ok, I guess if someone is a dick that means every word out of their mouths is a lie. interesting take.
No, just him in this case. It's too convenient. The money is immaterial but it's embarrassing for him to be invested in a covid treatment when he's been so vocally dismissive of the pandemic and any mitigation efforts .. all of them.
He's been dismissive of the restrictions, not treatments. he got the vaccine. and he tells people to get it if they want it.
look, I've been thinking about the republican end of this. while i find it abhorrent that R governors are opening things up when it's the absolute worst time to do so, I do understand their line of thinking: "the vaccine is available country-wide, people have had the opportunity to get the shot or not, and we can't wait anymore". Let me be crystal clear: I find this stance unconscionable, but it's consistent with R ideology: individual freedom or death.
I watched his "choose freedom" video and I misunderstood something he said about the vaccine.
Here's the thing. I've watched Rand closely over the years, as I found him interesting when he was first elected as a senator. He seemed principled and was willing to buck traditional views on both sides of the aisle. But over the past decade, he's devolved into someone even worse than a known partisan. I've found him disingenuous, deceitful and just as prone to ridiculous, hyperbolic statements as anyone. He is no Justin Amash who appears to be a truly principled libertarian. So he gets no benefit of the doubt from me. His continued badgering of Fauci both in hearings and now in a criminal referral is repulsive. He's worse than any other senator on the Hill in that respect,
There's seems to be something that happened when he, Lindsey Graham, and others went golfing with TFG. It can't be that the golf was soooo awesome (we all know TFG cheats at golf). My assumption has been blackmail of some sort, but I suppose that belongs in another thread.
I have no love for Rand Paul at this point, either. However, given that his wife lost money on the deal and knowing full well that things like this *can* happen, I'm not inclined to get agitated about this story. I WOULD like people to remember how certain senators were briefed on the coronavirus early last year and then sprinted to call their brokers and money managers before doing a damn thing on the public health front. That's worth remembering.
Lindsay was absolutely blackmailed. There's no doubt in my mind.
For Rand, I'm not agitated, but I'm not surprised either. Nor is my instinct to believe he forgot to submit that.
If you haven't been following Ed Yong's writing on the pandemic, you should. He won a Pulitzer for good reason -- thoroughly researched, clearly and thoughtfully-written reporting. He has a new piece up today on The Atlantic that offers, IMO, great coverage of where we are, where we're going, and how delta changed everything. It should NOT be paywalled.
excellent article. and also underlines one of the points I made before that some dismissed:
Finally, the U.S. simply needs more time to reach unvaccinated people. This group is often wrongly portrayed as a monolithic bunch of stubborn anti-vaxxers who have made their choice. But in addition to young children, it includes people with food insecurity, eviction risk, and low incomes. It includes people who still have concerns about safety and are waiting on the FDA’s full approval, people who come from marginalized communities and have reasonable skepticism about the medical establishment, and people who have neither the time to get their shots nor the leave to recover from side effects.
If you haven't been following Ed Yong's writing on the pandemic, you should. He won a Pulitzer for good reason -- thoroughly researched, clearly and thoughtfully-written reporting. He has a new piece up today on The Atlantic that offers, IMO, great coverage of where we are, where we're going, and how delta changed everything. It should NOT be paywalled.
excellent article. and also underlines one of the points I made before that some dismissed:
Finally, the U.S. simply needs more time to reach unvaccinated people. This group is often wrongly portrayed as a monolithic bunch of stubborn anti-vaxxers who have made their choice. But in addition to young children, it includes people with food insecurity, eviction risk, and low incomes. It includes people who still have concerns about safety and are waiting on the FDA’s full approval, people who come from marginalized communities and have reasonable skepticism about the medical establishment, and people who have neither the time to get their shots nor the leave to recover from side effects.
that is all well and good, but these are the exact same people who will not mask up and also accost those of us that do, and sue politicians that try to implement basic public safety protocols.
cdc has been advocating for masks for 17 months and vaccines for about 8 months. these people are not even doing the bare minimum to protect themselves. let alone other people.
i would bet almost anything that even when cdc approves the vaccines, there will be fewer than expected people rushing out to get them. that is how many stubborn, selfish, americans are. you can come to their house and offer to give them the vaccine and they would tell you to get off of their property.
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
If you haven't been following Ed Yong's writing on the pandemic, you should. He won a Pulitzer for good reason -- thoroughly researched, clearly and thoughtfully-written reporting. He has a new piece up today on The Atlantic that offers, IMO, great coverage of where we are, where we're going, and how delta changed everything. It should NOT be paywalled.
excellent article. and also underlines one of the points I made before that some dismissed:
Finally, the U.S. simply needs more time to reach unvaccinated people. This group is often wrongly portrayed as a monolithic bunch of stubborn anti-vaxxers who have made their choice. But in addition to young children, it includes people with food insecurity, eviction risk, and low incomes. It includes people who still have concerns about safety and are waiting on the FDA’s full approval, people who come from marginalized communities and have reasonable skepticism about the medical establishment, and people who have neither the time to get their shots nor the leave to recover from side effects.
that is all well and good, but these are the exact same people who will not mask up and also accost those of us that do, and sue politicians that try to implement basic public safety protocols.
cdc has been advocating for masks for 17 months and vaccines for about 8 months. these people are not even doing the bare minimum to protect themselves. let alone other people.
i would bet almost anything that even when cdc approves the vaccines, there will be fewer than expected people rushing out to get them. that is how many stubborn, selfish, americans are. you can come to their house and offer to give them the vaccine and they would tell you to get off of their property.
I should have italicized what group I was referring to:
If you haven't been following Ed Yong's writing on the pandemic, you should. He won a Pulitzer for good reason -- thoroughly researched, clearly and thoughtfully-written reporting. He has a new piece up today on The Atlantic that offers, IMO, great coverage of where we are, where we're going, and how delta changed everything. It should NOT be paywalled.
excellent article. and also underlines one of the points I made before that some dismissed:
Finally, the U.S. simply needs more time to reach unvaccinated people. This group is often wrongly portrayed as a monolithic bunch of stubborn anti-vaxxers who have made their choice. But in addition to young children, it includes people with food insecurity, eviction risk, and low incomes. It includes people who still have concerns about safety and are waiting on the FDA’s full approval, people who come from marginalized communities and have reasonable skepticism about the medical establishment, and people who have neither the time to get their shots nor the leave to recover from side effects.
that is all well and good, but these are the exact same people who will not mask up and also accost those of us that do, and sue politicians that try to implement basic public safety protocols.
cdc has been advocating for masks for 17 months and vaccines for about 8 months. these people are not even doing the bare minimum to protect themselves. let alone other people.
i would bet almost anything that even when cdc approves the vaccines, there will be fewer than expected people rushing out to get them. that is how many stubborn, selfish, americans are. you can come to their house and offer to give them the vaccine and they would tell you to get off of their property.
I should have italicized what group I was referring to:
these people are listening to the government when it comes to getting assistance with food and how to prolong the process of being evicted. what is the common theme of them refusing vaccines? it is because they are in red states.
they trust the government enough when it comes to assistance, but can't trust it when it comes to the most important function of public safety.
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
If you haven't been following Ed Yong's writing on the pandemic, you should. He won a Pulitzer for good reason -- thoroughly researched, clearly and thoughtfully-written reporting. He has a new piece up today on The Atlantic that offers, IMO, great coverage of where we are, where we're going, and how delta changed everything. It should NOT be paywalled.
excellent article. and also underlines one of the points I made before that some dismissed:
Finally, the U.S. simply needs more time to reach unvaccinated people. This group is often wrongly portrayed as a monolithic bunch of stubborn anti-vaxxers who have made their choice. But in addition to young children, it includes people with food insecurity, eviction risk, and low incomes. It includes people who still have concerns about safety and are waiting on the FDA’s full approval, people who come from marginalized communities and have reasonable skepticism about the medical establishment, and people who have neither the time to get their shots nor the leave to recover from side effects.
that is all well and good, but these are the exact same people who will not mask up and also accost those of us that do, and sue politicians that try to implement basic public safety protocols.
cdc has been advocating for masks for 17 months and vaccines for about 8 months. these people are not even doing the bare minimum to protect themselves. let alone other people.
i would bet almost anything that even when cdc approves the vaccines, there will be fewer than expected people rushing out to get them. that is how many stubborn, selfish, americans are. you can come to their house and offer to give them the vaccine and they would tell you to get off of their property.
I should have italicized what group I was referring to:
I'm a bit baffled about the eviction risk mention though because there has been a moratorium f.o.r.e.v.e.r. The government has propped up a few of these basic needs for months. The low income isn't going to change though, but if you have kids under 18 you received a lot of money last year to help supplement some of issues that may be associated to missing work for the shots and recovery. I'm sure there are asshole employers out there who won't allow the time off, but it can't be that big of a number.
If you haven't been following Ed Yong's writing on the pandemic, you should. He won a Pulitzer for good reason -- thoroughly researched, clearly and thoughtfully-written reporting. He has a new piece up today on The Atlantic that offers, IMO, great coverage of where we are, where we're going, and how delta changed everything. It should NOT be paywalled.
excellent article. and also underlines one of the points I made before that some dismissed:
Finally, the U.S. simply needs more time to reach unvaccinated people. This group is often wrongly portrayed as a monolithic bunch of stubborn anti-vaxxers who have made their choice. But in addition to young children, it includes people with food insecurity, eviction risk, and low incomes. It includes people who still have concerns about safety and are waiting on the FDA’s full approval, people who come from marginalized communities and have reasonable skepticism about the medical establishment, and people who have neither the time to get their shots nor the leave to recover from side effects.
that is all well and good, but these are the exact same people who will not mask up and also accost those of us that do, and sue politicians that try to implement basic public safety protocols.
cdc has been advocating for masks for 17 months and vaccines for about 8 months. these people are not even doing the bare minimum to protect themselves. let alone other people.
i would bet almost anything that even when cdc approves the vaccines, there will be fewer than expected people rushing out to get them. that is how many stubborn, selfish, americans are. you can come to their house and offer to give them the vaccine and they would tell you to get off of their property.
I should have italicized what group I was referring to:
these people are listening to the government when it comes to getting assistance with food and how to prolong the process of being evicted. what is the common theme of them refusing vaccines? it is because they are in red states.
they trust the government enough when it comes to assistance, but can't trust it when it comes to the most important function of public safety.
We seem to be on different planes here with the point: there is a subset of people that cannot get the vaccine because of ACCESS because of the variables mentioned above, not because they don't want to.
If you haven't been following Ed Yong's writing on the pandemic, you should. He won a Pulitzer for good reason -- thoroughly researched, clearly and thoughtfully-written reporting. He has a new piece up today on The Atlantic that offers, IMO, great coverage of where we are, where we're going, and how delta changed everything. It should NOT be paywalled.
excellent article. and also underlines one of the points I made before that some dismissed:
Finally, the U.S. simply needs more time to reach unvaccinated people. This group is often wrongly portrayed as a monolithic bunch of stubborn anti-vaxxers who have made their choice. But in addition to young children, it includes people with food insecurity, eviction risk, and low incomes. It includes people who still have concerns about safety and are waiting on the FDA’s full approval, people who come from marginalized communities and have reasonable skepticism about the medical establishment, and people who have neither the time to get their shots nor the leave to recover from side effects.
that is all well and good, but these are the exact same people who will not mask up and also accost those of us that do, and sue politicians that try to implement basic public safety protocols.
cdc has been advocating for masks for 17 months and vaccines for about 8 months. these people are not even doing the bare minimum to protect themselves. let alone other people.
i would bet almost anything that even when cdc approves the vaccines, there will be fewer than expected people rushing out to get them. that is how many stubborn, selfish, americans are. you can come to their house and offer to give them the vaccine and they would tell you to get off of their property.
I should have italicized what group I was referring to:
I'm a bit baffled about the eviction risk mention though because there has been a moratorium f.o.r.e.v.e.r. The government has propped up a few of these basic needs for months. The low income isn't going to change though, but if you have kids under 18 you received a lot of money last year to help supplement some of issues that may be associated to missing work for the shots and recovery. I'm sure there are asshole employers out there who won't allow the time off, but it can't be that big of a number.
this reminds me of republicans contending that marginalized communities "could vote if they really wanted to".
I have pretty much thought of her as a fanatical lunatic, now I am thinking she might be more evil than crazy.
I don't think it's either. breaking it down to its most basic, far right Republicans are for personal freedom over everything (liberty or death), Democrats are for the collective good. This falls in line exactly how one would expect for far right R's.
I have pretty much thought of her as a fanatical lunatic, now I am thinking she might be more evil than crazy.
I don't think it's either. breaking it down to its most basic, far right Republicans are for personal freedom over everything (liberty or death), Democrats are for the collective good. This falls in line exactly how one would expect for far right R's.
This isn't the traditional stance of Republicans, nor is their stance on gay rights consistent with personal freedom. It's total crap.
I have pretty much thought of her as a fanatical lunatic, now I am thinking she might be more evil than crazy.
I don't think it's either. breaking it down to its most basic, far right Republicans are for personal freedom over everything (liberty or death), Democrats are for the collective good. This falls in line exactly how one would expect for far right R's.
How about a state law from a republican legislature restricting private business' right to choose who they do & don't want to serve?
I have pretty much thought of her as a fanatical lunatic, now I am thinking she might be more evil than crazy.
I don't think it's either. breaking it down to its most basic, far right Republicans are for personal freedom over everything (liberty or death), Democrats are for the collective good. This falls in line exactly how one would expect for far right R's.
This isn't the traditional stance of Republicans, nor is their stance on gay rights consistent with personal freedom. It's total crap.
who said anything about "traditional" republicans? or republicans being consistent? lol
I have pretty much thought of her as a fanatical lunatic, now I am thinking she might be more evil than crazy.
I don't think it's either. breaking it down to its most basic, far right Republicans are for personal freedom over everything (liberty or death), Democrats are for the collective good. This falls in line exactly how one would expect for far right R's.
This isn't the traditional stance of Republicans, nor is their stance on gay rights consistent with personal freedom. It's total crap.
who said anything about "traditional" republicans? or republicans being consistent? lol
Then it's not being for personal freedom. That's a ruse. It means they are either against vaccines or against Democrats (or likely against D's therefore against vaccines).
I have pretty much thought of her as a fanatical lunatic, now I am thinking she might be more evil than crazy.
I don't think it's either. breaking it down to its most basic, far right Republicans are for personal freedom over everything (liberty or death), Democrats are for the collective good. This falls in line exactly how one would expect for far right R's.
This isn't the traditional stance of Republicans, nor is their stance on gay rights consistent with personal freedom. It's total crap.
who said anything about "traditional" republicans? or republicans being consistent? lol
Then it's not being for personal freedom. That's a ruse. It means they are either against vaccines or against Democrats (or likely against D's therefore against vaccines).
1000%
They want to see the vaccine's fail.
If they succeed, it's a win for the Biden administration & America doing well under a democrat president is the absolute worst case scenario for republicans at this point.
There's a reason why republicans haven't reprimanded / spoken out against MTG: she's good for their bottom line, which is undermining the opposition party. (AKA owning libs)
I have pretty much thought of her as a fanatical lunatic, now I am thinking she might be more evil than crazy.
I don't think it's either. breaking it down to its most basic, far right Republicans are for personal freedom over everything (liberty or death), Democrats are for the collective good. This falls in line exactly how one would expect for far right R's.
How about a state law from a republican legislature restricting private business' right to choose who they do & don't want to serve?
Not allowing people the personal freedom to kill themselves, others, and perpetuate terrible behavior by getting fucking hammered and driving home without a damn mask on.
What is the world coming to!
People fought for my right to get smashed without a mask on and drive home!
Land of the free and home of the brave. Yeah, right!
I have pretty much thought of her as a fanatical lunatic, now I am thinking she might be more evil than crazy.
I don't think it's either. breaking it down to its most basic, far right Republicans are for personal freedom over everything (liberty or death), Democrats are for the collective good. This falls in line exactly how one would expect for far right R's.
How about a state law from a republican legislature restricting private business' right to choose who they do & don't want to serve?
Not allowing people the personal freedom to kill themselves, others, and perpetuate terrible behavior by getting fucking hammered and driving home without a damn mask on.
What is the world coming to!
People fought for my right to get smashed without a mask on and drive home!
Land of the free and home of the brave. Yeah, right!
Nothing screams conservative government like *checks notes* regulating the shit out of private business.
I have pretty much thought of her as a fanatical lunatic, now I am thinking she might be more evil than crazy.
I don't think it's either. breaking it down to its most basic, far right Republicans are for personal freedom over everything (liberty or death), Democrats are for the collective good. This falls in line exactly how one would expect for far right R's.
How about a state law from a republican legislature restricting private business' right to choose who they do & don't want to serve?
Not allowing people the personal freedom to kill themselves, others, and perpetuate terrible behavior by getting fucking hammered and driving home without a damn mask on.
What is the world coming to!
People fought for my right to get smashed without a mask on and drive home!
Land of the free and home of the brave. Yeah, right!
Nothing screams conservative government like *checks notes* regulating the shit out of private business.
I have pretty much thought of her as a fanatical lunatic, now I am thinking she might be more evil than crazy.
I don't think it's either. breaking it down to its most basic, far right Republicans are for personal freedom over everything (liberty or death), Democrats are for the collective good. This falls in line exactly how one would expect for far right R's.
How about a state law from a republican legislature restricting private business' right to choose who they do & don't want to serve?
Not allowing people the personal freedom to kill themselves, others, and perpetuate terrible behavior by getting fucking hammered and driving home without a damn mask on.
What is the world coming to!
People fought for my right to get smashed without a mask on and drive home!
Land of the free and home of the brave. Yeah, right!
Nothing screams conservative government like *checks notes* regulating the shit out of private business.
This! The party of small government, until people try to do something they don't approve of or like.
I have pretty much thought of her as a fanatical lunatic, now I am thinking she might be more evil than crazy.
I don't think it's either. breaking it down to its most basic, far right Republicans are for personal freedom over everything (liberty or death), Democrats are for the collective good. This falls in line exactly how one would expect for far right R's.
How about a state law from a republican legislature restricting private business' right to choose who they do & don't want to serve?
Not allowing people the personal freedom to kill themselves, others, and perpetuate terrible behavior by getting fucking hammered and driving home without a damn mask on.
What is the world coming to!
People fought for my right to get smashed without a mask on and drive home!
Land of the free and home of the brave. Yeah, right!
Nothing screams conservative government like *checks notes* regulating the shit out of private business.
This! The party of small government, until people try to do something they don't approve of or like.
Historically, they have advocated for local gov't. In other words, the best gov't is the one that is closest to the people. Yet TX and FL gov continue to strong arm, threaten and pass laws that take away that ability from their local gov't in their state.
I have pretty much thought of her as a fanatical lunatic, now I am thinking she might be more evil than crazy.
I don't think it's either. breaking it down to its most basic, far right Republicans are for personal freedom over everything (liberty or death), Democrats are for the collective good. This falls in line exactly how one would expect for far right R's.
This isn't the traditional stance of Republicans, nor is their stance on gay rights consistent with personal freedom. It's total crap.
who said anything about "traditional" republicans? or republicans being consistent? lol
Then it's not being for personal freedom. That's a ruse. It means they are either against vaccines or against Democrats (or likely against D's therefore against vaccines).
wait. you said personal freedom isn't the stance of traditional republicans. I said I wasn't talking about traditional republicans. then you said "then it's not about personal freedom". so you don't believe ANY republican has a legitimate stance of personal freedoms? it's all a ruse, no matter who it is or their reasoning?
I have pretty much thought of her as a fanatical lunatic, now I am thinking she might be more evil than crazy.
I don't think it's either. breaking it down to its most basic, far right Republicans are for personal freedom over everything (liberty or death), Democrats are for the collective good. This falls in line exactly how one would expect for far right R's.
This isn't the traditional stance of Republicans, nor is their stance on gay rights consistent with personal freedom. It's total crap.
who said anything about "traditional" republicans? or republicans being consistent? lol
Then it's not being for personal freedom. That's a ruse. It means they are either against vaccines or against Democrats (or likely against D's therefore against vaccines).
wait. you said personal freedom isn't the stance of traditional republicans. I said I wasn't talking about traditional republicans. then you said "then it's not about personal freedom". so you don't believe ANY republican has a legitimate stance of personal freedoms? it's all a ruse, no matter who it is or their reasoning?
I'm saying today's Republicans are not anchored to personal freedoms. It's a ruse. If they were, then their stance on gay marriage and rights would be laissez-faire. It isn't. And traditional republicans did not believe that personal freedoms always outweighed the benefit to society. Conservatism was very much connected to the impact on society. They were not anti-vax, unlimited gun rights, and the like. They were socially conservative for sure, and believed gov't had a role to play in society, it was just different than teh role that liberals supported.
ok, again, I'm talking about the FAR right, the MJT's of the group. you think it's a ruse? you don't honestly believe she's all up her wazoo about the basics of constitutional fundamentalism? I think her stance is real, as flawed and somewhat insane as it is.
ok, again, I'm talking about the FAR right, the MJT's of the group. you think it's a ruse? you don't honestly believe she's all up her wazoo about the basics of constitutional fundamentalism? I think her stance is real, as flawed and somewhat insane as it is.
I have pretty much thought of her as a fanatical lunatic, now I am thinking she might be more evil than crazy.
I don't think it's either. breaking it down to its most basic, far right Republicans are for personal freedom over everything (liberty or death), Democrats are for the collective good. This falls in line exactly how one would expect for far right R's.
How about a state law from a republican legislature restricting private business' right to choose who they do & don't want to serve?
Not allowing people the personal freedom to kill themselves, others, and perpetuate terrible behavior by getting fucking hammered and driving home without a damn mask on.
What is the world coming to!
People fought for my right to get smashed without a mask on and drive home!
Land of the free and home of the brave. Yeah, right!
Nothing screams conservative government like *checks notes* regulating the shit out of private business.
This! The party of small government, until people try to do something they don't approve of or like.
Historically, they have advocated for local gov't. In other words, the best gov't is the one that is closest to the people. Yet TX and FL gov continue to strong arm, threaten and pass laws that take away that ability from their local gov't in their state.
It is interesting, here in Illinois republicans are railing against the Governor trying to mandate masking in schools, saying they should be able to choose locally. In Texas and Florida, republicans are cheering on the Governor while he threatens to punish school districts who want to have mask mandates and choose locally what to do.
I have pretty much thought of her as a fanatical lunatic, now I am thinking she might be more evil than crazy.
I don't think it's either. breaking it down to its most basic, far right Republicans are for personal freedom over everything (liberty or death), Democrats are for the collective good. This falls in line exactly how one would expect for far right R's.
How about a state law from a republican legislature restricting private business' right to choose who they do & don't want to serve?
Not allowing people the personal freedom to kill themselves, others, and perpetuate terrible behavior by getting fucking hammered and driving home without a damn mask on.
What is the world coming to!
People fought for my right to get smashed without a mask on and drive home!
Land of the free and home of the brave. Yeah, right!
Nothing screams conservative government like *checks notes* regulating the shit out of private business.
This! The party of small government, until people try to do something they don't approve of or like.
Historically, they have advocated for local gov't. In other words, the best gov't is the one that is closest to the people. Yet TX and FL gov continue to strong arm, threaten and pass laws that take away that ability from their local gov't in their state.
It is interesting, here in Illinois republicans are railing against the Governor trying to mandate masking in schools, saying they should be able to choose locally. In Texas and Florida, republicans are cheering on the Governor while he threatens to punish school districts who want to have mask mandates and choose locally what to do.
Cause it's no longer about principles unfortunately.
wait. you said personal freedom isn't the stance of traditional republicans. I said I wasn't talking about traditional republicans. then you said "then it's not about personal freedom". so you don't believe ANY republican has a legitimate stance of personal freedoms? it's all a ruse, no matter who it is or their reasoning?
I'm saying today's Republicans are not anchored to personal freedoms. It's a ruse. If they were, then their stance on gay marriage and rights would be laissez-faire. It isn't. And traditional republicans did not believe that personal freedoms always outweighed the benefit to society. Conservatism was very much connected to the impact on society. They were not anti-vax, unlimited gun rights, and the like. They were socially conservative for sure, and believed gov't had a role to play in society, it was just different than teh role that liberals supported.
David Frum (an actual conservative, although his ideas have been evolving to the left, and I don't know if he's registered GOP anymore) wrote about this for The Atlantic in April. This one's probably paywalled, although I'm a huge fan of The Atlantic and recommend a subscription. :-)
<<But the point is not to win the fight, or even really to fight the fight. The point is to announce
the fight, and to keep raging about it, even if you do not in fact
fight it very hard. DeSantis surely does not agree with those
Republicans who dismiss COVID-19 as a hoax, the COVID-19 vaccines as a
menace, and vaccine certificates as the mark of the anti-Christ. He has
repeatedly said
that he will take the vaccine when it’s his turn. But he must reckon
with a party in which anti-vaccination has joined pro-gun as an
indispensable cultural marker—and as a potential veto bloc for anyone
aspiring to a future Republican presidential nomination.
To
appease those cultural blocs, Republican politicians must be willing to
sacrifice everything, including what used to be the party’s
foundational principles. To protect the gun, or to avoid contradicting
the delusions of anti-vaccine paranoiacs, property rights must give way,
freedom to operate a business must yield. The QAnon-curious
Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene expressed the new mentality when
she took to Facebook to denounce vaccine passports as “corporate communism.” It sounded crazy. But if you understand that she interprets communism
to mean “any interference in the right of people like me to do whatever
we want, regardless of the rights of others”—then, yeah, the property
rights of corporations will indeed look to her like a force of
communism.
A sizable minority
of Americans want to use airplanes belonging to others, theme parks
belonging to others, sports stadiums belonging to others—without
concession to the health of others or the property rights of owners.
With guns, with COVID-19, with tech, the new post-Trump message from the
post-Trump GOP is: Private property is socialism; state expropriation is freedom. It’s a strange doctrine for a party supposedly committed to liberty and the Constitution, but here we are.>>
All those who seek to destroy the liberties of a democratic nation ought to know that war is the surest and shortest means to accomplish it.
Comments
For Rand, I'm not agitated, but I'm not surprised either. Nor is my instinct to believe he forgot to submit that.
Finally, the U.S. simply needs more time to reach unvaccinated people. This group is often wrongly portrayed as a monolithic bunch of stubborn anti-vaxxers who have made their choice. But in addition to young children, it includes people with food insecurity, eviction risk, and low incomes. It includes people who still have concerns about safety and are waiting on the FDA’s full approval, people who come from marginalized communities and have reasonable skepticism about the medical establishment, and people who have neither the time to get their shots nor the leave to recover from side effects.
www.headstonesband.com
cdc has been advocating for masks for 17 months and vaccines for about 8 months. these people are not even doing the bare minimum to protect themselves. let alone other people.
i would bet almost anything that even when cdc approves the vaccines, there will be fewer than expected people rushing out to get them. that is how many stubborn, selfish, americans are. you can come to their house and offer to give them the vaccine and they would tell you to get off of their property.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
But in addition to young children, it includes people with food insecurity, eviction risk, and low incomes.
www.headstonesband.com
these people are listening to the government when it comes to getting assistance with food and how to prolong the process of being evicted. what is the common theme of them refusing vaccines? it is because they are in red states.
they trust the government enough when it comes to assistance, but can't trust it when it comes to the most important function of public safety.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
www.headstonesband.com
www.headstonesband.com
www.headstonesband.com
How about a state law from a republican legislature restricting private business' right to choose who they do & don't want to serve?
https://www.austin360.com/story/entertainment/dining/restaurant-reviews/2021/08/10/launderette-fresas-vaccines/5555249001/
www.headstonesband.com
They want to see the vaccine's fail.
If they succeed, it's a win for the Biden administration & America doing well under a democrat president is the absolute worst case scenario for republicans at this point.
There's a reason why republicans haven't reprimanded / spoken out against MTG: she's good for their bottom line, which is undermining the opposition party. (AKA owning libs)
It is pretty funny, no doubt.
www.headstonesband.com
www.headstonesband.com
<<But the point is not to win the fight, or even really to fight the fight. The point is to announce the fight, and to keep raging about it, even if you do not in fact fight it very hard. DeSantis surely does not agree with those Republicans who dismiss COVID-19 as a hoax, the COVID-19 vaccines as a menace, and vaccine certificates as the mark of the anti-Christ. He has repeatedly said that he will take the vaccine when it’s his turn. But he must reckon with a party in which anti-vaccination has joined pro-gun as an indispensable cultural marker—and as a potential veto bloc for anyone aspiring to a future Republican presidential nomination.
To appease those cultural blocs, Republican politicians must be willing to sacrifice everything, including what used to be the party’s foundational principles. To protect the gun, or to avoid contradicting the delusions of anti-vaccine paranoiacs, property rights must give way, freedom to operate a business must yield. The QAnon-curious Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene expressed the new mentality when she took to Facebook to denounce vaccine passports as “corporate communism.” It sounded crazy. But if you understand that she interprets communism to mean “any interference in the right of people like me to do whatever we want, regardless of the rights of others”—then, yeah, the property rights of corporations will indeed look to her like a force of communism.
A sizable minority of Americans want to use airplanes belonging to others, theme parks belonging to others, sports stadiums belonging to others—without concession to the health of others or the property rights of owners. With guns, with COVID-19, with tech, the new post-Trump message from the post-Trump GOP is: Private property is socialism; state expropriation is freedom. It’s a strange doctrine for a party supposedly committed to liberty and the Constitution, but here we are.>>
Agreed!