Something to share with Brainwashed Normies

The Radical Left and their sycophantic cult members are now frequently regurgitating “1905 Jacobsen ruling” over and over again. Most of them have absolutely no idea what this means but cult members love to loudly chant what they’re told. Investigative journalist Alex Berenson has done some research:

  • 1883: “Racial discrimination is awesome” – Civil Rights cases [8-1]
  • 1895: “Monopolies are awesome” – US v EC Knight [8-1]
  • 1905: Jacobson v Massachusetts [7-2]
  • 1905: “Workers do not have and cannot have any rights vis-a-vis their employer” – Lochner v New York [5-4]
  • 1917: “You can go to jail for questioning the government” – Debs v US [9-0]
  • 1919: “You can go to jail for speech we don’t like” – Schenck v US [9-0]
  • 1927: “Your Fallopian tubes belong to us” – Buck v Bell [8-1]

38 Replies to “Something to share with Brainwashed Normies”

    1. Spot on CD. And where Justice Holmes declared that several generations of imbeciles was quite enough.
      Something along those lines anyways.

    2. But the Dems got around the repeal of the law by making abortion available to all, especially their captives on the plantations.

    1. Any bets that those physicians won’t be tracked down and punished? No? I didn’t think so, either.

  1. You might want to remind the brain washed normies, that at the Nuremberg trials, judges who ruled certain laws legal, were tried…and hung.

  2. 1919: “You can go to jail for speech we don’t like” – Schenck v US [9-0]

    Yep. I love to quote this one back to the overeducated dweebs who:

    1) use an American court case to prove some Canadian thing, and
    2) they forget to include the word “falsely” when they misquote “you can’t yell fire in a crowded theatre”, and
    3) it was overturned during the Vietnam war

    Yeah, I use all of my 1980s Grade 12 diploma for that one…

  3. Seriously, covid19 is to smallpox what a molehill is to a mountain. The recovery rate for covid is from 99.997% for the young to 96% for the very old. Small pox killed 30%.

    The covid vaccines also cannot compare to the smallpox vaccine. Covid vaccines are non-sterilizing, leaky vaccines that do not prevent infection or transmission and wear off in 4-6 months. These vaccines only mask symptoms. That is more like a therapy or treatment like steroid injections given every 4 months for pain control. Small pox vaccines were real vaccines that gave immunity.

    I think the courts would see covid19 and smallpox very differently. For instance, if you refused the smallpox vaccines then you were fined $5, not nearly as punitive as being prevented from working, learning and participating in “non-essential” activities regardless if you’re well or sick or have natural immunity.

    So: Covid is less far lethal. Covid vaccines do not give immunity. Punishment for covid vaccine refusal is far more draconian and arbitrary.

    1. Five dollars, back then, was a lot of money. Multiple fines would impoverish a person and do as much damage as the modern day ostracism.

      1. I’d pay today’s equivalent of a $5 fine. Still cheaper than losing a job, for instance. I could be wrong but I don’t think there were multiple $5 fines.

  4. The people regurgitating this “established law” … are the very same ones that say the US Constitution is a … “living document” … which can be changed with times and circumstances. Oh! Except when THEY deem otherwise …

  5. One of the comments was from a person dealing with a true believer. “You cannot have a rational conversation with a true believer.” Been there too.

  6. The people regurgitating this “established law” … are the very same ones that say the US Constitution is a … “living document” … which can be changed with times and circumstances. Oh! Except when THEY deem otherwise …

  7. The people regurgitating this “established law” … are the very same ones that say the US Constitution is a … “living document” … which can be changed with times and circumstances. Oh! Except when THEY deem otherwise …

  8. One of the comments was from a person dealing with a true believer. “You cannot have a rational conversation with a true believer.” Been there too.

  9. One of the comments was from a person dealing with a true believer. “You cannot have a rational conversation with a true believer.” Been there too.

    1. Funny you should mention that — seeing the same thing here. “Internet speed test” sites show my connection in top form, but hitting many websites is dreadfully slow. Surfing on the phone on the same network is even slower.

    2. Richfisher, Yup me too, earlier today. Seems OK now, but itr made me wonder if SDA had been attacked or shutdown.

  10. The other thing about the 1905 decision re: vaccines was it was a decision that enforced states’ rights over and against Federal interference, which actually bolsters the case of the anti-vaxxers regarding rebellious states.

  11. Can’t say to any degree of certainty that this Covid “vaccine” they’re insisting we all take even meets the true definition of vaccine.
    If it doesn’t, perhaps it’s time we affix a different label to it and not play their word games.
    How can I be “anti-vax” if it isn’t one?
    And in what universe do I reside in that I need a shot to protect those who’ve already had one?
    Effing Crazytown.

    1. It’s not been challenged in court.
      What the government is doing is technically illegal.
      Only the blind dead fools got the jab willingly because the government said so.
      They may fine ya and hold ya but technically it’s all still illegal.
      It is also depends on how well prepared you are for court too.
      Prepare to have a list of doctors that you want in court that have records.

    2. Crazy town indeed Burton.

      Critical thinkers see the rank hypocrisy of the statement, but the brainwashed normies have shut down their reason center of the brain.

      FEAR rules their lives, guided by the Fearmongers, BonBon, the Media, Fraudci, and all political leaders are guilty of this, and deserve lamp posts.

      1. Speaking of that charmer BonBon, some of the ads for the John Batchelor podcasts include messages from the B. C. provincial government, since I’m in Fort St. John right now and download them here.

        Verrrrryy smooth, laying it on with a trowel about how we should get the gunk to “keep each other safe”.

  12. 1905: Jacobson v Massachusetts [7-2]

    Unlike Joey Bidens Temper Tantrum, the Massachusetts case involved a LAW, something passed by both houses of the Massachusetts Legislature and signed by Massachusetts Governor. Senile Joe wants us to obey a regulation put out by OSHA. Not only that, but an EMERGENCY Regulation that bypasses all public comment and other means of stopping or slowing illegal regs.

    The courts should stay and then throw the regulation out. Will it get stayed before it gets to the US Supreme Court?

  13. I read that Jacobson would be avoided by the Feds as part of their case law argument because it doesn’t really say “government can mandate vaccines”, it really says “the states control health care”. The Feds really don’t want that when they’re staring down a phalanx of Republican governors who are saying “we control healthcare and we’re not doing vaccine mandates”.

  14. Of course these decisions come from an era where soft drinks contained cocaine.

Navigation