All_Pro_Bills

Is that you Dr. Fauci? Or another know it all drone that claims others are wrong or uninformed but yet cannot dispute a single point or produce a sound argument on anything. Just more pictures. 3rd grade level mind. Just pathetic..

From the perspective of the limits of government power I think the President has crossed the line here and shows no ability to restrain his dictatorial tendencies. But that's me and how much crap are other people willing to take? A lot more I expect until the point it impacts them directly. The other thing I see this mandate strategy as an attempt at scapegoating the un-vaccinated for the failure of a policy that focuses almost exclusively on vaccinating the population with vaccines of limited efficacy and duration to address the pandemic. Natural immunity which is acquired by infection and recovery is something they won't even consider exists. And if it gets mentioned the stock answer is natural immunity is "not as effective" against the virus as the vaccines. Something we know is false referencing Israeli population studies (real life evidence) on vaccines, natural immunity, and the Delta variant which show natural immunity is around 13x more effective than the vaccine against Delta. Please label that fact mis-information, Twitter, Facebook, and Google. Now we know that the vaccines aren't as effective as originally advertised. Just get vaccinated and we can return to "normal". Now the narrative has shifted to they'll keep you from getting very sick. But keep you from getting sick period? Apparently not. Now the narrative has focused away from the vaccine will protect you to the un-vaccinated are a threat to you. Never explaining how anyone could be a threat to me if the vaccines work as well as you have insisted they work. How can anyone infect me if I have immunity? Oh, wait, I only have immunity from getting very sick. So I don't have immunity. So its not really a vaccine its a pre-treatment. And it only lasts 4 to 6 months and now I need a booster shot every 4 to 6 months. So now the narrative shifts to protecting children. One of the central themes and commandments of politics (you may not care about yourself but what about the children?). Now they're pushing the vaccines on children who generally get asymptomatic, mild, or moderate cases and spice up with a zero casualty goal narrative with a lot of anecdotal stories of multitudes of children dying. A quick check at stats at sites like the CDC shows the cases. Maybe my county is not indicative of the country as a whole but not a single death of anyone under 30 has been reported since the outbreak began. So rather than accept reality and admit the vaccine centric strategy is a failure and adjustments to the approach and plan are needed they're doubling down on the vaccination push. The evidence is all there if you care to look at the results and situations of the most vaccinated countries. The threshold of "herd immunity" is reached and yet cases reappear and rise. Are the vaccines a bust? No they aren't. But that alone isn't going to keep this under control or allow life to return to "normal" and scapegoating a segment of the population is hardly productive when everyone coming together here is necessary. Not only was Biden's speech frightening from the perspective of personal freedom it was also divisive and ironic coming from a guy that ran a 2020 campaign on a theme of unity. The great unifier, a complete fraud.

The part run by a demented old fool that is destroying our democracy..

The fundamental debate here is about more than vaccines. Personally, I think people would be well advised to get vaccinated and that's a choice I personally made of my own free will. And for me that's the right of everyone else to decide for themselves. Do the un-vaccinated pose some kind of risk to me? Perhaps, but people pose all kinds of risks to us all every day. And life goes on. The issue is what are the limits of government power? is there anything that they cannot "order" you or "coerce" you into doing? Is it proper for the government to openly coerce private businesses to do their bidding? Can the executive branch unilaterally issue executive orders without the need for the legislature? Why do we have a Congress or State or local assemblies if the executive branch can just issue edicts and proclamations on anything and everything? Why do we have a Constitution and an established legal system if the government can just ignore it all whenever they decide its necessary? Because what it looks like to me is they can pretty much decide to tell everyone to do pretty much anything they want at this point. And get away with it. And the fact a lot of people are okay with it is the most frightening part of it all. If you buy into all the mandate and coercion tactics because you think it doesn't effect you or you think it makes you safer than please don't be surprised or shocked when they decide to issue some edict or proclamation prohibiting or requiring something that you're against. And nobody steps up to the plate to defend you. Because that's how tyranny works. One little step at a time. Either we're a flock of sheep that runs and scatters at the sign of trouble and its everybody for themselves or were a pack of wolves that work together for a common objective. That common objective should be to keep the limits of government power in place. That's the fight here. And what puzzles me most is the posters that will most likely disagree with me are the one's constantly crowing about threats to democracy. Well what kind of democracy is it when the elected legislature has no power or cedes its power to the executive? You see threats to democracy. But you can't see this? Are you blind? Well here it is. A threat. In the White House and State Capitols. In both major political parties.

Here's a fun fact. Are you aware that moving people from 3rd world countries into the US contributes to climate change? How you say? Because the carbon footprint and the resource consumption rate of an average American is multiples of the carbon footprint and resource consumption rate of people in the 3rd world. And as they adopt a US type lifestyle their carbon output increases to a US lifestyle which incrementally increases the overall US carbon footprint at a rate greater than it decreases the carbon output rate in their previous country. So either you're into unlimited immigration which floods the country with energy consuming and carbon producing new residents or fighting climate change by keeping everyone in their home country with their lower carbon output, but you can't do both. My suggestion is we ship two climate change virtue signalers to the 3rd world for every immigrant entering the country, allow them to adopt that low carbon footprint lifestyle, cut overall carbon emissions, convert their virtue signalling into virtue action, and save the planet. Send them to say Guatemala. Good idea?

Spoken like another mouthpiece for the elite establishment ruling class. Maybe all the inner city poor can move to the Knob Hill neighborhood in San Francisco? Or the upper East Side in Manhattan or vacation in the Hampton's? I hear they looking to improve their diversity profile by bringing in some poor folks.

So shouldn't the people in the community have some input on how government funding, which I'm 100% certain is needed to settle people, is going to be spent and allocated in their community? Along with who is going to be settled into their communities. After all, its not like the citizens in these poor communities are living so large that they couldn't use some additional help. Or are they just there for the elites and establishment politicians to crap all over when required? What I hate more than fake do-gooders is fake do-gooders that push all the consequences of their fake virtues on to somebody else.

As a consistent advocate for the elite establishment you should already know that none of the refugees will be allowed to settle in their gentrified and upscale neighborhoods or gated communities nor will their children be enrolled in the private schools the elite attend so they'll never know how it all works out.

We live in an arbitrary and dysfunctional system ruled by confirmation bias managed by like-minded idiots disconnected from reality from the same backgrounds and educational institutions approving and endorsing the ideas of other like-minded idiots disconnected from reality from the same backgrounds and educational institutions. As I've concluded its impossible to reason with the idiots its approaching the point in time where there's really only two solutions to the problem. Get rid of the idiots the easy way or get rid of the idiots the hard way.

Worried? Hardly, because there is no truth beyond the fact some protesters got out of control and they need to answer for their behavior. So I'd say I'm amused and slightly entertained by the pageantry of it all. But by all means let's devote a lot of time and expense to find out who broke a couple chairs and a window or two. I sit here riveted to my screen awaiting the next episode of the critically acclaimed award winning drama "The Committee". In the next episode we find out who "illegally" used the House chamber rest room as they are charged and sentenced to 50 years in prison for their heinous act of not flushing or washing their hands. An act that threatened the very core of our democracy! House speaker Pelosi decried the act vowing never to use stall #2 in the rest room ever again!

Are you still holding out hope that this dog-and-pony show is going to reveal some sort of conspiracy or some organized attempt to occupy the Capitol? Because from the looks of things so far you've got to be disappointed. Just some plea bargain deals on minor charges like in municipal traffic court. And more money and resources well spent by our government.

Or maybe only vaccinated people can vote? Hey why not. No booster, no vote. For your safety..

So companies see their margins fall or they pass on cost increases to customers. And then their customers have to make purchasing decisions. What do I need? And what do I want? Given a constant income the rational decision is I'll continue to buy what I need but cut back on things that I want. So the company that makes things people "want" but don't need, consumer discretionary goods see a drop in their sales. Things like vacations or maybe deciding to squeeze out a year or two more out of that car you drive. Pretty soon they don't need to produce as much. So they lay off workers. And then more companies lay off more workers. Pretty soon everyone notices unemployment is rising. And the economy slows. But workers that still have jobs will want wage increases to keep up with the cost of living. And those on public assistance or unemployment will need more money to keep even with price increases. So there will be calls for more government spending. Which means more borrowing and national debt. Which causes the dollar to fall and makes imports more expensive. Imports which we depend on. So what does the Fed do? Well normally they would print or create more money to juice the economy. But that will stoke already high inflation. So if they do that inflation will go higher. If they don't the economy will continue to shrink. Long story short we're screwed.

The protection argument misses the point. I can dream up all kinds of "protections". Like a Lion in a 6 foot cage we all can be as safe as possible. The issue here is under our system of Constitutional rights and legal due process are any of these edicts valid and legal? And is there any implicit or explicit authority to change the concept of "rights" granted by the Laws and the Constitution to the concept of "privileges" granted by government officials? The other issue is that almost every single one of these proclamations are generated from the executive level or some agency and not any legislative body. Without due process. And I was always led to believe the legislative branch at all levels debates, passes, and creates legislation. From where I sit the CDC or some other agency or Mayor, Governor, or some other public official has no authority to cancel or repeal my Constitutional rights. Pandemic or no pandemic.

Perhaps. But when I hear and see and him on the interview circuit I hear Sympathy for the Devil playing in the background. He looks and acts the part perfectly. Taker of Souls..

My question was explain away the results in India with some other factor that caused cases and deaths to plummet? Don't have one? Don't worry. Pfizer is working on a 3CL Protease Inhibitor anti-viral that will soon start clinical trials. And I'm certain it will get accelerated approval which is more than I can say for about 1/2 dozen treatment applications the FDA is currently sitting on. Functionally their protease inhibitor has properties consistent with medications like Ivermectin but you can be assured it will be a lot more expensive to produce and use. So soon Twitter and Facebook will authorize you to believe and defend what I just stated as "information" and "fact" which is the vaccine program needs to be augmented by an effective anti-viral treatment.

One thing our official clown car scientific community, or the slow-witted media and other self-proclaimed experts, can't explain is how the early and aggressive outpatient treatment of households and family units with Ivermectin in India coincided with a 97% reduction in cases in Delhi over a 28 day period this past May. Other States using the protocol also showed improvement and conversely those that did not saw cases rise. Could something else be responsible? Perhaps, but to this point there is no reasonable or "scientific" explanation to suggest anything other factor drove down Delta cases. The country went from the worst outbreak to being out of the conversation today. This is a country with very low vaccine rates. Even after all these cases and deaths piled up the US still has more cases and more deaths even with the benefit of our expensive and bloated healthcare system. But here in the U.S., cheap and readily available solutions not producing Big Pharma revenues and profits just don't reside in the DNA of America's decision makers. Their flippant arrogance to dismiss anything outside of the box they reside in is a pathetic substitute for the science they claim to follow. The only thing worse is the close minded idiots who continue to defend it.

Fauci needs to resign or be fired. Facts have proven him to be a liar. He lied to Congress, he lied to the public. This isn't a political issue. Its one of credibility. How does anyone expect the public to line up and support policy if the mouthpiece for it all is a fraud. And perhaps a guy that had a hand in unleashing COVID on the world? Sadly, a resignation or firing is unlikely as our leadership is both clueless and unaccountable. Over time the government and almost every other social institution has become dysfunctional and ineffective. Fauci is symptomatic of that dysfunction. And traditionally in our Constitutional form of government the government exists solely for the purpose of serving its citizens. If its not doing that then it has no purpose. We're getting real close to that point where a different vision of where the citizens exist solely for the purpose of serving the government is taking hold. The last one looks to be where all these officials and would-be dictators with all kinds of restrictions and edicts are lining up. Which one you believe tells which side of the struggle you sit on.

For the record, I'm not on Twitter or Facebook. And I generate my own conclusions using inputs from various sources of information. Some of which I agree with and some which I don't. And given my job I have access to what's likely the largest private collection of health care data and analytics including about a year and a half of COVID patient information. I'd say that makes me pretty well informed along with searching and researching publicly available sources like the CDC. One of several government and private organizations my work team happens to support. Also for the record I am vaccinated but I'm also aware of the limitations that provides. And apparently the CDC agrees with me as they have determined vaccinated people can spread the virus, have high viral loads, become infected, and get sick just the same as the un-vaccinated. I have yet to see any study or data that specifies the viral load reduction in vaccinated and un-vaccinated so if you've got a source I'd be interested. I'm not arguing against vaccines here. Or any specific measure. What I am arguing about is inconsistent and ineffective social and medical policies that conflict with known facts and the officials that refuse to adjust their edicts based on the availability of new information. As I've concluded vaccination alone will not stop the outbreak (look at Israel for example) I can only conclude they care more about getting everyone vaccinated than they do with stopping the virus.

Yes, CDC Director Rochelle Walensky made that admission on a CNN news interview a few months back. This from MSN. "The viral load of vaccinated people with breakthrough cases is the same as in unvaccinated people, the CDC said Friday." So where's the logic in restrictions on just the un-vaccinated? Playing the odds maybe? Or just shooting in the dark? Or has the goalpost been moved and rather than keeping vaccinated people from getting sick the goal is now to keep them from getting seriously sick? Has there ever been such a thing with vaccines ever before? https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/cdc-report-shows-vaccinated-people-can-spread-covid-19/ar-AAML2bE I keep preaching it over and over and over that we what's needed is an effective anti-viral to complement the vaccines but that idea seems to have little support among the people making all the rules here. More than being oblivious to the concept they appear to be resisting it. Protecting the host from severe inflection while allowing the virus to multiple and mutate using the host isn't going to get the job done. Unless the vaccine stops the virus from replicating, which apparently these vaccines don't, then vaccinating everyone isn't going to end this or get it under control without a lot of unintended consequences like ultimately producing some killer variant.

The problem here is all these policies are based on false assumptions or premises. False premises known to organizations like the CDC. False assumption #1. Vaccinated people can't get the virus. Fact is they can and they do either because the vaccine did not "work" for them or the immunity it provided is wearing off over time. False assumption #2. Vaccinated people can't spread the virus. Fact is they can because the vaccines are not good at controlling viral load. And an individual with a viral load, vaccinated or not vaccinated, is a potential spreader.

It appears to have worked in India. Curiously, the demise of the Delta variant there coincided with the use of the cheap, plentiful, and easy to produce medication. In Indian States where it was used the case rates plummeted while in States where it wasn't they continued to rise. The course of treatment was when a family or household member tested positive all the household members would be put on the treatment. To prevent the infection more than to treat it. Evidence and results suggest that strategy may have been the solution there as the Delta outbreak is under control. Not so much in the U.S. it seems. But who gets rich off a 50 cent solution to the outbreak? Not the exec's at Pfizer that's for sure. Or the big hospital systems. Or the politicians spreading fear to gain power. Now I don't know for sure whether the "horse de-wormer" turned the tide of the outbreak in India or if it was some other factor. But what's funny is how in the U.S. all the low cost potential solutions are so easily dismissed and discredited while the most expensive and complex solutions are always pursued. In the investment world the concerns about the vaccine producers was that the revenue and profits were one shot events because after everyone is vaccinated that's it. But now booster shots! Problem solved! And apparently all the useful idiots, being the least informed people on the planet, would prefer to mock and casually dismiss potential solutions and advocate for the big pharma companies and continue with all sorts of social restrictions rather than take a serious look at alternatives. I find the lack of curiosity and willingness to entertain alternatives disturbing. Along with a conclusion that we're being led by narrow minded intellectual bigots and idiots. If we had leaders that were capable of actual intelligent thinking the problem would be over by now.

Or ask Clinton or Gates. We can go on naming names of people involved across the political and social spectrum but that's not my point. This issue transcends politics and shouldn't be trivialized by it.

The question with Epstein isn't about involvement of Trump or Clinton. The question is why is the media and the legal community, both private and public prosecutors, taking such a "hands off" approach to what is clearly sexual abuse and exploitation of young women? Where is the Me Too movement on this? Feminist groups and women advocate organizations? Where are the investigations? Hearings? Leaks of names on "the list"? Questioning and arrest of others involved? Why is Epstein untouchable even in death? Was it true that he was a Mossad operative blackmailing US officials and powerful men? I hear more about the Brittaney Spears legal battles with her father than I do about this topic. This all seems quite suspicious. The fact heads aren't rolling is telling. Who's giving the orders to bury the subject?

The way the question is phased obviously biases the survey (would anyone approve of a botched plan?) but overall I'm still trying to process the idea that anyone paying attention to what transpired here can in any way "approve" of the way the withdrawal was performed or rationalize that it was executed well. I expect a better question is "do you think the withdrawal event will have any adverse consequences for US foreign policy and its relations to its allies and foes going forward"? IMO the way it went down makes the U.S. look weak and feeble. Which is perhaps a reflection on our current leadership. For me this marks a clear beginning of the end for the Empire and everyone should prepare accordingly.