william.scherk Posted December 21, 2021 Share Posted December 21, 2021 On 12/20/2021 at 10:21 AM, william.scherk said: I wonder if Trump is persuaded that there is a stark or notable difference in vaccination rates between Democratic-leaning counties and Republican-leading counties. Bill O'Reilly speaks up for Trump, asserting that Trump understands that Trump supporters are less likely to have been vaccinated than the demons who follow another path. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Posted December 21, 2021 Author Share Posted December 21, 2021 45 minutes ago, william.scherk said: Bill O'Reilly speaks up for Trump, asserting that Trump understands that Trump supporters are less likely to have been vaccinated than the demons who follow another path. Way to go President Trump. Follow what your doctor tells you. What group is dying off in greater numbers, the people who received coronavirus vaccines or those who did not? Are more Trump supporters LESS LIKELY to get vaccinated? Whether the pro Trumpers die off or decide to not vote or vote for a libertarian Presidential candidate, it is not good for "'our' numbers" in a Presidential race. Yet Biden's poll numbers have hit some new lows too. Follow the medicine. Follow your own good sense. Don't listen to the billy goat news that supports a right-wing bias. Baaaah. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThatGuy Posted December 21, 2021 Share Posted December 21, 2021 14 minutes ago, Peter said: Follow your own good sense. Don't listen to the billy goat news that supports a right-wing bias. Baaaah. Get on in the box car. Don't make waves. Just follow orders. Baaah. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmj Posted December 21, 2021 Share Posted December 21, 2021 Covid is very dangerous for some groups , but not for most. Reliance on a known leaky ‘vaccine’ isn’t the best strategy, if the risk analysis shows the risks of the experimental jab could confer some added safety than that may be the rational choice. But since infection can occur with or without the jab , treatment especially early treatment is the most important avenue for personal safety. Get the jab if you feel you ‘must’ , but figure out what you’re going to do when you get the virus , cuz everyone will , it’s what viruses do. Thankfully for most it isn’t what the fear makes us think it is. oh and fuck the CCP 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmj Posted December 21, 2021 Share Posted December 21, 2021 Plus for those who chose to stay in the control group and remain vaccine free , Omicron seems to be the natural vax. Still early of course , but it seems this variant is quickly becoming the dominant strain and it also appears to be less ‘virulent’ , but still fuck the CCP and those who enabled them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted December 21, 2021 Share Posted December 21, 2021 Get a load of this. "It's Immoral! Stop It Now!" Biden Accuses Conservative Media Personalities of "Killing Their Own Customers" by 'Peddling Lies' About Covid Vaccines (VIDEO) WWW.THEGATEWAYPUNDIT.COM Joe Biden on Tuesday delivered remarks on the Omicron variant from the White House. Biden announced the federal government will be sending out free Covid tests to anyone who requests one. Dementia... Biden talking about morality? Good God... That's like Satan (or better, one of the minor demons) presenting the Lord's Prayer. Or maybe Michael Avenatti giving a course on Objectivism. The next thing you know, Biden will be offering advice on how to raise moral children... Michael 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted December 22, 2021 Share Posted December 22, 2021 It looks like some great news is coming. America's Frontline Doctors Vows to Open Its Own Clinics and Invites Medical Staff and Pharmacists to Join Them WWW.THEGATEWAYPUNDIT.COM America’s Frontline Doctors (AFLDS) is planning to open its own clinics and is inviting medical staff and pharmacists to join. News Punch reports: According to a newsletter that was distributed among its... If they open their own clinics, finally people will be able to get medicine for the coronavirus without all the sabotage from Big Pharma and the government and their forcing vaccines on people. I have never before seen a situation where a social policy of denying people medicine has been implemented. I have never even heard of such a thing for society at large. I had to live through it to know how depraved the predator class is. Thank God we have people who push back. And on that note, here is someone else pushing back in her own way: Sarah Palin. Sarah Palin Vows 'Over My Dead Body' Will She Get COVID Vaccinated WWW.THEGATEWAYPUNDIT.COM Former Alaska governor and vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin vowed on Sunday she would get a COVID vaccine “over my dead body.” “Enough is enough, especially when it comes to government telling us... Quote Former Alaska governor and vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin vowed on Sunday she would get a COVID vaccine “over my dead body.” “Enough is enough, especially when it comes to government telling us what we have to inject in our own bodies,” Palin proclaimed during AmericaFest, an event hosted by Turning Poing USA in Phoenix Arizona. “I will not do it. I won’t do it, and they better not touch my kids, either.” Knowing Sarah, her problem is not science. It is coercion. Michael 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThatGuy Posted December 22, 2021 Share Posted December 22, 2021 <cold stare> The Vaccine Pushback Is Bad, But Wait for the Climate One "At some point, governments will start using more sticks than carrots to break our deadly dependence on fossil fuels. How will humanity respond?" The Vaccine Pushback Is Bad, But Wait for the Climate One T.CO At some point, governments will start using more sticks than carrots to break our deadly dependence on fossil fuels. How will humanity... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Posted December 22, 2021 Author Share Posted December 22, 2021 7 hours ago, tmj said: Plus for those who chose to stay in the control group and remain vaccine free , Omicron seems to be the natural vax. Still early of course , but it seems this variant is quickly becoming the dominant strain and it also appears to be less ‘virulent’ That is my opinion too, TMJ. I was sitting in a drug store near Fenwick Island waiting for my prescription to be filled (they said it was ready, but it wasn't) and a guy comes in asking the pharmacist for the quick test. He was told they were out. As he walked by me and out the store, it seemed like he deliberately coughed but who knows. It is now two days later, and I feel OK. Three Pfizers and one flu shot should tide me over this winter. A school - teacher I know is getting the third Moderna shot tomorrow. With school out for the holidays it gives teachers a chance to have a bad reaction and not miss teaching, yet still be fully vaxxed. Good luck to all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted December 22, 2021 Share Posted December 22, 2021 In a sea of noise, I like Viva Frei's objectivity. He goes hard on the difference between prediction and fact. And on this point, I think he hit the main mechanism of the fake news media. They constantly present their predictions as facts. But are they lying when they do that? Sometimes. Definitely when they treat the prediction as fact for other knowledge. Then he goes hard on the difference between prediction and lie. And to illustrate, he uses the publication The Lancet, which he concludes is deceitful. The lie he presents is not the substance of the initial 2020 report, which was signed by gobs of scientists. That report sucked up to China and said definitively that COVID-19 has natural--not manmade--origins and to think otherwise is to engage in conspiracy theories. So if that isn't the lie, what is? The Lancet now comes out and says that to question the origin of COVID-19 is a legitimate line of enquiry and did not mention the hard stance before that was signed by gobs of scientists. (Actually, I remember The Lancet issuing some kind or retraction. But I agree with Viva Frei that the retraction also needed to be in the current report given the scope of the damage it caused and is still causing.) And there's this. Viewers also have brains. They can extrapolate rationally. So it is reasonable for them to assume The Lancet actually lied in its 2020 China bootlicking report and conclude the entire report was a lie. Why? Because The Lancet is lying right now. In everyone's face. That makes it a liar. The Lancet is trying to "memory hole" its earlier position that helped change the world and grant gobs of power to governments, so that makes it an unrepentant liar at that. Imagine the pressure it had to extend on all those scientists who signed the 2020 report to get them to do that. Imagine the corruption involved. All of it was all a lie. I feel comfortable saying that. I mean, how far of a logical leap does it take to conclude that lying is what liars do? So I think a lot of recent material from The Lancet should be scrutinized by objective experts (if and where such can be found anymore), especially where China and/or Big Pharma (and big money in general) could have influence on the report. Michael 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anthony Posted December 22, 2021 Share Posted December 22, 2021 "The stated purpose of this system is “to address rising COVID-19 cases” in Boston caused by the “Omicron” variant. This seems a bit strange, because what we’ve been told is supposed to be so alarming about “Omicron” (pronounced “Oh, c’mon”) is that it’s extra transmissible — with rapid viral spread observed even among those who are fully vaxxed and “boosted” out the wazoo, drowning in daily “rapid tests,” and quadruple-masked at the first sign of human contact. These measures have evidently not succeeded in curtailing the exponential spread. Nonetheless, the hammer is about to come down hard again on “The Unvaccinated,” allegedly because they pose such a unique transmission threat. If you don’t quite follow the logic there, you simply must not understand The Science, dummy". "Question: when does all this amount to a “Permanent Emergency,” and when do we get to discuss that the very notion of a “Permanent Emergency” is oxymoronic?" Emergency Powers Deployed to Impose Vaccine Passports ⋆ Brownstone Institute BROWNSTONE.ORG Given the vast interlocking patchwork of governmental jurisdictions in the US, only the most discerning citizens would have the faintest clue... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anthony Posted December 22, 2021 Share Posted December 22, 2021 On 12/21/2021 at 5:50 PM, Michael Stuart Kelly said: Tony, I don't agree with this. Selling out is a trade, not a sacrifice. Not all self-betrayal (or betrayal of values) is self-sacrifice. Who is the intended collector of the sacrifice? In altruism it is "others." And who is the collector in selling out? Oneself, of course, in addition to the party sold to. Both parties are receiving their share of the trade. A person who betrays his principles might be able to do so in order to benefit others, but by no means does he have to be convinced he is serving a "greater good" or others. Often he just wants the goodies for himself. In that case he is swapping his integrity for, say, money. He himself is a collector of the result of his betrayal. That's just not self-sacrifice. That's not altruism. It doesn't matter if he is making a bad trade. It's still a trade, not a sacrifice. Or let me put it this way. You are the only person I know in the entire world for all of human history that I am aware of who calls this altruism. If that is your intent, like I said, I'm fine with it. But even then, I disagree that this is a legitimate meaning of altruism as used everywhere else, including by Ayn Rand. I can call my left foot my right foot and insist on it, but I can't expect the world to adopt my new meaning for right and left feet. Not all betrayals are sacrifices. Not all destruction is a sacrifice. Not all evil is a sacrifice. Not even all theft is a sacrifice. And none of it innately has to be self-sacrifice by the same self. A sacrifice implies a loser and a beneficiary, especially self-sacrifice. I can give case after case where there is only a loser and no beneficiary. Loss for the sake of loss. Unhappiness for the sake of unhappiness. Destruction for the sake of destruction. That is not even bullying, much less altruism, which is predicated on raising the other above oneself as the rightful beneficiary of one's actions and efforts. Michael Yes, "a trade". For the worse, sometimes for the evil. A sacrifice: reneging on, giving up, surrendering, giving away, "a greater value for a lesser - or, non-value". "A value" may be physical, like money and property, but as often (and since there's no body/mind dichotomy) it's accompanied by the 'spiritual'. Such as giving up one's integrity and honor, one's own principles, convictions and standards cheaply or for nothing, no net gain - only loss. For example, one might "sell out", in order for cheap amusement or popularity with a group, private confidences by one's dearest friend. The broad "altruism" (sacrifice in the active or passive, by oneself and to oneself) was clearly expanded by Rand into psychology along with the moral philosophy. Morally, she plainly understood the causal relationship. More than just the identity of 'altruism' as widely and wrongly accepted, but its consequences. (Its identity-in-action. The identification unique to Objectivism ). A summation. The precondition for 'other-sacrifice' - to predate upon, to destroy/control others values/minds, cause deliberate harm to another spiritually or physically, (etc). - is and had to be preceded by, original self-sacrifice. Not merely by my assertion, from Rand's over-all, ethically reasoned samples. Rand was full of explicit expositions of the principle in fiction and prose, like this corollary: never living for anyone else - and not allowing another to live for one. (Not being a predator nor meekly consenting to being predated upon). I reckon that she, as always, closely observed the premises and results of self/other-sacrifice, all around in reality - with individual people, from the existing culture, traditions and from history, by prior philosopher-ethicists, and finally by introspection: What it must be like to live, think and act as a consistent altruist? Reality-based, iow, not from rationalistic reasoning, as most other ethicists. To top that all, we know Rand had a clear metaphysical vision of man, what he is and should live as. Nathaniel Branden, after her, had I think the best grasp of altruism as the whole, knowing precisely the moral doctrine, plus applied to his specialty, psychology. Explored in his self-esteem psychology, he laid out the same correlation, how selfless-ness will be as destructive as it's self-destructive, concluding in Honoring the Self: "Not self, but the absence of self, is closer to being the root of all evil". For me simply and basically, a "sacrificer" treats others consistently as he does himself, with contempt and non-value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anthony Posted December 22, 2021 Share Posted December 22, 2021 21 hours ago, Peter said: That is my opinion too, TMJ. I was sitting in a drug store near Fenwick Island waiting for my prescription to be filled (they said it was ready, but it wasn't) and a guy comes in asking the pharmacist for the quick test. He was told they were out. As he walked by me and out the store, it seemed like he deliberately coughed but who knows. It is now two days later, and I feel OK. Three Pfizers and one flu shot should tide me over this winter. A school - teacher I know is getting the third Moderna shot tomorrow. With school out for the holidays it gives teachers a chance to have a bad reaction and not miss teaching, yet still be fully vaxxed. Good luck to all. Peter, maybe two-thirds to three-quarters of a population did not HAVE to be vaccinated. (Nor locked -down...) For argument let's say one-half, to be on the safe side. Must they submit to it, despite whatever reason they don't choose to, whether they have Faith in, say, Fate or the Godly Design of the healthy human body to withstand viruses? (not entirely wrong, naturalistically). Or like others, atheists, who have made a sober and rational, benefit evaluation of their ages, health and immuno-systems, those too? If they all must. Why? Who said? I know you as an O'ist take individual freedoms seriously, but it seems you tacitly go along with these immoral, anti-rights, mandates. I'm glad you're doing well. As all others who needed it. I ask you to keep in mind that vaxxing worked for YOU. You can't abstract your individual circumstances and necessary choice onto a proscription for everybody else. We know that vaxxing has done little to nothing with curtailing the spread; so that blows away any 'argument from duty'. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
william.scherk Posted December 22, 2021 Share Posted December 22, 2021 (edited) On 11/5/2021 at 11:48 AM, william.scherk said: now Pfizer claims its drug Paxlovid has been found effective -- more effective than Molnupiravir: Six weeks later: Coronavirus (COVID-19) Update: FDA Authorizes First Oral Antiviral for Treatment of COVID-19 On 11/15/2021 at 1:05 AM, Michael Stuart Kelly said: The gist of Dr. Campbell's explanation is that ivermectin, which won the Nobel Prize in 2015, was handed over to the public domain by it's inventors. So it cannot be patented. The new therapeutic drug by Pfizer acts in the same way as ivermectin, but has a different chemical make-up which is evident when showing it. And that means it is patentable. Pfizer's newly-approved Paxlovid was discussed by Campbell first in this video (cued): The subsequent video cited above: Nota bene: this is an emergency-use authorization (EUA). Edited December 22, 2021 by william.scherk Noted the EUA approval Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Posted December 22, 2021 Share Posted December 22, 2021 The latest in Trump clotshot advocacy, from an interview with Bill O’Reilly, 19 December 2021 in Dallas: O’Reilly: Both the president and I are vaxxed and uh, [turning to Trump] did you get the booster? Trump: [speaking emphatically] Yes. O’Reilly: I got it too. Ok, so uh— [booing from audience] Trump: [annoyed, speaking as if to an obnoxious child, waggling his right hand at the audience, beginning fortissimo and continuing decrescendo with downward glissando, and as a final dismissive gesture throws his waggling hand down] Don’t, don’t, don’t, don’t, don’t, don’t – don’t, no, no. That’s all right, it’s a very tiny group over there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Posted December 22, 2021 Share Posted December 22, 2021 Interview of Peter Breggin with his wife Ginger in the background, about their new book Covid-19 and the Global Predators: We Are the Prey, conducted by Reiner Füllmich on July 28, 2021. Abridged. More at:COVID-19 and Coronavirus Resource Center Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
william.scherk Posted December 22, 2021 Share Posted December 22, 2021 Trump is pretty forthright, enunciating clearly what seem to be his views on vaccination in this excerpt from a sit-down with Candace Owens. Of lesser note, Trump seemed a little bit surprised to hear that Joe Biden had given credit to the Trump administration's Warp Speed achievements. Quote Trump told Fox News that he was "very appreciative" of Biden's acknowledgment and that it was difficult to criticize him in the wake of his remarks. "It is a little tough to be overly critical now because he just thanked us for the vaccine and thanked me for what I did," Trump said. "You know, that's a first — so it is very tough for me to be overly critical now." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmj Posted December 22, 2021 Share Posted December 22, 2021 Not sure if that is a video I saw , but John Campbell discusses the properties of protease inhibitors and the mechanism by which they slow viral replication. And shows that ivermectin has three modes of action against covid, while one ( or perhaps two) of the new big Pharma choices are single action inhibitors. Not to mention a wide disparity in pricing. At the very least it is at least finally starting to discuss treatment options , instead of the ridiculous quest of zero covid . There is even a crazy scheme where some white hat bio-hackers ‘sent’ Omicron into the population. All told not terrible on any front. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted December 22, 2021 Share Posted December 22, 2021 On 12/20/2021 at 9:51 PM, Michael Stuart Kelly said: Even me being fine, though, Trump better be careful with his base. Lots of people are not amused. Politics is not about what a person really believes. It's about what people perceive that person believes. I am pretty sure Trump is smart enough to navigate this, but I do have one caveat. He is awfully proud of the achievement of developing a vaccine in a short amount of time. And his ego could make him dig in on this. If he digs in, he will lose a lot of credibility with people who are 100% behind him right now. For instance, this guy (but stuff like this is starting to pop up elsewhere). Crowd Boos Trump As He Tells Them to Take Credit For Vaccines WWW.BITCHUTE.COM article - ... I agree with Salty. Whoever is telling Trump it is OK to dig in on this should be fired. Actually, I suspect one of the people telling him that is Bill O'Reilly himself. I heard O'Reilly praising the vax a while back. So am I now worried? No. I'm not worried about Trump getting reelected and maybe even reinstated. To me that's a given. But I am starting to get pre-worried that this vax thing will become a face-off between Trump and his base. I see nothing good coming from that. This is going to grow. Let me add this one for the record. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted December 23, 2021 Share Posted December 23, 2021 7 hours ago, anthony said: A summation. The precondition for 'other-sacrifice' - to predate upon, to destroy/control others values/minds, cause deliberate harm to another spiritually or physically, (etc). - is and had to be preceded by, original self-sacrifice. Tony, I disagree. Existence exists as it is, not how we want it to be. Just because altruism exists in the way you say some of the time, that does not mean it exists in that form all of the time. To mix Rand with Freud: sometimes a drooling beast is just a drooling beast. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dglgmut Posted December 23, 2021 Share Posted December 23, 2021 20 hours ago, ThatGuy said: The Vaccine Pushback Is Bad, But Wait for the Climate One T.CO At some point, governments will start using more sticks than carrots to break our deadly dependence on fossil fuels. How will humanity... This is a quote from that article: Quote In some ways, the rhetoric is reminiscent of the mantra of the pro-choice movement: “keep your laws off my body.” But it’s a misleading resemblance. Anti-vaxxers do have a choice and it’s not comparable to a back-alley abortion. They can quit their jobs. It almost sounds like a joke it's so stupid. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dglgmut Posted December 23, 2021 Share Posted December 23, 2021 On 12/21/2021 at 2:40 PM, Peter said: Way to go President Trump. Follow what your doctor tells you. Yes. Thank God doctors are so reliable! Study Suggests Medical Errors Now Third Leading Cause of Death in the U.S. - 05/03/2016 WWW.HOPKINSMEDICINE.ORG Analyzing medical death rate data over an eight-year period, Johns Hopkins patient safety experts have calculated that more than... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Posted December 23, 2021 Share Posted December 23, 2021 Trump is digging himself in deep. Candice Owens interviewed him 21 December 2021 at Mar-a-Lago resort. The full interview is behind a paywall but here are two snippets: Trump: The [covid] vaccine is one of the greatest achievements of mankind. We would have had a 1917— remember the Spanish Flu killed perhaps a hundred million people. Actually it ended the first world war because the soldiers were so—. A lot of people don’t know that. The soldiers got so sick, it was a terrible thing, there were no vaccines, there were no anything. I came up with a vaccine, with three vaccines. All are very very good. Came up with three of them in less than nine months. It was supposed to take five to 12 years. ...Interviewer: More people have died under Covid this year ... under Joe Biden than under you, and more people took the vaccine this year, so people are questioning how— Trump: Oh no, the vaccines work but some people aren’t taking them. The ones that get very sick and go to the hospital are the ones that don’t take their vaccine. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anthony Posted December 23, 2021 Share Posted December 23, 2021 One of the better ones by Ben Shapiro "Because the big-government lie must be maintained. It is an article of faith. And faith requires reason-free sacrifice — it requires skin in the game, demonstration of devotion. To pursue rational policy would evidence no fealty to the notion of government-as-protective-god. To pursue irrational policy and then demand obeisance — this is the mark of the faithful. And if you are not faithful, you are a heretic". The Big Government COVID-19 Lie - Ben Shapiro IP1.THEJMG.COM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anthony Posted December 23, 2021 Share Posted December 23, 2021 2 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said: Tony, I disagree. Existence exists as it is, not how we want it to be. Just because altruism exists in the way you say some of the time, that does not mean it exists in that form all of the time. To mix Rand with Freud: sometimes a drooling beast is just a drooling beast. Michael The rational animal exists. "Rational" and valuing, by his free will (or not). The drooling beast is a sacrificial beast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now