@raphjd said in Pfizer Confirms COVID-Vaccinated People Can ‘Shed’ Spike Proteins And Harm The Unvaccinated:

https://www.nationaltimesaustralia.com/health/pfizer-confirms-covid-vaccinated-people-can-shed-spike-proteins-and-harm-the-unvaccinated/

What a piece of shit "reporting"... this is a right-wing Australian publication who is twisting a report of "all claims" as somehow a "confirmation" from Pfizer...

Once again, just a little "critical thinking" debunks some of these baseless claims:

• Your body is bombarded with billions of random "spike proteins" (and with certainty: deadly bacteria & active viruses themselves!) every minute of every day. But you have a natural protection barrier: your skin (though I suspect your's is so thin as to offer little, if any protection IRL!).
• For the COVID-19 spike proteins to cause a reaction in your body, they have to be INSIDE the body - where they themselves are completely harmless!
• The way the vaccine works is that these spike proteins trigger an immune response - that's the inflammation people report.
• You could literally drink a QUART of the vaccines and it wouldn't harm you... your digestive system is well accustomed to killing off bacteria and viruses, and digesting proteins - which is why this isn't an ORAL vaccine!
• The vaccine doesn't "course through your body" - it pretty much stays put in your arm muscle (where its been injected), which is why the inflammation and soreness typically linger there - at ther injection site.
• IF the vaccine NEEDED to "course through your body" to work, it would be injected into your blood stream, not a muscle - the way most antibiotics and drugs (not vaccines) are administered in hospitals. (IV drug users know the difference!).

Vaccines are not DRUGS - they are "cheat sheets" for your immune system. YOUR IMMUNE SYSTEM HAS TO DO THE WORK - which is why the vaccines don't work well (in some cases, at all) for immuno-compromised people.

Really people: take - just a little - time to learn HOW these things work, and the fucking magic disappears - and with it, the booga booga attempts to scare you!

@raphjd said in Is FOX even "news" anymore?:

@eobox91103

Hillary had more Russian collusion than Trump did.

It was the FBI that repeatedly lied to the FISA court. One FBI agent even illegally altered an official email to further the anti-Trump agenda.

Hillary Clinton was an awful candidate for President - I voted against her, and would again (gleefully!). That said, she didn't have any ties to Russians - or any other Foreign Governments - in the 2016 election cycle. And neither did her campaign.

Why? Because they were "old school" politicians who knew and understood the rules-of-engagement.

Trump and the Trump campaign did not - so when the Russians came a knockin' they didn't report it to the FBI (the way they were supposed to), they jumped at the chance! It was wrong of them, and it nearly got Trump impeached! (That is not what the first impeachment trial was about - the Dems never did get any evidence that Trump himself colluded - or even met with or talked to - actual Russians himself - so there were never any actual charges raised... and the "Special Prosecutor" admitted that he didn't file any charges against Trump - not because he was guilt-free, but because as the sitting President, he was untouchable.

But why let FACTS get in the way of your argument - you never have before! Hell, you've made them up before! I'm sure you'll make up some more now!

Even Derek Jeter admitted after he cheated and successfully claimed that a foul ball actually hit him on the hands... the real fault was, after all, the umpires, no? (that's an open question for Sports Fans to argue about for decades to come!)... the point is, mistakes happen... the real question (in my mind) isn't so much whether the amateurish Jared Kushner actually MET with the Russians (he did)... the real questions are:

• Did he know it was illegal when he did it?
• When did he learn/discover that it was illegal?
• Did he do it again after this discovery?
• How much and when was Trump himself involved.

Some of that may have been uncovered in the special prosecutor's investigations, but it hasn't been made public.

But this "our hands are clean" act - after SO MANY have been charged and convicted - is not fooling anyone!

To be perfectly clear: Kyle Rittenhouse absolutely DID kill 3 black men.

What he did NOT do, according to the jury, was murder them.

Facts and word choice matters!

@raphjd said in Waukesha Christmas Parade SUV Attack:

...
He only killed 2 people, lawfully.

Re-read your own post... he didn't kill... he only killed...
Why... you're Humpty Dumpty!

“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.”
“The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.”
- Lewis Carroll: Through the Looking-Glass, ca. 1871

YES! He (Rittenhouse) most certainly DID kill those men. But, YES, he was justified in doing so - according to the jury! Thus, it was not murder (nor manslaughter)... in legal terms, it was "justifiable homicide."

And in our legal system, THEIRS (the jury's, not yours, and not mine) is the decision/opinion that matters!

That he (Rittenhouse) killed them was never in doubt! There was plenty of evidence of that. The trial was about whether it was justified, not whether it ever happened!

If you believe in the jury system (and I do), then you have faith that the Rittenhouse jury got it right, and you equally must have faith that the Arbery jury did so as well!

Proof positive that the Republicans (Q-Anon & Trumpites) DO NOT have a lock on insane extremism! Dems have them too!

@raphjd said in Waukesha Christmas Parade SUV Attack:

@bi4smooth said in Waukesha Christmas Parade SUV Attack:

To be perfectly clear: Kyle Rittenhouse absolutely DID kill 3 black men.

What he did NOT do, according to the jury, was murder them.

Facts and word choice matters!

I'm quoting this for posterity, in case you try to edit your post claiming you never said this.

Kyle, despite what your liberal "news" outlets want everyone to believe even after the trial, DID NOT kill 3 black men.

He lawfully killed 2 white men and shot another white man.

Either you are a blatant liar, or you are just a tool who listens to liberal "news" and repeats the bullshit lies they spew.

Dude... you've done it again... He did not kill... followed by he did kill -- unless your issue is with 3 vs 2... so he killed 2 and nearly killed the 3rd... again, tho. the point of the trial was NEVER whether he shot at and killed anyone - he did.. the question at trial was: was it legal for him to have done so.

In Illinois, it was perfectly legal for him to do so (and in the same breath, you want to blame the Chicago (IL) mayor for all the homicides in her city! You kill me (jokingly) with the situational ethics!)

@raphjd said in Liberals are child and animal rapists:

@bi4smooth

Blah Blah Bloviated Blah...

So, you are saying it's the conservatives that are the ones that are once again pushing for pedo and animal rapists to become mainstream.

Define again - and show me a single mainstream politician (national) that is proposing to legalize pedo- or zoo-ophilia... EITHER PARTY!

That's as stupid as you claiming that Kyle Rittenhouse killed 3 black men in Illinois.

Sigh - that discussion was about using the word KILL vs MURDER, not about the race of the victims... leave it to you to focus on something non-salient to distract from your idiocy...

As for that book, you would have seen the video of the mother reading from the said book at the school board meeting and understood how pornographic it actually is.

I DO NOT CARE how "pornographic" you (or the mother) thought it was... that's not the point. Again, you never let facts get in the way of your moral outrage!

I do love how you play the victim. Even when I make a normal post that doesn't mention you, you have to get your panties in a bunch and attack me, then play the victim. Even if I do mention you, but just about how long I remember you posting here, you go all spastic and lose your rag. But you're the victim. Typical liberal.

ROFL - I am the one complaining (and even starting separate threads) to complain about being called names? I don't think so! Me thinks the lady (and I use the term VERY loosely) doth protest too much!

Just to summarize about 30% of your posts in the past year:

• You, being a white man, are constantly being persecuted by the liberal society

My own personal stance on that is:

• Me, being a white man, have continuously benefited from White Privilege - even when I didn't know it at the time. This fact was made especially clear to me once I became engaged to a Black man - and was exposed to the "same world" from his viewpoint.

Of course, the "liberal" media (like CNN?) would NEVER report on Biden's gaffe... would they?

Look, some media IS highly liberal - but how is that any different than the highly conservative media? The point it, there are FEW (if any) non-partisan news sources out there today - if that's even possible in today's world - for reason's I've discussed in other threads

Truth be told, the "mainstream media" pays a lot more attention to Democrat gaffes these days than to Republican ones (tho MTG is definitely trying!) - and for a simple reason: they're the ones in power!

They (Democrats) ARE the ones to blame for Gov't problems (and there continue to be a LOT of those!)... and @raphjd's favorite news whipping boy, CNN, didn't fail to catch Biden's mistakes - being harsher on is "memory" than even I was!

(The link to the CNN story is in the CNN name above).

Again:

• Did Biden make his FIRST overseas trip as a Senator to Israel? YES, among other places too!
• Did Biden meet with Israeli leaders during this trip, including PM Golda Meir? YES - though that isn't surprising! They would have treated ANY US Senator the same way!
• Was Biden shown Israeli war plans for the 6-days-war? NO! It was the Yom Kippur War - but he did discuss those plans with Meir.
• Did Biden fancy himself a potential liason (nay, even Ambassador) to potential Israeli / Arab / Palestinian peace talks? Yes his writings of the time clearly show that HE THOUGHT he would be an excellent candidate for that job, and was CERTAIN that he might be asked to do so... BUT, he was (almost laughably) mistaken... the idea that the re-elected (by a WIDE margin) Republican President Richard Nixon would tap a freshman Democrat Senator for such a highly important role is laughable - But Biden was only 30 at the time, and just elected Senator of Delaware... he can be given a little slack for thinking himself somewhat more important than he was at the time... it's called HUBRIS, and in my personal experience, it's far from RARE in 30 y/o men! Much less those who are Senators!
• WAS Biden used as ANY kind of liaison or ambassador in the Israeli conflicts of the 1970's - at all? NO! and, in part, because the Israelis wouldn't have him! You may have read the Israeli Times article quoted above? The Israelis weren't too keen on him THEN, and they really aren't so keen on him TODAY, either!
• Did the Israeli PM (Meir) invite Biden to Israel in 1973? YES, but it wasn't to be any kind of liaison - it was because Biden was also visiting Egypt on that visit, and they didn't want the Egyptians to be the only "input" the freshman Senator received.
• And finally: did Biden get some of his facts wrong about what he did (and why) FIFTY YEARS AGO? YES You betcha! Agreed! Totally!

But let me ask you: if you described your first date, would your memory of that even be the same as your date's? OK, go go with me here... does that mean that either of you is telling a LIE, just because your memory of how good the kiss (or the sex, for that matter!) was, or what they were wearing, is wrong?

Look - I teach my children this dictionary lesson all the time - because, like @raphjd, they know that the term LIE (and LYING) are incendiary - explosive, even!

To be a lie, the person has to know (or, at least believe) that what they are saying is untrue! If they didn't know (or believe) it was untrue, then they were just wrong, and not (generally) LYING.

Granted, we hold politicians - ESPECIALLY Presidents - to a higher standard... but I, again, think the facts speak for themselves: Biden got it wrong, but he wasn't LYING!

Oh, and the "liberal" CNN media completely overlooked the whole incident, because they let sitting Presidents "off the hook" *if they're Democrats!

DOH!

That's totally untrue! Was it a LIE, or just sarcasm...
You figure it out! Gotta love the English Language! LOL

@kekkaishi said in Once again, Biden can't stop lying:

I'm sorry to intervene again, it's just that I follow @raphjd so it's inevitable
Can each of you two share your age to put things into perspective a little? (you don't have to)

I'm 36

I'll be 58 later this month...

Lie:

1. to make an untrue statement with intent to deceive
2. something that intentionally misleads or deceives

So, a guy who truly believes that his wife - the mother of his children, and the love of his life - was killed by a drunk driver, and because the police didn't charge them as-such (indeed, never even tested the other driver), they're lying...

And in the same breath, you'll tout all the greatness (and infallibility) of He Who Must Be Named, His Orange-ship, Donald Trump... HIS record of telling the truth is better?

Dude! They're both old men - quickly approaching 80 - who get things WRONG. Don't we all? But (and even my 10-year-old kids get this): Being WRONG isn't the same thing as LYING!

When you FIRST claim that your inauguration was "the largest crowd in history" it's just being wrong. When you're shown photographic evidence, backed up by testimony of your own followers - that you were wrong, but you continue to make that claim, you cross over from just being wrong to lying.

But there's more to that analogy:

• Trump has much to gain by claiming to have had the largest crowd in history. There is an intent to deceive there!
• Just exactly what is the benefit to Biden when he claims he was in Israel just before the 6-days-war, when it was really the Yom-Kippur-war? What's the deception?

Biden has a well-established history of gaffes - and he still struggles with stuttering! Oh the inhumanity! GOD save us!

Actually - God (only one cap) is going to have to save us from the inflation these Gov't give-aways are going to cause for years to come! To call a Spade a Spade, the policies that incited this inflation started under Trump, but Biden has exacerbated them!

To be clear tho: Gov't spending (paying for actual things, or actual labor) isn't necessarily inflationary... Gov't giving away money - pumping cash into the economy with no purchase, no "benefit", just giving it away - is completely inflationary!

Under Trump, the "stimulus" was reasonable - inflationary, but inflation was historically low, and the economy had just taken a gut-punch. The 2nd Trump "stimulus" was purely political, and totally an inflationary event - causing people to not only spend unwisely, but also to expect to routinely collect money from the Gov't for free!.

Then, along came Biden - who wanted to show that HE TOO could give away trillions of dollars to people, in exchange for nothing - just free cash! Which piled on the inflationary pressures, and super-heated the economic demands - beyond the ability of the damaged infrastructure to keep up with - which accelerated the inflation even more.

In case you missed it: Jobless claims have dropped to their lowest levels in 52 years! (There are multiple underlying reasons for this - some good, some bad. But facts are facts).

@geobear40 said in Facebook uses 1st Amendment in lawsuit:

@bi4smooth
You are quite right to a point. Users of Facebook and other social media platforms are not their employees. It is also the governments responsibility to protect the 1st Amendment rights of the citizens from being infringed.

Please - PLEASE - listen to some of the lectures I posted above.

The Government DOES NOT protect your First Amendment Rights from others!

The First Amendment protects YOU from the Government!

The restrictions described in the First Amendment apply SOLELY to the Government! It is the Government who CANNOT infringe your right to free speech! Other people, other organizations, other groups of people, ABSOLUTELY can limit your free speech! It's a free country!

IT IS ONLY THE GOVERNMENT WHO CANNOT - under the First Amendment. There are other limitations placed on PEOPLE's (and organizations') free speech rights. Copyright laws & libel laws are easy examples.

NOTE: when I libel you, I will face CIVIL charges, not criminal ones! Likewise, if I infringe your copyright, I am CIVILLY charged, not criminally! The Government does not charge me with libel or copyright infringement, some other person (or people) do! And, it's not a First Amendment case!

There have been tons of court cases:

• Can the Government sue me for libel because I called the President a fascist (or claimed he impregnated a communist spy)? NO This is a First Amendment issue - I can say anything I want about the Government - even libelous things!
• Can the President him/herself sue me for libel? NO This is also a First Amendment issue: although, if the complaint didn't have a governmental component - e.g. I claimed Mr. Trump fixed the Ms Universe pageants in the 1990s in exchange for sexual favors), he could sue AFTER his term as President ended (and he was no longer President), but not while he was President (as President, he IS the Executive Branch of the US Government!)
• Can I sue the Government for libel? YES the First Amendment protections ONLY apply to the Government!
• Can the Government sue a newspaper to prevent them from publishing stolen plans for invading another country? NO They are protected by the First Amendment!
• Can the filmmakers of the new Harry Potter flick sue a newspaper to prevent them from publishing stolen scripts and revealing the plot of the movie? YES The movie company is NOT the Government! There is no First Amendment protection for the paper against suits, or even censorship of copyrighted material, from individuals!

@raphjd said in NYC Dem councilwoman is racist against latinos:

https://notthebee.com/article/a-new-york-city-councilwoman-voted-against-allowing-noncitizens-to-vote-because-she-was-worried-that-latino-voters-might-use-the-law-to-vote-republican

I guess liberal media will call this "white supremacy" because everything is white supremacy no matter the races involved.

Oddly, a liberal black woman doesn't want brown people to vote, in the guise of equality.

Of course, there's the whole non-citizens being able to vote in NYC elections.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that only those in the country legally can vote in NYC elections, unlike in San Francisco which allows illegals to vote as well.

So.... let this be your correction: NYC just voted to let ANYONE vote in City elections - regardless of citizenship.

This NYC councilwoman - a black woman - voted to keep the status-quo (wherein you have to be a citizen, and registered to vote) - and now she's getting it from both sides!

• Liberals are hating on her for not allowing illegals to vote
• Conservatives are hating on her for the same thing (because she defied expectations, and because of some of her stated reasons WHY)

Black Woman vilified ... does there NEED to be a reason in the US in today's political climate?
I mean, really, doesn't it really come down to: she didn't vote liberal enough for the liberals and she wasn't conservative enough for the conservatives... and there is no middle anymore, so she's just an awful person for not meeting the expectations of others...

It's ridiculous that NYC wants to let non-citizens vote, but it's their city! They can choose to allow cats to vote too! (But not dogs! Dogs are too dumb! LOL)

@geobear40 said in Pennsylvania Supreme Court Rules Mask Mandate For School Children Is Illegal:

@bi4smooth
You are not following the science.

Children have a zero percent chance of dying from Covid 19.

FALSE

The studies that prove anything less then a N95 mask does nothing to stop the virus.

FALSE

The socialization and mental health harm to children forced to wear masks.

NOT SHOWN (I can't say FALSE here, because there haven't been any real studies... what HAS been shown is that the remote-learning experiment of 2020 was a colossal failure - few children were able to learn much of anything over zoom classrooms, and the vast majority essentially lost the year.)

IMHO, if the local area is in a COVID outbreak / hotzone, the local schools and/or school board should be allowed to require students and staff to wear masks.

The point of agreement here is that STATE-WIDE mandates - EITHER WAY : either requiring masks or not allowing masks - is state government overreach, and NATIONAL mask mandates are overreach by an order of magnitude worse!

@lololulu19 said in NYC Dem councilwoman is racist against latinos:

@geobear40 here's an idea.. require a social security number to vote. and that number is on the ballot. That would not only verify that the person was a citizen, but also prevent people from voting more than once.. and having their votes counted more than once.

You apparently are not aware that Social Security cards are NOT identification cards, that they're easily faked, and that many non-US Citizens have SSN-like numbers. Furthermore, LOTS of people who DO have Social Security cards are NOT allowed to vote!

Maybe, just maybe, we should have something that's special for voting... you know, an ID card just for voting! You could print people's party affiliation, and what districts they lived in - you know, for Congress, the state legislature, and even local districts! We could call it a VOTER ID CARD

In case you couldn't TASTE the sarcasm, at least here in Florida, I've had one for 40 years now! And it's exactly as I described above...

@raphjd said in Pennsylvania Supreme Court Rules Mask Mandate For School Children Is Illegal:

https://djhjmedia.com/rich/pennsylvania-supreme-court-rules-mask-mandate-for-school-children-is-illegal/

It will be interesting to see the written opinions...

IMHO: The state-wide mask mandates are overreach, but the local ones are not. If the virus is "run amok" in a community, they should have the power and authority to mandate children wear masks (or close the schools) as an "order of protection"... But unless you're talking about Rhode Island, STATES are too big (and the whole country is by an order of magnitude too big) to be making these decisions...

When the Trump Administration shut down the economy in the early days of the pandemic, we saw large areas of the country - almost untouched, as-yet, by COVID-19 - having to shut down and "hide" from a threat that wasn't there yet! It was a knee-jerk decision - and not one I opposed at the time! I fully admit to hindsight being 20-20!

But I believe that this early overreaction is, in part, what led much of rural America to believe that COVID-19 wasn't so bad, or was a HOAX to begin with!

I'm a believer in empowering local governments to do what's right for their own communities, with larger jurisdictions coming into play (like states and the federal government) when coordination and uniformity are required. Masks in schools does not require that...

Thus, I am just as opposed to my State's Governor's Executive Order prohibiting mask mandates as I am of the PA Governor's order requiring them!

In my view, local School Boards need to be making these calls - and in some areas, individual school Principals! Most States are FAR TOO BIG to be making these sweeping COVID response requirements, when different communities are seeing different situations!

Finally: this opinion should not be conflated with my belief that certain people can, and should, be required to be vaccinated (including COVID-19), depending on many factors - including their jobs!

@geobear40 said in Pennsylvania Supreme Court Rules Mask Mandate For School Children Is Illegal:

@bi4smooth
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/47-studies-confirm-inefectiveness-of-masks-for-covid-and-32-more-confirm-their-negative-health-effects/

https://healthpolicy.usc.edu/article/mandatory-masking-of-school-children-is-a-bad-idea/

So my statements are not false at best the science is not settled.

Again you put way to much trust in the Government and Lord Fauci

The CONSENSUS of Scientists is that the Earth is round and orbits the Sun... however, there are SOME SCIENTISTS who insist that the Earth is flat and that the Sun circles (not orbits) the Earth...

The CONSENSUS of Scientists is that masks DO WORK to slow the spread of aerated, respiratory viruses - like COVID-19. The permeability of the mask is of little consequence, as the point (work) of the mask isn't to block the virus itself, but to block the aeration/air flow and the water droplets that CARRY the virus.

I consider the flat-earth question settled, but admit that there are some that will never - EVER - be convinced.

I consider the mask issue settled, but admit that there are some (like yourself) that will never - EVER - be convinced.

@geobear40 said in Pennsylvania Supreme Court Rules Mask Mandate For School Children Is Illegal:

@bi4smooth
Being straight or gay is not a "lifestyle" and if you think that you are still pretending to be something and not being yourself.

Your vocabulary is insufficient here... perhaps you're confusing "lifestyle" with "orientation" or "desire"??? I don't know - but:

A "lifestyle" is how you choose to live... and that means it's a way of BEHAVING. I am trying to live a more active lifestyle as part of my "healthy living" initiative... that means I choose to do more active things: like walking and riding my new bicycle!

When I have been in relationships (including a 15-year marriage to one) with women, I have chosen to only have sex with them! That's a monogamous, straight, lifestyle! Straight in that I only had sex with women, or more grammatically correct: a woman! THAT woman! It does NOT mean I lost my attraction to men - or other women, for that matter - only that I choose to not act on those desires while I'm in a relationship!

Likewise, when I have been (as I am currently) in a relationship with a man, I chose (and currently choose) to only have sex with him! That's a monogamous, gay, lifestyle! Gay in that I only had (have) sex with men (him)! It doesn't mean I have lost my attraction to women - or to other men, for that matter - only that I choose to not act on those desires while I'm in this relationship!

There have been other times in my life that I've chosen to be monogamous... as well as times I have chosen NOT to be... But never - since the age of 12, and I first came to terms with the fact that I was neither gay nor straight - have I deluded myself into thinking my attraction to other people could be controlled or changed. This is the way "my wiring" works, and I'm fine with it.

My sexual desires (fantasies) do not change when I'm in a relationship - only my chosen behavior does! If you behave the same in a relationship as you did before the relationship, then that's you - and you should be you. But I'm glad I AM NOT dating you!

Or, perhaps you are of the misguided belief that my ex-wife didn't know I was pan-sexual? Before we even dated, much less had sex, got married, had kids, adopted more kids, and later got divorced!

Or, perhaps you thought I somehow hid my NINE CHILDREN and their mother from my former fiance? Or even my current boyfriend?

Or, maybe you, as so many others - ESPECIALLY GAY MEN, in my personal experience - want to force my sexual orientation into one of your neat & tidy little labels.

Mind you - I'm not saying I can (or do) choose to be straight or gay... it's not a "binary" equation!

I AM pansexual: my physical attraction goes either way, and my emotional attraction to someone does not depend on their sexual equipment! I have no difficulty being satisfied - sexually and emotionally - by a woman (as evidenced by a 15-year faithful marriage to one!); nor do I have any difficulty doing the same with a man (as evidenced by the 5-year relationship with a man - one that ended in tragedy, not divorce).

But more importantly, I am describing ME, and ONLY ME!

I do not have the HUBRIS (or gall!) to tell others what THEY should do! While I may be perfectly fine spending 15 years with a woman, and forsaking all others - including (especially?) men - while I was in that marriage; that doesn't mean YOU would (or should) be!
I might be equally fine trading in a wife for a husband... but that doesn't mean YOU should (or could) be!
I might be fine living monogamously when I'm in a relationship! But, that doesn't mean YOU should (or have to) be!

Maybe that is why you think of the government as your parent telling you how you should live your life.

You've got the wrong straw-man, my friend... I am no friend of big-government! As I've stated in another thread, I'm just as much against the NY Governor mandating masks in her State as I am against the FL Governor prohibiting mask requirements in his State! The pandemic's effects are not evenly distributed - and the best place to make decisions like that is in the LOCAL governments!

If NYC (or Jackonville, FL) is having a COVID-19 outbreak, they should be allowed to enact a local mask mandate, and to lift it when the danger passes. But the folks in Lake Placid (or Lake Panasoffkee) shouldn't have to mask up because there is an outbreak hundreds of miles away!

Now, if your stance is that we shouldn't have any kind of public-health response to COVID-19 - just let people do what they want to do - well, that's just anarchy... and I'm not an anarchist. We DO need SOME rules, otherwise society breaks down.

Again, my personally: I'd rather local mask mandates on an as-needed basis than a national (or state) wide vaccine mandate! But the vaccine question takes us back to the "your private employer is not the same as the government" argument.

The Government shouldn't be able to force everyone to get a vaccine, but your employer should have that right - even if your employer is the Government!

Want simpler answers? Go back to 2nd Grade! This is real-world stuff... this shit gets complicated FAST!

@raphjd said in Pennsylvania Supreme Court Rules Mask Mandate For School Children Is Illegal:

@bi4smooth

You believe that businesses have rights and people don't unless businesses (sometimes the government too) allow them to.

Thank you, once again @raphjd for that lucid and coherent explanation of what other people think... your clairvoyant abilities continue to astound us (or is that, confound us?)

What ever would I do in life, were it not for your clarifying my own thoughts for me!

Here's an idea: the next time you want to start a sentence with the words "you think" or "you believe" - think again! Erase that part and start over...

@raphjd said in Pennsylvania Supreme Court Rules Mask Mandate For School Children Is Illegal:

@bi4smooth

Hey dumbass, you can watch the news on YouTube.

You can also watch videos of people discussing news articles/videos.

You can also watch Congress on YouTube.

You can watch police press conferences on YouTube.

But, be a cuntish Ms Feng Feng, as always.

yes, but you can also find videos of dogs and cats sleeping together (sleeping - get your mind out of the gutter) and how-to videos on how to masturbate a horse (for breeding, you filthy-minded whore!)

The point isn't that you can't find videos on YouTube, but that YouTube isn't -by itself- a source for verified news... um, in other words, it's not a news source (just a video source).

@lololulu19 said in Biden now OWNS the Covid Virus!:

@geobear40 The main issues now are... the 2020 vaccines are useless against the new strains of Covid.. so all the vaccinations given so far.. are meaningless.

False - to the point of absurdity!

The vaccines are providing about 70% protection against hospitalization (severe illness) from Omicron, with "natural immunity" (from prior COVID-19 infection) providing about 50% protection....

It is insane to give people the false idea that masks protect them, when it has been established that masks do more harm than good.

False - beyond absurdity!

In a separate thread I posted a list of more than a dozen links - not to news outlets, or political sites - but medical journals from multiple countries showing quite the opposite: masks of all kinds offer substantial (but far from total) protection from aerated COVID-19 infection.

One thing that should be done is to take the temperatures of everybody crossing a border or going on a trip that will take several hours for several reasons:
If cooped up next to someone for several hours who is sick - no matter what the disease - there is a high risk of getting that disease.
The people who are sick with a high temperature are not only at high risk for giving their disease to others, but also at high risk of being infected by others. For instance.. an unspoken reason why cruise ships are not more popular than they are is because they are incubators for disease. You are cramped in with thousands of other people for several days or even weeks, and you are inundated with their germs in the shared pools, dining rooms, restrooms, etc. The sick people don't have the luxury of staying away from other people when they are on a cruise ship.

That's a lot to unpack, but I must agree with final conclusion: now is NOT a good time to go on a cruise!

I haven't been sick from a disease in over 20 years. I have not been vaccinated, and I've never had Covid. My immune system is strong because I'm not a smoker nor drug abuser nor prescription drug user either. All these people popping pills for their anxiety, depression and mental problems are compromising their immune systems.

Statistical samples of 1 are always definitive! I'm glad you've been healthy, but your good fortunes (on many levels) hardly apply to large populations...