I’m merely pointing out the commerce clause is what Congress uses to enact laws that have nothing to do with interstate commerce. However, this interpretation by Congress implies they have the authority, not the states.

    Bob Thompson (View Comment):
    The problem for the federal action is the lack of police power. How do you suggest such federal power be enforced?

    They will ignore posse comitatus and use the military. Or, they could nationize the National Guard which does have the authority in spite of posse comitatus . . .

    • #16
    • April 1, 2020, at 12:52 PM PDT
    • Like
  17. Freeven Member
    Freeven Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Stad: The concern is that once this virus blows over and governors (hopefully) relinquish their powers, how many will miss that taste so much, the next time anything resembling a crisis appears, the yoke is put back on their citizens? Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

    Three words: Catastrophic Climate Change.

    AOC has laid the groundwork with her claim that the world will end in 12 years. If an AOC-type comes to power, that will be enough justification for the ultimate power grab.

    • #17
    • April 1, 2020, at 1:03 PM PDT
    • 3 likes
  18. Bob Thompson Member

    Freeven (View Comment):

    Stad: The concern is that once this virus blows over and governors (hopefully) relinquish their powers, how many will miss that taste so much, the next time anything resembling a crisis appears, the yoke is put back on their citizens? Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

    Three words: Catastrophic Climate Change.

    AOC has laid the groundwork with her claim that the world will end in 12 years. If an AOC-type comes to power, that will be enough justification for the ultimate power grab.

    The urban density in New York City, with its close living and high speed rail for movement from place to place, is exactly the prescription for living favored by AOC. Or maybe it is the prescription for dying.

    • #18
    • April 1, 2020, at 1:17 PM PDT
    • 2 likes
  19. OccupantCDN Coolidge

    Freeven (View Comment):

    Stad: The concern is that once this virus blows over and governors (hopefully) relinquish their powers, how many will miss that taste so much, the next time anything resembling a crisis appears, the yoke is put back on their citizens? Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

    Three words: Catastrophic Climate Change.

    AOC has laid the groundwork with her claim that the world will end in 12 years. If an AOC-type comes to power, that will be enough justification for the ultimate power grab.

    I agree. We live in terrible uncertain times, and they’ll get worse.

    We are living in the opening days of a global depression – not a down turn or recession – the damage done to western economies is frankly incalculable. However our trials pale in comparison to what could come next.

    Just as the Nazi’s burned the Reichstag to give themselves a crisis to inflict totalitarianism on the German people, modern totalitarians dont have to damage any buildings – only create a virtual threat with biased computer models and seize power when elected. As much as the nazi’s have been vilified in history, in 1933 they did manage to get elected. Adolf Hitler was appointed to be Chancellor. It only took them only a month. Hitler formed the government on Jan 30 1933, and fire was on Feb 27.

    • #19
    • April 1, 2020, at 3:19 PM PDT
    • 2 likes
  20. Paul Stinchfield Member
    Paul Stinchfield Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    A-Squared (View Comment):
    I use this site to track Chicago murders…

    Hey Jackass and CWBChicago.com are excellent sources of information–far better than the Chicago Tribune.

    • #20
    • April 1, 2020, at 6:22 PM PDT
    • 3 likes
  21. Stad Thatcher
    Stad

    Freeven (View Comment):

    Stad: The concern is that once this virus blows over and governors (hopefully) relinquish their powers, how many will miss that taste so much, the next time anything resembling a crisis appears, the yoke is put back on their citizens? Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

    Three words: Catastrophic Climate Change.

    AOC has laid the groundwork with her claim that the world will end in 12 years. If an AOC-type comes to power, that will be enough justification for the ultimate power grab.

    Obamessiah chimed in on this too.

    • #21
    • April 2, 2020, at 5:53 AM PDT
    • Like