9:46 here. Is it still the Kung Flu even if you don't trigger some hyper-sensitive liberal? What's the fun of the name if you can't provoke a cultural fight?
@9:46 – Why is it trolling? Is calling it by its normal, original name, considered wrong? Should we change all past diseases to avoid offending everyone from everywhere? What would you recommend we call the Spanish Flu, German Measles, MERS, Zika Virus, Ebola, Lime disease, West Nile Virus, etc..? Are those not offensive to you? Just this one, because China told you it was offensive?
@9:53 – I'm cool with Kung Flu. It's funny and apt.
@10:!6 – Let me guess. You're one of the folks that posted that dumbass meme claiming that covid-19 stood for "China Originated Viral Infectious Disease number 19".
It's not its "normal, original name". It was referred to as SARS-like until it was identified as a novel coronavirus, and the virus named SARS-CoV-2. The disease that SARS-CoV-2 causes is named covid-19.
10:16 here. I'm not the person that posted the "meme". Actually, it was referred to EVERYONE as Chinese Coronavirus (including CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, NBC, FOX) until a month ago when China tried to convince people that the United States Army implanted the virus in the Wuhan Province and that it was racist to call it the Chinese Coronavirus. Then the Democrat leaders, taking their cue from Mainstream Media started parroting the same accusations of racism. It's not racist. It's a FACT. This originated in China. China gets the blame and deservedly so.
OMG – GET THE BLOGMASTER ASAP – SOMEONE GAVE A CLEARLY LABELED OPINION ABOUT A NAMED PERSON. Please call out the National Guard, FBI, CIA, Galleria Mall Security guards, and the guy that saved me in third grade from getting beat up. I thought was could not name anyone per the "McFarling Decision of 3/24/20."
Looking at these posts, a couple things come to mind.
First, it would be great if we take more of a team approach, turn the volume down a bit on vitriolic partisanship, and try to have a real give-and-take discussion as we are all in on this together. Example, rather than calling the Governor a "moron", instead it would be far more productive to focus on what one believes he and his staff should be doing differently ,and why.
Secondly, we should recognize that this big argument about whether to attach "Chinese" to the name of the virus when discussing it, has lost all scope and meaning as each side has greatly over-stated their position to the point where credibility is compromised. Both sides have a valid point if we recognize proportionality and avoid hyperbole.
The side arguing that to include "Chinese" in the name of the disease is accurate,and that other diseases(e.g. Spanish Flu, German Measles, etc.)have been attached to a nationality and have not resulted in any detectable violence or aggression toward such nationalities, are correct and accurate to a point.
That said, the other side is accurate when they say the above analysis(about how other diseases have been attached, via name, to a nationality or country of origin, without serious societal fall out in terms of displays of bigotry) somewhat ignores the highly inflamed climate we now live in and ignores the anti-Chinese rhetoric strongly in effect since 2015, wherein the Chinese are are largely being blamed by some for ruining our economy, etc.
Fair enough. But then when those of this position(that "Chinese" should not be included in the virus name)discuss the violence and societal fall-out if "Chinese" is included in the name of the virus, they lose all scope and meaningful focus.
We are to believe that(if "Chinese" is included with thee name of the virus) that we will have a dramatic increase in people viciously attacking anyone who looks faintly Asian. This ignores how real life operates and defies logic. There is no such thing as a stable, law-abiding decent human being who will suddenly resort to violence if it is called "Chinese Caronavirus". If someone is inclined to attack someone based on a racial issue, there are thousands of stimulis and outside input, media and otherwise, on a weekly basis that disturbed people could use as a pretext to attack a myriad number of races. There are constantly articles, or on line rants, or television and radio programs. wherein people are constantly spewing their venom about this race or that race, or this religion or that religion. If that has not succeeded in turning certain people towards violence, the name of this virus will not do so.
Any such twisted maniac who would publicly attack an Asian person based on the name of this virus, is already a twisted sicko who is a bomb ready to explode, and probably already has.
That said, I come down in favor of NOT including "Chinese" with the virus. Even though I don't agree, that including the name, will lead to some large increase in violence and bigotry, if there is even a risk for a slight increase in violence and bigotry, then why take the unnecessary chance for no reason?
12:31–that raises a point that you should not ignore. Does the government, and by extension the media, have an obligation not to inflame matters, and to protect against that certain disturbed people will use something as an excuse for violence.
It's a slippery slope and a highly nuanced, multi-layered issue. But you even admit that a few twisted people may commit violence if it is called Chinese Coronavirus, so it is better to avoid calling it by that name.
I do, however, agree with the point that calling it Chinese coronavirus
is not likely to result in some meaningful increase in violence, and that any people who would attack an Asian person based on that, is already a violent screw ball who would have in the near future attacked someone else based on something equally ludicrous.
So, yes, the government and media should avoid inflaming morons. Whether they have an "obligation" to refrain from doing so is a different matter as that is largely determined by one's interpretation and analysis of the situation. What one person may view as fair and accurate reporting, another will view as encouraging bigotry.
9:44 (any anyone else who clearly hasn't), go read the actual language of the emergency regulation that Gov. Sisolak endorsed and then come back. Only then might y'all be properly equipped for intelligent discourse on the topic.
I don't care what we call it. Is it possible for a NV licensed medical doctor to prescribe the miracle cure that is saving lives in NY or not? I can't figure that out. Anyone know the answer?
So, as of now, he is banning the drug for "off label" uses. Thus, innocents die, even as doctors in New York save lives with the drug. One term governor.
Our firm is closed to the public, but rust never sleeps and the work goes on.
Guest
Anonymous
March 25, 2020 5:50 pm
This comment has been removed by the author.
Guest
Anonymous
March 25, 2020 5:51 pm
@9:46 AM;
9:53 AM here. I just think Kung Flu is catchier (see what I did there?) than COVID-19.
I'm amenable to other catchy names. But not Wuhan Virus or Chinese Virus; those just lack imagination.
Guest
Anonymous
March 25, 2020 5:58 pm
The Eighth Judicial District Court has imposed "Blue Jean" telephonic or video conferencing. Fortunately, CourtCall is still allowed.
I've never heard of Blue Jeans before. Anyone have the low-down on this (presumably) private company that is about to reap a windfall (presumably) thanks to Administrative Order 20-10?
I used BlueJeans this week. It was free (for me and my client), and easy to use. It's not a great way to hold a substantive hearing. But all future status checks should be done this way.
Guest
Anonymous
March 25, 2020 6:00 pm
I really wonder what effect a mail-in election will have on the judicial races? I think the "turn-out" will be higher than a normal election and the people with the big union endorsements will have an edge.
11:00–Agreed, because in primary elections where turn out and interest level is expected to be low, those who are endorsed by groups and unions whose members are motivated to vote, and often have good reasons to vote(e.g. policy and legal issues that impact them), have a clear advantage over candidates who lack such support or endorsements.
Simply put, people who receive so-called slate cards form their union or work place, vote a lot more, and are more focused on who to vote for, than a prospective voter who knows nothing about the judicial candidates and has received no meaningful input form any source he/she is connected with and trusts.
As to your first point, that turn out in general will be higher if people can vote by some remote means not on premises, on the surface this appears to obviously be true. Even without the Coronavirus, more people would vote if they had the option to do so from the comfort of their own home than if they are forced to drive somewhere, stand on line, etc. And with the pandemic, this would appear to significantly multiple the people who will now vote, but who would not have if they needed to do so in person.
But there's one caveat that should not be ignored. All of the above, plus the points made by 11:00, assumes that all remote methods are created equally. Certainly if people could vote on line this would increase turn out, and much more so now on account of the virus.
But as far as voting by mail, filling out forms manually and then packaging them and dropping them off to be mailed, is something now so increasingly alien to many folks. I don't know anyone I can think of under 40(and very few under 50) who pay anything, or do anything, through U.S Mail. They do use overnight shipping services, and order items online through Amazon, E-bay, and such, but that is something different than filling out and mailing forms.
I do think the pandemic, heavy ballot and potential mail in probably help some of the judges and candidates with more sordid histories. They are more likely to fly under the radar now with the general public. I would name names, but we all know who they are.
Indisputable fact for the Blog Owner to delete at risk of his/her reputation. The McFarling Law Group (explicitly not referring to a human person) is open as of 3/25/20. See https://www.mcfarlinglaw.com/covid-19/ or call their office to verify. Does this meet the standards of this blog? If not, why? Thank you.
Thank you. I will take that as a step towards understanding the rules. Next step, how is calling Sisolak a moron (above) different from my assessment (after many, many years of reading someone's pleadings and listening in the ante rooms of family court to their discussions) that a now unnamed person's legal skill is substandard? Also, you do not find the widely panned usage of "moron" a slight to those people who struggle with mental challenges. I'm being serious, please give me a serious answer. I'm a hardened, old, cynical lawyer – I can take it. If the answer is that this is your blog, you make willy nilly rules, then I will be on my way and accept that. I just see calling by a sir name someone a "moron" more bullyish than assessing their legal work with clearly labeled opinion. Thank you.
I'm not the blog owner, but I would say look at in terms of defamation claims. Sisolak is a public figure and would require actual malice for a claim of defamation even if you could convince a jury that calling someone a moron is definition and not strictly opinion. Calling out specific local attorneys who are not public figures is more likely to succeed as a defamation claim. Having read this blog for years, i think they just aren't interested in getting sued.
11:52–Please strive for a little more accuracy and fairness.
If the blog owner deleted a comment(s) about that law firm, I doubt it was deleted simply because the post commented that the firm is still open for business during the pandemic.
Fact is that there were a couple of highly disparaging posts yesterday concerning that attorney who runs the firm.
Now if you want to take the blog owner to task because you don't believe comments should have been deleted even if they were of a highly critical and disparaging nature, fair enough. That is a legitimate dialogue to have. But to try to create the impression that comments were deleted merely because they mentioned the firm is still open for business during the pandemic, is not really being totally forthright or accurate.
Guest
Anonymous
March 25, 2020 8:17 pm
You should read the nvscs new anti slapp decision on blog posts. Blog owner seems to be in the clear, so is the commenter, even on defamation. Pure opinion baby.
Well in that instance, either will deleting the post. They might get sued just to compel the IP address of the meanie with bad opinions. Moral of that story, use a VPN
Guest
Anonymous
March 25, 2020 10:17 pm
All of you champagne liberal managers who let people go its too bad for you! KAGA2020! President Trump's new legislation takes care of the companies that didn't lay people off. KAGA2020. Don't worry dem incumbents, we will remember.
Guest
Anonymous
March 26, 2020 12:05 am
Wolfson on the defense. You should be. You are allowing criminals off lately. No prosecutions is not delayed prosecutions. Nice try.
Guest
Anonymous
March 26, 2020 12:58 am
I cannot believe how fucking selfish attorneys are in this town. Please bitch about how you cannot use your sports bra right now, when my sister is iban er nurse working the front lines against the corona virus. Grow the fuck up!
Guest
Anonymous
March 26, 2020 2:33 am
Old news, but the Eglet lawsuit is just so dumb and its only going to end up hurting the state. We don’t need China to be antagonistic towards Nevada. Eglet, you’ve got your millions, don’t screw over the community that gave it to you.
1:16 pretty much hit the nail right on the head. I think the exact range is 1946-1964. Pretty much starts with the immediate Post War Era and ends with the start of the Post J.F.K. Era.
Sisolak is a moron for banning a drug that has already been proven very effective in battling the Chinese Coronavirus.
The deliberate, unnecessary trolling over the name of the virus is, without question the apex (or maybe nadir) of stupid culture wars.
@9:46 – can we please call it the Kung Flu now?
9:53 AM,
9:46 here. Is it still the Kung Flu even if you don't trigger some hyper-sensitive liberal? What's the fun of the name if you can't provoke a cultural fight?
@9:46 – Why is it trolling? Is calling it by its normal, original name, considered wrong? Should we change all past diseases to avoid offending everyone from everywhere? What would you recommend we call the Spanish Flu, German Measles, MERS, Zika Virus, Ebola, Lime disease, West Nile Virus, etc..? Are those not offensive to you? Just this one, because China told you it was offensive?
@9:53 – I'm cool with Kung Flu. It's funny and apt.
@10:!6 – Let me guess. You're one of the folks that posted that dumbass meme claiming that covid-19 stood for "China Originated Viral Infectious Disease number 19".
It's not its "normal, original name". It was referred to as SARS-like until it was identified as a novel coronavirus, and the virus named SARS-CoV-2. The disease that SARS-CoV-2 causes is named covid-19.
@10:34
10:16 here. I'm not the person that posted the "meme". Actually, it was referred to EVERYONE as Chinese Coronavirus (including CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, NBC, FOX) until a month ago when China tried to convince people that the United States Army implanted the virus in the Wuhan Province and that it was racist to call it the Chinese Coronavirus. Then the Democrat leaders, taking their cue from Mainstream Media started parroting the same accusations of racism. It's not racist. It's a FACT. This originated in China. China gets the blame and deservedly so.
OMG – GET THE BLOGMASTER ASAP – SOMEONE GAVE A CLEARLY LABELED OPINION ABOUT A NAMED PERSON. Please call out the National Guard, FBI, CIA, Galleria Mall Security guards, and the guy that saved me in third grade from getting beat up. I thought was could not name anyone per the "McFarling Decision of 3/24/20."
Looking at these posts, a couple things come to mind.
First, it would be great if we take more of a team approach, turn the volume down a bit on vitriolic partisanship, and try to have a real give-and-take discussion as we are all in on this together. Example, rather than calling the Governor a "moron", instead it would be far more productive to focus on what one believes he and his staff should be doing differently ,and why.
Secondly, we should recognize that this big argument about whether to attach "Chinese" to the name of the virus when discussing it, has lost all scope and meaning as each side has greatly over-stated their position to the point where credibility is compromised. Both sides have a valid point if we recognize proportionality and avoid hyperbole.
The side arguing that to include "Chinese" in the name of the disease is accurate,and that other diseases(e.g. Spanish Flu, German Measles, etc.)have been attached to a nationality and have not resulted in any detectable violence or aggression toward such nationalities, are correct and accurate to a point.
That said, the other side is accurate when they say the above analysis(about how other diseases have been attached, via name, to a nationality or country of origin, without serious societal fall out in terms of displays of bigotry) somewhat ignores the highly inflamed climate we now live in and ignores the anti-Chinese rhetoric strongly in effect since 2015, wherein the Chinese are are largely being blamed by some for ruining our economy, etc.
Fair enough. But then when those of this position(that "Chinese" should not be included in the virus name)discuss the violence and societal fall-out if "Chinese" is included in the name of the virus, they lose all scope and meaningful focus.
We are to believe that(if "Chinese" is included with thee name of the virus) that we will have a dramatic increase in people viciously attacking anyone who looks faintly Asian. This ignores how real life operates and defies logic. There is no such thing as a stable, law-abiding decent human being who will suddenly resort to violence if it is called "Chinese Caronavirus". If someone is inclined to attack someone based on a racial issue, there are thousands of stimulis and outside input, media and otherwise, on a weekly basis that disturbed people could use as a pretext to attack a myriad number of races. There are constantly articles, or on line rants, or television and radio programs. wherein people are constantly spewing their venom about this race or that race, or this religion or that religion. If that has not succeeded in turning certain people towards violence, the name of this virus will not do so.
Any such twisted maniac who would publicly attack an Asian person based on the name of this virus, is already a twisted sicko who is a bomb ready to explode, and probably already has.
That said, I come down in favor of NOT including "Chinese" with the virus. Even though I don't agree, that including the name, will lead to some large increase in violence and bigotry, if there is even a risk for a slight increase in violence and bigotry, then why take the unnecessary chance for no reason?
12:31–that raises a point that you should not ignore. Does the government, and by extension the media, have an obligation not to inflame matters, and to protect against that certain disturbed people will use something as an excuse for violence.
It's a slippery slope and a highly nuanced, multi-layered issue. But you even admit that a few twisted people may commit violence if it is called Chinese Coronavirus, so it is better to avoid calling it by that name.
I do, however, agree with the point that calling it Chinese coronavirus
is not likely to result in some meaningful increase in violence, and that any people who would attack an Asian person based on that, is already a violent screw ball who would have in the near future attacked someone else based on something equally ludicrous.
So, yes, the government and media should avoid inflaming morons. Whether they have an "obligation" to refrain from doing so is a different matter as that is largely determined by one's interpretation and analysis of the situation. What one person may view as fair and accurate reporting, another will view as encouraging bigotry.
9:44 (any anyone else who clearly hasn't), go read the actual language of the emergency regulation that Gov. Sisolak endorsed and then come back. Only then might y'all be properly equipped for intelligent discourse on the topic.
and anyone else*
I don't care what we call it. Is it possible for a NV licensed medical doctor to prescribe the miracle cure that is saving lives in NY or not? I can't figure that out. Anyone know the answer?
#SisolakVirus how's that?
4:48, see 1:07.
So, as of now, he is banning the drug for "off label" uses. Thus, innocents die, even as doctors in New York save lives with the drug. One term governor.
So, this is the magic combo that is saving lives in New York and other places, fyi:
1. Hydroxychloroquine 200mg twice a day for 5 days
2. Azithromycin 500mg once a day for 5 days
3. Zinc sulfate 220mg once a day for 5 days
Hospitalized patients can be prescribed the medication. Primary care cannot prescribe the drugs off-label. It is a mess.
The fact that Suasor states "•The Governor has ordered most law firms to close to the public" tells me all that I need to know about that Blog.
Our firm is closed to the public, but rust never sleeps and the work goes on.
This comment has been removed by the author.
@9:46 AM;
9:53 AM here. I just think Kung Flu is catchier (see what I did there?) than COVID-19.
I'm amenable to other catchy names. But not Wuhan Virus or Chinese Virus; those just lack imagination.
The Eighth Judicial District Court has imposed "Blue Jean" telephonic or video conferencing. Fortunately, CourtCall is still allowed.
I've never heard of Blue Jeans before. Anyone have the low-down on this (presumably) private company that is about to reap a windfall (presumably) thanks to Administrative Order 20-10?
I'm sure Blue Jeans is a company owned by someone close to Sisolak and his cronies.
From what I understand, Blue Jeans is being offered at no cost.
I had never heard of it either, but apparently the EJDC trained everyone there on how to use it just prior to the shutdown.
BlueJeans is free and tied into the JAVS system. CourtCall by my understanding is not and does cost money.
I also noticed that BlueJeans callers are easier to hear whereas CourtCall callers seem more distant
I used BlueJeans this week. It was free (for me and my client), and easy to use. It's not a great way to hold a substantive hearing. But all future status checks should be done this way.
I really wonder what effect a mail-in election will have on the judicial races? I think the "turn-out" will be higher than a normal election and the people with the big union endorsements will have an edge.
11:00–Agreed, because in primary elections where turn out and interest level is expected to be low, those who are endorsed by groups and unions whose members are motivated to vote, and often have good reasons to vote(e.g. policy and legal issues that impact them), have a clear advantage over candidates who lack such support or endorsements.
Simply put, people who receive so-called slate cards form their union or work place, vote a lot more, and are more focused on who to vote for, than a prospective voter who knows nothing about the judicial candidates and has received no meaningful input form any source he/she is connected with and trusts.
As to your first point, that turn out in general will be higher if people can vote by some remote means not on premises, on the surface this appears to obviously be true. Even without the Coronavirus, more people would vote if they had the option to do so from the comfort of their own home than if they are forced to drive somewhere, stand on line, etc. And with the pandemic, this would appear to significantly multiple the people who will now vote, but who would not have if they needed to do so in person.
But there's one caveat that should not be ignored. All of the above, plus the points made by 11:00, assumes that all remote methods are created equally. Certainly if people could vote on line this would increase turn out, and much more so now on account of the virus.
But as far as voting by mail, filling out forms manually and then packaging them and dropping them off to be mailed, is something now so increasingly alien to many folks. I don't know anyone I can think of under 40(and very few under 50) who pay anything, or do anything, through U.S Mail. They do use overnight shipping services, and order items online through Amazon, E-bay, and such, but that is something different than filling out and mailing forms.
Unions don't usually do slate cards for primaries.
I do think the pandemic, heavy ballot and potential mail in probably help some of the judges and candidates with more sordid histories. They are more likely to fly under the radar now with the general public. I would name names, but we all know who they are.
If this is the future brains of the family court bench, lord help us! https://youtu.be/oMX4okSVt_w
Indisputable fact for the Blog Owner to delete at risk of his/her reputation. The McFarling Law Group (explicitly not referring to a human person) is open as of 3/25/20. See https://www.mcfarlinglaw.com/covid-19/ or call their office to verify. Does this meet the standards of this blog? If not, why? Thank you.
Looks "work-appropriate, slander and bully-free" to me. Unlike your post yesterday.
Thank you. I will take that as a step towards understanding the rules. Next step, how is calling Sisolak a moron (above) different from my assessment (after many, many years of reading someone's pleadings and listening in the ante rooms of family court to their discussions) that a now unnamed person's legal skill is substandard? Also, you do not find the widely panned usage of "moron" a slight to those people who struggle with mental challenges. I'm being serious, please give me a serious answer. I'm a hardened, old, cynical lawyer – I can take it. If the answer is that this is your blog, you make willy nilly rules, then I will be on my way and accept that. I just see calling by a sir name someone a "moron" more bullyish than assessing their legal work with clearly labeled opinion. Thank you.
I'm not the blog owner, but I would say look at in terms of defamation claims. Sisolak is a public figure and would require actual malice for a claim of defamation even if you could convince a jury that calling someone a moron is definition and not strictly opinion. Calling out specific local attorneys who are not public figures is more likely to succeed as a defamation claim. Having read this blog for years, i think they just aren't interested in getting sued.
11:52–Please strive for a little more accuracy and fairness.
If the blog owner deleted a comment(s) about that law firm, I doubt it was deleted simply because the post commented that the firm is still open for business during the pandemic.
Fact is that there were a couple of highly disparaging posts yesterday concerning that attorney who runs the firm.
Now if you want to take the blog owner to task because you don't believe comments should have been deleted even if they were of a highly critical and disparaging nature, fair enough. That is a legitimate dialogue to have. But to try to create the impression that comments were deleted merely because they mentioned the firm is still open for business during the pandemic, is not really being totally forthright or accurate.
You should read the nvscs new anti slapp decision on blog posts. Blog owner seems to be in the clear, so is the commenter, even on defamation. Pure opinion baby.
Did that decision resurrect Elle, or Wild Wild Law?
The decision might give one strong legal cover, but it won't prevent one from getting sued in the first place.
Well in that instance, either will deleting the post. They might get sued just to compel the IP address of the meanie with bad opinions. Moral of that story, use a VPN
All of you champagne liberal managers who let people go its too bad for you! KAGA2020! President Trump's new legislation takes care of the companies that didn't lay people off. KAGA2020. Don't worry dem incumbents, we will remember.
Wolfson on the defense. You should be. You are allowing criminals off lately. No prosecutions is not delayed prosecutions. Nice try.
I cannot believe how fucking selfish attorneys are in this town. Please bitch about how you cannot use your sports bra right now, when my sister is iban er nurse working the front lines against the corona virus. Grow the fuck up!
Old news, but the Eglet lawsuit is just so dumb and its only going to end up hurting the state. We don’t need China to be antagonistic towards Nevada. Eglet, you’ve got your millions, don’t screw over the community that gave it to you.
Because the Boomers just can't let go of power and money; enough is never enough.
Mid 70s? Sure.
Eglet is not in his mid-70s. Probably early 60s. He's not a Boomer
He looks mid-50's.
Ever any lifestyle parties?
Early 60's would make him a Boomer.
The Boomers are between ages 55-75, roughly.
I learned something. I thought Baby Boomers were people who were born just after World War II.
I believe the cutoff for Baby Boom is 1945-1965
1:16 pretty much hit the nail right on the head. I think the exact range is 1946-1964. Pretty much starts with the immediate Post War Era and ends with the start of the Post J.F.K. Era.