OPINION | The opinions expressed in this article are that of the writer, and may not necessarily reflect those of Tatum Report LLC
Recently, I was chatting with a teacher whose husband is a state trooper. We live in a state where the dictat… cough, cough, the governor is extorting state workers into getting the CCP virus mRNA injection regardless of their anti-body, natural immunity, or health risk status. Then she grimaced and paused.
She told me her husband opposes the mandates and would not get the injection if not coerced. But they have small children, and he felt he had to submit and keep his job. That emphasizes the evil of this entire Democrat scheme.
This choice is personal and challenging. Each person has different circumstances and uncrossable red lines. For some, those lines come early, for others late, and for some others, too late. Think Sam and John Adams. Sam immediately joined the patriot cause. John needed to experience more government tyranny first. John eventually joined the cause, becoming as formidable as his cousin.
But there’s another murkier aspect of this tyranny. I told the teacher about a comment another cop said to me. “Let them fire you, so you have a lawsuit.” But is that true in this alternate reality?
Then she said something I’d heard about a year ago. “Judges won’t take these cases and, if they do, they dismiss them.” That previous case involved a small business owner. He said judges were refusing to even hear “COVID-19” cases filed primarily against government mandates. Why? The health “emergency.”
For example, Reuters reported, “A federal judge… ruled that a Cincinnati, Ohio-area healthcare provider could require its employees get vaccinated against COVID-19 or risk losing their jobs, in what appears to be the first ruling of its kind for a private employer in the United States.”
As a libertarian, I normally skew toward private businesses calling their own shots. However, with this radical leftist government, shouldn’t we talk about private businesses acting as government agents?
Inevitably, some business decisions will naturally align with some political agendas. But what is it when businesses consistently make decisions specifically to enforce a political party’s tyranny? Is this in the same realm of law as anti-trust or monopoly? As a basic example, when informants (private citizens) act on behalf of the police, courts consider them government agents.
I’m not saying I know the answer. But the frustration experienced by Americans seeking relief in the courts from government/corporate/big-tech tyranny is intense. It seems liberal judges and justices tend to be more judicially activist and conservative jurists judicially restrained. This makes sense since conservatives tend to be more originalist.
To be fair, in the Ohio case, the leftist site CrooksAndLiars.com described the federal judge, David Bunning, as conservative. Perhaps Judge Bunning ruled the way he did based on the “libertarian” argument. But what happens when judges rule the same way but with anti-libertarian government mandates?
Well, here’s what happened in one state. According to Claims Journal, “A federal judge in Seattle has dismissed lawsuits filed by hundreds of Washington state businesses seeking insurance coverage for revenues lost because of COVID-19 public health orders.”
Business owners sued insurance companies to collect for economic losses experienced because of government CCP virus edicts. Again, to be fair, existing law may favor insurers and tie the judge’s hands.
Business owners hung their hopes on having purchased “all-risk” policies. However, U.S. District Judge Barbara J. Rothstein ruled the policies “provided coverage only if there was ‘direct physical loss of or damage to’ property.”
Further frustrating business owners, the plaintiffs asked the left-leaning Washington Supreme Court to make “a declaratory ruling on whether COVID-19 can cause direct physical loss or damage, but the high court refused.”
Whether the court was ideological or spineless in abdicating its responsibility, their refusal favored the government and insurers? With no Supreme Court direction, Judge Rothstein said she had to rule based on the limitations of existing state law.
The businesses suffered an unexpected and devastating financial loss, arguably, for arbitrary political reasons. If this weren’t so, other states would not have functioned inversely under the same “emergency.”
There is the woo-woo concept of a “harmonic convergence,” which is a good thing. In its evil reversal, we experience a disharmonic convergence where every branch of government has converged against traditional America.
When governments and private companies, promoting a government agenda, can extort innocent workers into injecting an experimental substance into their bodies while disregarding natural immunity and health concerns, or they get fired, and there is no remedy in the courts, what are good people supposed to do?
A judge in Denver just dismissed a police officer’s lawsuit asking the court to overturn Mayor Michael Hancock’s vaccine mandate. In America today, too many “referees” are playing for the other team, folks.
How can this CCP virus tyranny, CRT corruption, and stolen elections not lead to radicalizing people to address the oppression? It eventually has to, right? As people who hate America slowly steal the history and traditions from the people who love America, where is the relief valve? Where does the righteous indignation go? We need to fix this before it gets to that point.
Follow Steve Pomper: Gettr Twitter
Follow Tatum Report: Gettr Instagram Twitter Facebook
Originally from New England, he’s a Boston sports fan. He now lives in the Pacific Northwest with his wife, Jody, a retired firefighter. He enjoys spending time with his adult kids and three grandchildren.
- Manhattan Democrat DA Alvin Bragg Mocks American Criminal Justice System - March 31, 2023
- Leftist Trans and Gun Control Activists Invade Tennessee Capitol - March 31, 2023
- Biden, KJP Blame Law-Abiding Gun Owners for Demented Woman’s Carnage - March 30, 2023
