Hey, there! Log in / Register

Braintree councilor says screw masks and shutdowns; Covid-19 ain't that bad

Lawrence C. Mackin Jr., city councilor for Braintree's District 6, says it's time to bring back the old days of crowded stores, large family get togethers and just freedom. In a long rant, he says that because the governor of California is a hypocrite and because the media never tell you that most people survive Covid-19, restrictions don't work except to make things worse.

One of his Facebook followers suggested he take a trip to a local hospital and talk to some of the doctors and nurses there about his ideas on the pandemic.

According to the latest state statistics, Braintree had 266 new Covid-19 cases over a two-week period. Since the start of the pandemic, 120 Braintree residents have died from the virus, according to town statistics.

Mackin won election last fall.

In 2015, his father, Leonard C. Mackin, Sr., wrote a novel about true-blue American police officers taking the country back from the Obama-led private armies and Islamists who were enslaving the country and killing cops to create a Chinese-controlled Islamic dictatorship.

Neighborhoods: 
Free tagging: 

Ad:
Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!

Comments

he can go the way NH's Republican Leader went.

Anti Mask
"Covid is fake"

for months.

Gets voted in as GOP leader, dies a week later from Covid.

Stupid is as stupid does.

up
Voting closed 5

I hope he gets it and there aren't enough hospital beds. Then we'll see how his survival rate is.

up
Voting closed 8

And there won't be.

up
Voting closed 8

Wishing harm or death on someone is not a good way to elevate the conversation.

up
Voting closed 5

is no longer possible.

The virus doesn't care how "elevated" a conversation is.

up
Voting closed 4

Don't your hands hurt when you clutch your pearls like that?

When I look at this guy, my thought is that if he can't be a good example -- and he's clearly determined not to be -- he'll just have to be a horrible reminder. And sometimes people learn from those horrible reminders. He may yet be useful!

up
Voting closed 4

stranger, even one holding elective office. But if you were to exhibit this kind of reckless, idiotic, science- and-medical-expertise-flouting behavior, especially from any kind of position of leadership, and then catch the virus and die, my initial impulse would be to say, "That's what you get for being a goddamned stupid ideologue, asshole. Thanks for making the average IQ of the species go up."

The problem is that these fuckwits don't just get themselves sick and dead: they get other people sick and dead, too, even the morally and socially responsible ones.

Shun this person, shame him publicly, drum him out of office if you've got a vote to spend on it, but don't wish death on him. And don't forget where this lethal moron's example came from: the top. This has the Great Orange Mistake written all over it.

up
Voting closed 6

I know it’s bad form to outwardly wish harm on the bad guys, but I would be lying if I said I wasn’t inwardly wishing widespread self-inflicted poetic justice on those actively spreading harmful lies and working to undermine common-sense public health practices. Call me Petty LaBelle.

up
Voting closed 7

poetic justice for anti-maskers, anti-vaxxers, and assorted other science ignoramuses to fuck off and die from their own stupidity. I find it hard to shed a tear when idiots get themselves killed with their own idiocy.

The issue is that the virus doesn't confine itself to toxic numbskulls. They get it and keep spreading it, and that's bad for a lot of innocent, smarter, more socially responsible people. Further, there are a lot of people I love who are highly vulnerable to covid, and we're months away from a well-vaccinated populace.

up
Voting closed 4

So, this is the sort of libertarian "freedom" that includes the right to injure and kill your neighbors, as long as you say you're sorry, and insist that there was no way to know that shooting a gun into a crowded street would hurt anyone?

up
Voting closed 2

No, the libertarian response would seem to be “all the people who are so afraid of getting shot in the street should just stay home and hide in their bunkers and let the rest of us get on with our lives.”

up
Voting closed 4

:(
He was very scary and aggressive when he came door to door campaigning. Pushed right past me (female) to only talk to my husband. We have many medical first responders who live in our area not to mention people personally affected by Covid. This is so insulting.

up
Voting closed 6

For somebody with a master's degree in conflict resolution and negotiation.

up
Voting closed 6

That sounds like trespassing and assault, not campaigning

up
Voting closed 8

Did he call you "kiddo"?
-
You didn't trigger him by mentioning your PhD, did you?

up
Voting closed 6

And yet your neighbors chose to elect him, which means that our anger is properly directed at your neighbors rather than at the guy who they hired to represent y’all.

up
Voting closed 7

our anger is properly directed at your neighbors rather than at the guy who they hired to represent y’all

Why not both? Unless you want to argue that neither of them is a sentient being with personal agency.

up
Voting closed 5

If you don't like some policy at McDonald's, do you take it out on the kid working behind the counter at minimum wage? Your issue is with the boss, not with the hired help. An elected rep is the hired help, who reflects the wishes of the people in that rep's district. This guy is who the people in the district, at the polls, said that they are.

up
Voting closed 3

...with a stretch like that.

Your issue is with the boss, not with the hired help. An elected rep is the hired help

...and comparable with an elected official, uh huh, yeah, right. Cool story bro.

up
Voting closed 9

An elected official's power comes 100% from the voters. Campaign contributors don't elect legislators. Lobbyists don't elect legislators. Bribe-givers don't elect legislators. Voters do. Without the consent and approval of voters an elected official has absolutely no agency.

Don't like Mitch McConnell? Your beef is with the voters in Kentucky, who, overwhelmingly, by their actions at the polls, are instructing him to keep doing what he's been doing. He's just following orders.

up
Voting closed 9

Make no mistake, my beef with the Senate Majority Leader is directly with the Senate Majority Leader. Especially since his power has a direct impact on my life and the lives of hundreds of million of my fellow citizens that have no ability to vote for or against him.

up
Voting closed 7

McConnell as a Senator from Kentucky, or McConnell as Senate Majority Leader? I know, it's impossible to separate the two at this point, but one office gives him much more power than the other.

You are correct, the voters in Kentucky sent him there and they are the only ones who can reject him. But the voters in Kentucky did not give the Republican Party a majority of the seats in the Senate, nor did voters in Kentucky decide that he would be Majority Leader.

up
Voting closed 8

But I will defend his right to rant. Just remember the constitution is not a spigot and you can't turn it off because you don't agree with the speaker. Why bring his father into the conversation? Adam you are a real journalist but this story belongs on Turtleboy not on Universal Hub you are better than this.

up
Voting closed 9

You're right. He has the right to spout off like a moron. But others have the right to spout off about how he's a moron.

As for bringing his father into it, apple, tree, etc. The Venn diagram of Covid deniers and Obama haters is far from two separate circles.

up
Voting closed 4

Liberals have always hated the 1st Amendment because it give people who disagree with them the right to verbalize their disagreement. They’d really shit themselves of all the people, who couldn’t be bothered to deal with their insanity, decided to exercise their first amendment rights.

up
Voting closed 4

Liberals have always hated the 1st Amendment because it give people who disagree with them the right to verbalize their disagreement

Since when is Donald Trump a liberal?

up
Voting closed 8

They’d really shit themselves of all the people, who couldn’t be bothered to deal with their insanity, decided to exercise their first

Yes, you've been such shrinking violets the past four years, haven't they? And in such good taste, too.

up
Voting closed 4

No right is absolute. That is a qualification that has been accepted as a basic premise undergirding the concept of rights. The classic case of course is shouting Fire in a crowded theater when there is no fire.

Trump utilized the propaganda method of deceit, falsehoods and misdirection in the creation of a "base" that follows him in the formation of dictatorship and the destruction of democracy, both direct and indirect.

The effect is clear: he generated a movement that relied upon death threats and other forms of threatened and actual violence to push the false claims of election fraud.

This is abuse of a right to free speech. The question is at what point does this kind of abuse exceed what is a healthy degree of tolerance?

If a politician exhorts his constituents to act in ways that result in a high probability of making them sick is the politician protected by freedom of speech? Or is that abuse of free speech?

While making that level of speech illegal is probably still abusive, a healthy legal system needs a mechanism to punish people who push support behavior that causes harm. Cult leaders who push their followers to engage in harmful behaviors are charged when they contribute to the harm of their followers.

Politicians should not exempt from the same kind of behavior just because they are a politician. The better question is whether this politician's words do result in causing harm. If so then he has violated laws.

To the person who whined about liberals, etc. Grow up. The world is not divided into liberals and conservatives. It is composed of human beings. Get out of your silo and talk to people you think are wrong. You may be surprised how much you have in common with them.

up
Voting closed 4

up
Voting closed 10

To put it midly. But one of the many horrible outcomes of the pandemic is inability to discuss the virus and affects of mitigation without being labeled as a science denying, death loving, money grubbing lunatic. (I'm sure I'll incorrectly get called one for writing this post.)

A lot more is known about the virus now than in April including who is most at risk and the likelihood of complications. And it's wrong to not acknowledge the negatives externalities of various methods of trying to prevent the spread. The government screwed up at every level but so have citizens and health professionals.

By early summer everyone who wants a vaccine should be able to receive one. But the effects of loosing a year of schooling or a job will linger for decades. Inequality has jumped tenfold and will remain. Small business owners and employees are seeing all their wealth vanish while a few big corporations have become an order of magnitude richer and more powerful. That's not going to be reversed when the vaccine is distributed. (Inequality is directly linked with life expectancy.)

Yes, nothing is worth than death. But to only look at COVID in life and death terms misses a much bigger picture. Hunger and happiness are not inconsequential.

If everyone just wore a mask indoors much of life could continue as normal...

up
Voting closed 4

Masks don’t work. Dr Fauci said so. Also, does the virus wear a watch? What’s this 9:00pm rule all about?

up
Voting closed 3

eight months ago. Fauci said that in March, the earliest days of the pandemic, when the value of masks wasn't well understood, and he feared a shortage of that kind of PPE for front-line medical workers. He quickly revised that advice in April.

It's December. Try to keep up, and not spread potentially lethal disinformation while you're at it.

up
Voting closed 3

If you want to wear a mask, wear one. If not, don’t. If a store owner wants masks worn in his business, wear one or find another business to patronize. Stop with your Nazi tactics. Something tells me you agree with the “Keep the government’s hands off my body” sentiment. Does it not apply here?

up
Voting closed 7

... aerosols off my body.

up
Voting closed 4

Stay 6’ feet away from me and you won’t have a problem.

up
Voting closed 5

As you well know since you follow the news and the science, there's absolutely nothing magic about 6 feet. Likelihood of infecting someone else drops off with distance, especially outdoors, but there have been loads of carefully documented cases of transmission over much greater distances indoors, depending upon which way the HVAC system is directing the air.

Staying six feet apart doesn't prevent you from infecting someone else any more than driving 54 miles per hour in a 55 zone prevents you from getting into an accident.

up
Voting closed 9

Stay 6’ feet away from me and you won’t have a problem.

Sounds a lot like, "Don't like my driving drunk? Drive under the speed limit and you won't have a problem."

up
Voting closed 5

No, it doesn’t. Call me when abortions are contagious and cause other shoppers to be infected.

“If you want to urinate in public, urinate in public. If not, don’t...stop with the Nazi tactics.”

Wild that the government having an interest in keeping the public healthy is considered to be Nazi-like.

up
Voting closed 5

Yeah! How clueless can one person be?
I mean...
...actually suggesting that there is a parallel between (a) people (some of them in actual tough situations through no fault of their own) taking unnecessary actions - rationalized by "freedom" and "autonomy" - that kill other human beings, and (b) people (some of them in actual tough situations through no fault of their own) taking unnecessary actions - rationalized by "freedom" and "autonomy" - that kill other human beings?
...
What will they think of next?

up
Voting closed 7

But the clearest parallel between the two is the fact that regressive conservatives, despite all the best medical and scientific expert advice and evidence, are vocally against wide-spread easy access to and compliance with prophylactic measures, both to reduce Covid spread and reduce abortions.

up
Voting closed 2

Let me break this down for you.

All Americans are entitled to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. I hope you agree with that statement. What should be obvious but goes unsaid is that those rights end where it impacts someone else's life, liberty and pursuit of happiness.

So, your freedom ends where my nose begins. Determining the line between your freedom and the tip of my nose is the most difficult determination in a democratic society. People like you who are demanding that you have the right not to wear a mask are ignoring the fact that you are part of a larger society and you are literally demanding to behave in a way that will lead to someone losing their life.

You do not have that right.

up
Voting closed 7

information, saying "Fauci said you don't need to wear a mask", when he said, "Sorry, based on new scientific information, you should wear a mask" eight months ago.

If you refuse to heed the advice of the USA's leading immunologist, I can't help you. But you can at least stop parroting the kind of transparent lie that make you look like a hopeless dolt.

up
Voting closed 5

Virtually every law on the books is an assault on your freedom, yet you don't bitch about that.
Want to sell weed from your house? Nope
Want to drive 150 mph? Nope
Want to walk around naked? Nope
Want to build any house anywhere you like? Nope

Whenever your actions can harm or kill someone else, your freedoms end, magat.

up
Voting closed 5

If you want to drive drunk, drive drunk. If you don’t want to drive drunk, don’t. If the bus company or the cab company lets its drivers drive drunk and you don’t like it, find another bus or taxi company to patronize. Libertarian paradise, amiright?

up
Voting closed 6

You are not only wrong, you are dangerous to yourself and others.

up
Voting closed 6

I said I was going into work today once the snow let up and I cleared the driveway. The snow as finally let up around 2pm. I am not going into the office at this point. Somehow, the people I had told that I was going to be in, back when I thought I was going to make it in today, are not wandering around the building saying "Brian said he would be here today." At least, I really hope they aren't doing that.

Whatever Fauci said about masks back in MARCH has changed, and it changed a lot closer to March than to December. Either you can't keep up with changes in information that happened in early April, or you are full of shit and need to shut the fuck up before your disinformation harms someone else.

up
Voting closed 3

http://video.foxnews.com/v/6172548515001/

Take your dishonesty back to your trash Facebook friends.

up
Voting closed 6

Remember who said that?

up
Voting closed 5

But I suspect that you are saying these things like a deranged parrot becuase you are either too mentally ill or too intellectually challenged to realize how ignorant and dangerous your behavior is.

Masks, distance, or good luck finding an ICU bed honey.

up
Voting closed 5

Fauci says one thing at the beginning of the pandemic when we knew very little about the virus, and you magats cling to that like a tick on a dog. This has been a learning experience (something you seem unfamiliar with) and Fauci changed his thoughts on masks soon after. But, you don't remember that.

You magats are pathetic

up
Voting closed 3

It’s maggots.

up
Voting closed 7

you're honest about your self-identity, I guess?

up
Voting closed 7

As in MAGAt

up
Voting closed 3

When one has to research another’s attempt at humor, it means the joke isn’t funny.

up
Voting closed 4

...they're a pathetic disingenuous pretender, or perhaps mentally ill.

up
Voting closed 5

Can't say so much for you, plague spreading rat.

up
Voting closed 6

People spreading vaccine disinformation can go to Parler and find their ugly-minded soul mates. They do not deserve a platform among civilized human beings.

up
Voting closed 4

If you don’t agree, it’s disinformation? Ok.

up
Voting closed 4

Certain topics are not debatable, in good faith at least. It's like the Holocaust. If you say it didn't happen, it's not a simple disagreement or difference in opinion.

up
Voting closed 4

So the flu is up there with the Holocaust?

up
Voting closed 3

Saying that Covid is “just the flu, bro” is as dishonest, imbecilic, and uncivilized as debating the existence of the holocaust.

up
Voting closed 4

Where did I mention the flu?

up
Voting closed 8

Because I'm a public health scientist, and I know what the science is.

Because I did research on how corona and rhinoviruses spread through office buildings, and you didn't.

Because I helped build a prototype of a testing rig that verified that MASKS WORK.

Because I'm not ignorant like you and also too insane to learn anything but how to parrot talking points chanted by other ignorant and insane people.

up
Voting closed 18

You get to have your own opinion, plague rat. You don't get to have your own facts.

up
Voting closed 7

I have never seen more people wearing masks in my life and yet we have more cases now than ever. If masks works so well, why the big increase in cases?

up
Voting closed 6

“I have never seen more people wearing seatbelts in my life...if seatbelts and airbags work, why are there so many deaths in motor vehicle accidents?”

If something isn’t 100% effective, it therefore doesn’t work. Brilliant analysis.

up
Voting closed 7

This argument also relies on facts not in evidence. If one was to take up that argument on seat belts and airbags, their data set of motor vehicle deaths would most definitely include those who were not wearing a seat belt when the accident occurred. Which of course, leads to nonsensical statements such as, "if seat belts work, why do people who don't wear them still die in accidents"

up
Voting closed 3

We're seeing the effects of a long-term and widespread education failure: People literally don't understand what science is or how it works. People point out that scientists have changed their minds on various topics as though that were somehow a criticism of science.

News flash: Changing their minds is pretty much exactly what scientists do for a living.

Observe something.
Develop an explanation.
Gather additional data to find holes in the explanation: places where the explanation is wrong or incomplete. Plan, design, and run experiments that will yield additional useful data.
Change the theory to fit the new data. Or throw it out and find a new theory.
Lather. Rinse. Repeat.

Science isn't magical; it's merely an organized way to keep track of the best available information and the best available explanations for what's been observed.

Science has been wrong about a lot of things. At one point the best available science said that the Sun orbited around the Earth. That's not because astronomers were stupid or ill-willed, it's because the explanation fit the available data. It was good enough to predict when the sun would rise and set, where the planets would appear in the sky on any given night, when winter would turn to spring, etc. Once astronomers discovered the holes in that theory, they replaced it with one that fit the data better (although the Church kinda got in the way for a while there).

So, I believe the science not because I think it's infallible. I know for sure that it's not. But it provides the best available knowledge we've got at the moment.

What are the alternatives? Sit at home and don't plant your crops because you know the astronomers haven't got it right yet? Believe what you wish were true to be true?

up
Voting closed 7

Then you have the people who push a personal agenda under the guise of science.

up
Voting closed 7

...who promote insane conspiracy theories and a specious right to spray their spit everywhere.

up
Voting closed 7

Government needs to do their job and provide relief to small business and unemployed. They couldn’t pass a stimulus bill in 6 months. Imagine not doing your job for 5 months , getting fuck all done , then getting rehired again in November .

I think people would be more likely to abide by cdc recommendations if their livelihoods weren’t crumbling before their eyes .
It’s very easy to say keep it all shut/hibernating when you’ve got a salary and just work from home now

up
Voting closed 7

You mean this son of a bitch and his "get them all infected" asshole enabling friends:

IMAGE(https://compote.slate.com/images/dad4d22d-d83f-4ebc-a6fe-6d2baa4578c7.jpeg?width=840&rect=4000x2667&offset=0x0)

The House of Representatives and individual Senators have been working on stimulus bills for the last six or more months! Fuckhead Turtleface has been blocking action in the Senate AND Pence has no intention of ever reclaiming his powers under Article 1 Section 3 to run the senate.

up
Voting closed 6

Providing relief is secondary (but very necessary). The first job of any government is to protect the lives of its constituents. The federal government failed miserably at that by not providing even the most basic infrastructure of a pandemic response even before this virus struck, by being dishonest about the severity of the virus, by not providing nationwide mandates, protections, and resources, and possibly most damaging, by undermining those governors, CDC officials, scientists, health care providers who were doing the work the federal government would/could not. If the proper things had been done months ago, if we had locked down completely and early, we'd have this under control by now and the need for relief would be far less. The simple fact is the sooner we attend to these restrictions, the sooner we'll be over them and can get on with rebuilding.

up
Voting closed 2

is a large reason why relief isn’t happening

up
Voting closed 5

That and the overlapping "it's not the government's job to keep you safe" crowd. You know, that government that was formed to do things like provide for the common defense, and promote general welfare.

Then there's the "you can't rely on the government forever, what if they aren't here next time you need them?" crowd. To which, let me just say, if the government of the United State of America, or the Commonwealth of Massachusetts are suddenly non-existent, I'd say we have some real big problems at hand. Like really really big problems.

up
Voting closed 5

They were out of brains.

up
Voting closed 6

For an elected idiot to say that, he should be kicked out of office. Then vote someone in who gives a damn about the people.

up
Voting closed 8

But he was elected in a free election. You have to wait until the next election and find someone you think is better and vote for that guy. You don’t get to break the rules because you don’t like what he said.

up
Voting closed 5

You have to wait until the next election and find someone you think is better and vote for that guy

True sometimes, not true everywhere. I don't know what the bylaws are in Quincy, but recall petitions are a thing, as is removal for cause.

up
Voting closed 5

It's always a peculiar thing when a person who wants to be from the government states that his desire is bad.

When the messenger admits that his motivation is to be false, then his statements need to be taken with a hefty grain of salt. In this case Mackin is playing the game that McCarthy played. Find a reason to create controversy to create the illusion that he is a leader. In McCarthy's case it was alcoholism running his lust for fame and power. Of course what he got was infamy shame and early death.

No idea of what Mackin's true motivation is. But the welfare of his constituents is clearly not part of that motivation.

up
Voting closed 4

Alternatively, pretty much everyone aside from the most cynical con-men (your McCarthy example is good), deep down inside, thinks they're the good guys. Some pretty twisted positions come from people who actually believe what they're saying to be true. It's entirely possible that this guy genuinely thinks he's acting in the best interests of his constituents.

up
Voting closed 5

.

up
Voting closed 5

It could be that he simply, for whatever the reason, feels that masks don’t work. If you don’t agree with him, that’s your right.

up
Voting closed 4

Nobody's questioning his right to express pretty much whatever opinion he wants, so long as it falls short of a very few well-defined lines (the "shouting 'fire!' in a crowded theater" doctrine.) This opinion piece is obviously well within the realm of protected speech.

up
Voting closed 5