JaCrispy Posted August 8, 2023 Author Posted August 8, 2023 (edited) 10 hours ago, Magox said: Vivek's previously held views on masks. This was in July of 2020, when there was already plenty of available data that masks were not making any sort of a real impact. Here he is siding with Sanders for a national "Masks for all" plan. Here is Vivek deriding conservatives for opposing wearing masks. Here he is in 2022 still pushing masks and social distancing. The point is this, it's ok to have your positions to naturally evolve (even though there was plenty of evidence at the time to make a different determination), the issue is that there were a some people on the right that were fighting the fight in real time and taking heat for having at that time unpopular positions in the public who eventually were proven right. When the fight mattered, Vivek was on the side of mainstream thought. For me, that's an automatic disqualifier because it shows you who they are when the time counts. Interesting…definitely not a fan of the Soros comments, or that he was on a list of billionaires being praised by the WEF…🤔 Hopefully he will be asked about his mask stance in the debates… I certainly wouldn’t put it passed the global Establishment class to insert a double agent into the running in the Republican primary… After all, the WEF has bragged about getting their puppets elected into other countries…we shall see… EDIT: As I’ve had time to back and read his comments several more times, I noticed there isn’t much context, and that they could easily be misinterpreted… Case in point- Vivek never states that all Americans should be forced to wear masks…But instead, he suggests that the federal government should pay for masks for all Americans…He even says that it is “personal responsibility” instead of it being mandated…still would like to hear him clarify at the debates… Second, although I despise the Nazi, George Soros, Vivek is simply agreeing with him that the Chinese leader is dangerous to the free world… That being said, I always hold that it is of vital importance to always be skeptical of government and that’s what I try to do…👍 Edited August 9, 2023 by JaCrispy 3 1
JaCrispy Posted August 9, 2023 Author Posted August 9, 2023 This guy was born with a gift…Don’t know if he will ever be president, but you could tell, at a young age, he was meant to do great things…👍 2
B-Man Posted August 12, 2023 Posted August 12, 2023 I can only pray that the other candidates don't do this. 😆 2
JaCrispy Posted August 15, 2023 Author Posted August 15, 2023 4 hours ago, Magox said: Dude just oozes charisma…so glad he’s running…he makes it so much more interesting…👍 1 2
The Frankish Reich Posted August 15, 2023 Posted August 15, 2023 5 hours ago, Magox said: Does Vivek have kids? Because to me, 8 years old = 2nd grade. I thought I heard here that talking about anything related to sex with a 2nd grader was per se "grooming."
Magox Posted August 15, 2023 Posted August 15, 2023 3 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said: Does Vivek have kids? Because to me, 8 years old = 2nd grade. I thought I heard here that talking about anything related to sex with a 2nd grader was per se "grooming." Yeah, apparently Jay thought it was a positive tweet from him lol.
JaCrispy Posted August 15, 2023 Author Posted August 15, 2023 1 hour ago, Magox said: Yeah, apparently Jay thought it was a positive tweet from him lol. Anything above kindergarten is a step in the right direction…don’t ya think? 😉 2
The Frankish Reich Posted August 15, 2023 Posted August 15, 2023 8 minutes ago, JaCrispy said: Anything above kindergarten is a step in the right direction…don’t ya think? 😉 Sounds like a campaign slogan to me … Eight is Enough 1
BillsFanNC Posted August 16, 2023 Posted August 16, 2023 Great interview. The last answer is the best. He would seek Trumps advice about reducing federal bureaucracy. His #1 domestic policy agenda is to reduce federal head count by 75%. An essential move if we hope to root out the marxists. 1 1
Tommy Callahan Posted August 21, 2023 Posted August 21, 2023 Damn he called out black rock/vanguard. Hope he has good security https://twitter.com/VivekGRamaswamy/status/1693342053030051990?t=7GEbQoYmFkOJCVDtQc-n6g&s=19 1
The Frankish Reich Posted August 21, 2023 Posted August 21, 2023 (edited) 4 hours ago, Chris farley said: Damn he called out black rock/vanguard. Hope he has good security https://twitter.com/VivekGRamaswamy/status/1693342053030051990?t=7GEbQoYmFkOJCVDtQc-n6g&s=19 Here's what he posted: BlackRock, State Street, & Vanguard represent arguably the most powerful cartel in human history: they’re the largest shareholders of nearly every major public company (even of each other) & they use *your* own money to foist ESG agendas onto corporate boards - voting for “racial equity audits” & “Scope 3 emissions caps” that don’t advance your best financial interests. This raises serious fiduciary, antitrust, and conflict-of-interest concerns. So far, a legitimate point. These companies are, of course, the biggest shareholders because they run the biggest mutual funds. But then this: As President I will cut off the real hand that guides the ESG movement - not the invisible hand of the free market, but the invisible fist of government itself. This simply doesn't follow. He says private companies are behind the ESG investing agenda, but then blames the "invisible fist of the government itself." It probably sounds good to the low information voters he is courting, but it is meaningless. What he seems to want is MORE government regulation of the markets, to be achieved through government control, imposing new fiduciary standards on private investment companies. Remember that the next time this vulture investor talks about "too much regulation." https://www.politico.com/news/2023/05/23/vivek-ramaswamy-martin-shkreli-pharma-00098338 Edited August 21, 2023 by The Frankish Reich 1
Tommy Callahan Posted August 23, 2023 Posted August 23, 2023 (edited) On 8/21/2023 at 2:54 PM, The Frankish Reich said: Here's what he posted: BlackRock, State Street, & Vanguard represent arguably the most powerful cartel in human history: they’re the largest shareholders of nearly every major public company (even of each other) & they use *your* own money to foist ESG agendas onto corporate boards - voting for “racial equity audits” & “Scope 3 emissions caps” that don’t advance your best financial interests. This raises serious fiduciary, antitrust, and conflict-of-interest concerns. So far, a legitimate point. These companies are, of course, the biggest shareholders because they run the biggest mutual funds. But then this: As President I will cut off the real hand that guides the ESG movement - not the invisible hand of the free market, but the invisible fist of government itself. This simply doesn't follow. He says private companies are behind the ESG investing agenda, but then blames the "invisible fist of the government itself." It probably sounds good to the low information voters he is courting, but it is meaningless. What he seems to want is MORE government regulation of the markets, to be achieved through government control, imposing new fiduciary standards on private investment companies. Remember that the next time this vulture investor talks about "too much regulation." https://www.politico.com/news/2023/05/23/vivek-ramaswamy-martin-shkreli-pharma-00098338 None of those companies are private, they are publicly traded. You notice how much of the stimies went directly to Blackrock/Vanguard controlled companies? Same ones that also heavily support the left and the ESG, DEI movement. Its like a big circle. PACS get politicians elected, Politicians promote legislation and spending to Companies that PACS support. Companies fund the same PACS. maybe he is referencing removing tax exempt status from those groups (duel PAC/Charity) that rank and promote it. The duel "Political pac/charity" game is out of control. Edited August 23, 2023 by Chris farley
The Frankish Reich Posted August 23, 2023 Posted August 23, 2023 36 minutes ago, Chris farley said: maybe he is referencing removing tax exempt status from those groups (duel PAC/Charity) that rank and promote it. Well, then say what you mean. As it stands, we have a member of the capitalist/investor class calling out his colleagues for doing something he doesn't like, and saying he'll put a stop to all of that. How? To whom? With what limitations? Like I said: sounds oh-so-good and tough to low information voters. 1
Tommy Callahan Posted August 23, 2023 Posted August 23, 2023 1 hour ago, The Frankish Reich said: Well, then say what you mean. As it stands, we have a member of the capitalist/investor class calling out his colleagues for doing something he doesn't like, and saying he'll put a stop to all of that. How? To whom? With what limitations? Like I said: sounds oh-so-good and tough to low information voters. I kind of did. removing Tax exempt status from Charities playing PAC could be a start. If you're going to be a PAC, be a PAC. With all its financial disclosure regs. shouldn't have charities pushing wedge issues while also being a partisan PAC. I am in the boat that publicly trades corporations should not be funding and promoting parties thought Charities and PACS. Cause we get what we have now, a government that's representative of those groups, vs us.
Recommended Posts