We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page
Friday, June 18. 2021
Happy Birthday Mr. President From the Marginalized Majority
Bookworm Beat 6/14/21 — the Flag Day illustrated edition
Father's Day: Fatherlessness Is America's Top Domestic Problem
Why Do Colleges Dislike Men? The Disappearing Collegiate Male
Mark and Patricia McCloskey Plead Guilty to Charges, Will Surrender Guns
Mom Won't Let Her Vaccinated 15-Year-Old Go to Summer Camp, and Slate Agrees. A bad response from the magazine's parental advice column
CONCERNED SHAREHOLDERS TAKE ACTION AGAINST COKE’S RACIST DEMANDS
Critical Race Theory and Academic Freedom - State-based legislation banning the teaching of the toxic ideology is philosophically and legally justifiable.
Last Men Standing: Charles Murray vs. Ibram X. Kendi
England’s first Black Studies professor accuses his university of being racist
In Loudoun County, Dad Has 2 Reasons to Take on Critical Race Theory
John McWhorter: Ignore the left's gaslighting, it's not racist to criticize Critical Race Theory
Abbott launches Texas border wall project with $250 million 'down payment'. Texas' governor accused the Biden administration of abandoning its border responsibilities
Australian Media Mocks CNN's Glowing Coverage of Bumbling Joe Biden
Tracked: Jun 20, 09:32
Tracked: Jun 20, 09:50
Tracked: Jun 20, 09:56
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)
We live in a semi rural area in Missouri. Pretty conservative and quiet and that's the way we like it. The majority of the workmen, all white, are not living with their children. Some refer to their children's mother, and others refer to their ex-wife. Some really miss their kids and don't get to see them often. I wonder how their white children will fare, any better than the black fatherless kids. If mom keeps bringing in "boyfriends" as many of these women tend to due I would bet the results will be the same. I feel sorry for all involved.
Read Charles Murray. Nothing about color when it comes to Fishtown.
I would also recommend Thomas Sowell’s Black Rednecks and White Liberals. A very informative read on the effects of how the culture in which you are raised, has profound impacts on your thinking and work habits. The chapters on the history of slavery, is very eye opening.
Re: Mom Won't Let Her Vaccinated 15-Year-Old Go to Summer Camp
Obviously, the Slate columnist is an idiot but the first mistake was vaccinating a 15-year-old in the first place. These vaccines are experimental in the first place but in the second place, almost no 15-year-olds have had any serious issues from the Wuhan flu. So a 15-year-old is being experimented on for free and receiving no benefit. Worse, there could be dangerous side effects from it.
"We are being experimented on".
Just saying that precludes any intelligent discussion. You can argue that the vaccine has side effects but nearly everything does. You can argue that it wasn't fully tested, but it is a simple fact that our FDA allows people to die for years before they get around to all the paperwork to approve drugs that they knew were safe all along. You can say that 15 YO's shouldn't be vaccinated, but indeed 15 YO's do die from Covid. I suppose everything in life is an "experiment". I wasn't ready for marriage but I did it and that experiment failed. I wasn't ready for fatherhood and that could have been done better too. I wasn't ready for college... yada, yada, yada. EVERYTHING is an experiment. The ONLY reason to call this miraculous life saving vaccine an "experiment" is to support the anti-vaxxer conspiracy theories. THANK GOD Trump got us this vaccine! THANK GOD sleepy Joe wasn't our president when Covid hit.
There is no data that justifies giving the vaccine to 15 year olds. There is no statistical risk from covid for people under 45 years old. If you're going to worry about other people you should at least limit it to real problems.
"There is no data that justifies giving the vaccine to 15 year olds."
The absence of proof is not proof.
But in your zeal to declare me wrong you had to seize on something I did not say. I did not say that 15 YO's "SHOULD" get the vaccine but instead my point was I see nothing wrong with choosing to give a 15 YO the vaccine. FREE CHOICE!!!
Now, it may eventually be proved that the risk of giving children the vaccine is greater than the risk from Covid. THEN it would make sense to CHOOSE to not give your 15 YO the vaccine.
The problem here, the 800 lb gorilla in the room that you aren't talking about, is anti-vaxers. Some people read the tripe about vaccines that is out there on the internet and suddenly decide that vaccines are the problem. They are ignorant, simple as that. Often they simply aren't old enough to have lived before vaccines and simply do not know what a miracle vaccines are.
Do you get your flu shots every year? Do you get your pneumonia shot when you get into your late 50's and 60's? Do you get your shingles shot? Do you make sure your children get all their vaccinations? IF YOU DON'T then you need to take a serious look into why because you are ignorant of the facts.
A mere 100+ years ago half of people born would die before their 18th birthday from diseases that we can today vaccinate against. Today roughly 1 in a million people incur a reaction from a vaccination and we think THAT is the problem while blissfully unaware that vaccines have saved probably in excess of 2 billion lives in the last 50 years or so. THAT belief is IGNORANCE writ large.
I’m 62 and have never gotten the flu shot, pneumonia shot, or shingles shot. I have no intention of getting this experimental COVID vaccine.
Haven’t had the flu that I know of in over 25 years and typically get a cold once every 10 years. People I worked with would get the flu shot when offered at work and half of them would call in sick the next day.
I’ll take my chances that my body will fight off any bugs that come along.
Get covid and live, get covid and die, get a vaccine.
No one gives a shit which choice you make.
That is your choice and hopefully it is based on knowledge and not rumors and conspiracy theories. Just so you know You do in fact get colds probably a couple a year. What you don't get is symptoms. Why does this matter? Because you believe your body is more capable of fighting off the flu or pneumonia than it actually is.
"There is no statistical risk from covid for people under 45 years old."
I think you are wrong on that:
I think Jack should have said "healthy people under 45 years of age" instead. If you believe the numbers you refer to, people in the age group 0 - 49, account for about 4.4% of all Wuhan flu deaths in the US. Since the target age was 45, one could be generous and say that deaths in the 40 - 45 group would only be half the deaths in that age group (that would be generous because age is a significant factor in risk so there are likely more deaths in the 45-49 population than the 40 - 45). This gives the total death count from 0 - 45 of 18,297 or a little less than 3%. We know nothing of the health of those 3% and many could have comorbidities so even that is an inflated percentage.
But that's not the risk of death from those in the 0 - 45 age group because we are only considering those who died. I would say the real question is what is the risk of death if you get the Wuhan flu? So what is the percentage of 0 - 45 year olds who contracted the Wuhan flu that died? Worldometer says the US has had 34,378,217 cases which gives 0.05%.
One can judge whether 0.05% is a statistical risk.
The interesting thing about those younger people who die from the Covid virus is that most of them have been healthy.
But more importantly I think it is a mistake to try to argue that some number of deaths between 4000-8000 is no big deal. You can try to justify that position be saying that at ages above 65 there were 400,000 deaths and yes, that is significantly greater than 4000 or so deaths but you cannot simply discount the 4000-8000 deaths of the younger age group as though it was no big deal. I have four children between the age of 30-50 and I have encouraged all of them to get the vaccine. It would never have occurred to me to tell the 50 year old to get it and tell the 30 year old to not get it. Because; statistically I believe the risk from the disease is greatrer than the risk from the vaccine.
We were arguing statistics, not whether it is a big deal. It is a big deal when anybody dies (even George Floyd, Ted Kennedy, or George Soros when he dies). We do not live in a world without risk. It's up to individuals to manage risk. For some in the 0 - 45 age group, 0.05% chance of dying should they contract Wuhan flu is frightening. To others that risk could be deemed insignificant.
Tomorrow is promised to no one.
Again the statement was "There is no statistical risk from covid for people under 45 years old."
That isn't accurate. There is a low statistical risk. That low risk can be even lower if you choose to vaccinate. Simple as that.
Would you say there is statistically no risk of a person contracting polio after taking all the appropriate vaccines? I know an adult that happened to.
I'm not going to argue the definition of a "statistical risk." 0.05% risk is what it is. You can assign a seriousness to that depending on your own risk threshold.
We had an 11 year old die of it just recently. His parents were fully vaccinated, he was not.
There are always outliers. I recently read about a healthy 19 year old male who apparently died from the vaccine. L pray that was an outlier too.
To say that these vaccines are experimental should not be the end of a conversation but rather the beginning of one.
You can say every one of those things and it doesn't change the fact that none of the Wuhan flu vaccines so far have received full FDA approval. They are approved under an emergency use authorization. None that I am aware of had had animal trials. The use of a vaccine that gets the body to create the cells so the body can create antibodies for those cells is new and there are wide gaps in the understanding of potential side effects and long term consequences. In other words, these vaccines are an experiment. That being the case, only those who are at risk to serious risk from the Wuhan flu should take the vaccines and healthy and especially young people should not take it now. That means it is insane to give it to all our military, for example.
It may end up that the fears some doctors and scientists have are overblown, and that is certainly the hope, but there have been many more serious side effects as well as deaths attributed to these vaccines, than from all previous vaccines.
I would not blame Trump for any fallout from these vaccines. His options were limited when political attacks were made on possible treatments. (I would note that Fauci spent more money at the Wuhan Institute of Virology than on investigating the efficacy of hydroxychloroquine or ivermectin. One has to wonder why.) With treatments being a hard sell, his only option was vaccines and he is to be acknowledged for his part in producing them in record time.
You are more or less correct. But here are some of the fallicies:
The FDA doesn't make extensive tests and at the end of 4-10 years determine that a new medicine is safe. They merely place political roadblocks and tons of red tape in the path of creating and marketing new medicine, devices and treatments. It is a simple and troubling fact that if we had no FDA and the pharmaceutical companies could create a new drug and put it on the market the next day MORE lives would have been saved by eliminating that delay THAN were saved by more testing.
Another fallacy is: that because a drug fails the FDA process OR having passed the FDA process and at some later point proves to be harmful to some people that this means either the Pharmaceutical companies are bad OR that the FDA process isn't strict enough. But most likely in these cases is that the drug works BUT just as some people are allergic to peanut butter some people are not helped by the drug and/or my be hurt by the drug. The FDA being a political organization and NOT a scientific organization cannot allow this so a good drug must be banned.
Most side effects from vaccines are short lived, don't cause death or long term problems and are statistically very safe. The least safe drugs on the market (i.e. cause the most deaths and serious side effects) are the over the counter NSAIDS. More people are killed by aspirin then by vaccines. Where is your outrage against aspirin???
You are not arguing against any of the points I made. Is the FDA a waste of time and money - likely. I would say that the requirement of a drug or device be effective is costing a lot of money, pain, and lives. But in general, I agree with you about the politics and the FDA. None of that changes the fact that the FDA considers it to be experimental.
If the FDA was not tasked with judging the efficacy of a treatment, as you stated, many more drugs would be available. For a certain time it could be argued that the early use was an experiment to determine its efficacy. I have no problem with that (we are pretty sure it's safe because in our scenario, the FDA still tests for safety) and as you also stated, it's a personal choice.
I believe the number of deaths attributed to these vaccines is several multiples of the deaths from all previous vaccines. I consider death to be a rather persistent condition. It's important to compare vaccines to vaccines and not drugs in general. I think most people view them a bit differently. But in this case, there are significant forces encouraging or pressuring people to take these vaccines. Given that, it is now much less a personal choice. If government officials are pressuring citizens to take a vaccine, the assumption is that it is safe. That is not yet known.
Anti-vaxers will be against all vaccines. That doesn't mean that all those who are skeptical of these vaccines are anti-vaxers.
"the FDA considers it to be experimental."
Probably true. By the same exact standard Dr. Salk's [polio vaccine would have been considered experimental. Suppose back in the 50's when the polio vaccine was given to all/most children in the U.S. we had the ability that the internet gives us to declare that Salk's vaccine was "experimental". Do you think that a significant percentage of parents would have denied that vaccine to their children because of that scare tactic? So what is the purpose in the FDA making a big deal about the Covid vaccine being "experimental"? My guess is it was all a political anti-Trump effort.
"I believe the number of deaths attributed to these vaccines is several multiples of the deaths from all previous vaccines.
This could be true. We don't know that. We have many people on the internet claiming that is true but offering no evidence. By I concede it could be true (or not). What difference does that make? If I came up with a drug that saved the lives of 98% of people with cancer but possibly caused the death of 0.01% of those who took the drug should that drug be banned? Should anonymous sources on the internet tell stories to scare 50% of the people from taking that drug? OR should we base decisions on provable facts.
According to (https://www.fda.gov/media/73549/download) it seems that the FDA really started determining the effectiveness of medications in 1966 which is long after the Salk vaccines came out so I suspect that Salk did his own efficacy testing. I was a child at the time. But your point is taken. If the Salk vaccine came out today, it would likely be considered experimental. And to reiterate, I'm not opposed to people taking experimental drugs including these Wuhan flu vaccines.
However, I think there are substantial differences between the roll out of the Salk vaccine and the Wuhan flu vaccines. The Salk vaccine was tested as early as 1954. I took the sugar cube polio vaccine probably in the early '60s. I am reminded that that was the Sabin vaccine. Both the Sabin and Salk vaccines were "conventional" vaccines that employed either live or dead viruses. These vaccines are not "conventional."
There are a couple of databases that track vaccine side effects (e.g. VAERS). I believe that either the CDC or HHS also keep databases of vaccine side effects. They are not compiled from Interweb stories.
It is important to understand that vaccine side effects are generally an individual's body reacting to an outside influence. That is it is the person's body reacting not just because it is a vaccine or what is in the vaccine but because this individual has a genetic predisposition to reject anything alien to their body. You could inject a harmless saline solution and get the same result. Sometimes someone with this tendency to react like this causes them to reject life saving medicines like antibiotics. The point is that it isn't the vaccine harming people it is the rare individual that is reacting to the vaccine or other injections.
For example some people cannot eat dairy. Their reaction to it can be mild to serious. Death has resulted in rare cases. Clearly though this does not mean dairy products are experimental or should be controlled by the FDA or even that we need some kind of registry to keep track of people sickened by a bite of cheese.
That may have been true in the past but these are not your father's vaccine. I would agree that in most cases, especially where the ridiculously baroque set of tests are completed, that most of the side effects are due to individual characteristics but in this case, we're dealing with a different technology than previous vaccines. The vaccines actually cause the body to make a spike protein in order to generate antibodies. From what I've read, the body already uses similar spike proteins for "legitimate" bodily functions. Should we expect the new antibodies to attack all similar spike proteins - including the body's own? Can the antibodies tell the difference between the body's own spike proteins and the ones it made at the behest of the vaccine?
My point from the beginning is that we are in uncharted waters with these vaccines. They are not conventional vaccines we are used to and from what I've found out recently, the animal testing was either shortened or done away with entirely. There is a lot we don't know about them.
re Mark and Patricia McCloskey Plead Guilty to Charges, Will Surrender Guns
There has to be more to the story than what was reported at the link.
No explanation for why they pleaded guilty.
The plea makes no sense to me unless a lot of leverage was being applied to the couple.
I can't see where they did anything wrong.
It makes perfect sense. The DA's do this all the time. It isn't about justice or guilt it is about their massive unfettered power and how they misuse it. This is classic misuse of power. The DA KNOWS that these two did noting wrong but she basically gave them a choice where she would use the power of her office to prosecute them using a St. Louis jury that almost guarantees their conviction and even if they luck out and win it will cost them millions. But by taking the plea the DA can insist that proves she was right.
They would never have gotten a fair trial in St. Louis, about like the cop in Minneapolis. With those in control of the politics in STL it would be strictly white versus black. At least someone got Kim Gardner off the case as she is Soros political pick and is crooked as the day is long. She is basically responsible for getting rid of former Governor Eric Greitens. Nothing was ever done to her for illegally paying off people to get rid of him. Mark McCloskey is now running for the senate seat of Roy Blunt who is "retiring".
"Mark McCloskey, a St. Louis personal injury lawyer who gained national attention after he and his wife waved guns at racial injustice protesters who marched near their home last summer, said Tuesday that he will run for the U.S. Senate in 2022.
McCloskey made the announcement on Tucker Carlson's show on Fox News. Earlier Tuesday, the Federal Election Commission's website showed “Mark McCloskey for Missouri” was registered, and a website, mccloskeyforsenate.com, was seeking campaign donations."
I agree with you, but their gun handling from a safety standpoint was pretty scary. I doubt the wife had ever even picked up a handgun before, from what I saw of the way she was carrying it. The biggest risk going on was that they might have shot each other accidentally.
re CONCERNED SHAREHOLDERS TAKE ACTION AGAINST COKE’S RACIST DEMANDS
I hope there is follow up to this as events unfold. I am very interested to see how this turns out.
The McCloskey case just gets weirder every time it comes up. I think his Senate campaign is over. He just surrendered.
I’m not going to go back and find all the information on this case, the initial video released sure looked like a dangerous situation for the McCloskey‘s. At least some of the protesters seemed intent on causing trouble. It appeared that they broke through a gate, but the prosecution says non of the protesters realized they were on private property? What about the report that said the guns were movie props? There was reports that the forensic lab had modified the guns, once they had possession of them. I’m going to trust that the second prosecutor got everything right. There has to be some hope that honest justice is still alive in America. Right?
What most people don't realize is that just outside that broken gate and down a couple of blocks are pretty dangerous streets. They had no idea what that group would do once they had broken down the locked gate. Since there has been no repercussions for destructive riots anywhere in the country in lately who wouldn't defend themselves.
A ZOOM congressional hearing is getting the news because on of the congressmen was in shorts (or underwear) and his tee shirt was up and exposed his belly. for whatever reason the women on the committee are upset. Please ladies in the privacy of your own home check and see because you too have a belly.
Yes it might have been careless of this gentleman or even impolite but, seriously, have you seen pictures of Stacy Abrams fully clothed??? THAT is far more disgusting than this man's belly being exposed. Just saying...
Being a Missouri voter I am most appreciative that Blunt is not running (He has been recognized as a McConnell rino) and McCloskey is a surrender token made in the image of McConnell. I still think Greitens will win the senate seat.
As for the virus...the entire politicized medical establishment has nary a useful statistic in which to base any conjectures as they have changed rules governing cause of death and keep moving rules around considering how you even test for covid. That was the intent of the promoted panic porn.
"Clockwork manure robot is proof the future is here"
WTF ... manure robot ?
nope, not gonna read that link.
re getting the COVID vaccine
The bottom line here relates to the question of credibility.
If you believe everything the mouth pieces for the Government say, then getting the vaccine is a no brainer.
If you see Government as a serial lying machine and are then told that THIS time, the string of lies is being interrupted for an item of truth, it is much harder to accept the vaccine. Logic dictates that you are likely being lied to yet again.
Who believes a chronic liar and con-man?
It's a question of trust and many have no trust for Big Brother.
It's as simple as that.
Full disclosure. I have been vaccinated. However, I have no idea what they put in me other than their say-so that it was good and for my benefit.