Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
WSJ article citing multiple WHO studies and September, 2019 report from Johns Hopkins — this time from the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, citing work from real doctors, claims that quarantining not only didn’t work, but that the WHO and JH both recommended against it prior to the pandemic.
“What caused the scientific community to abandon its aversion to lockdowns? The empirical evidence didn’t change. Rather, the lockdown strategy originated from the same sources the WHO had heavily deprecated in its 2019 report: speculative and untested epidemiological models.”
“During an emergency, it should be expected that implementation of some NPIs,
such as travel restrictions and quarantine, might be pursued for social or political
purposes by political leaders, rather than pursued because of public health
evidence. WHO should rapidly and clearly articulate its opposition to inappropriate NPIs, especially when they threaten public health response activities or pose increased risks to the health of the public.”Full disclosure, the 2006 WHO study hypothesized that quarantines would work in isolated rural areas.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3291415/
Medical historian John Barry’s MIT paper said that quarantines clearly didn’t work in 2009:
https://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/102841/esd-wp-2009-07.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
OMG, Newsome would destroy Harris in the primaries. This is a woman who couldn’t even carry her own state in 3 years ago.
Let her run. It will be fun to watch.
I think it has to be Newsom. He can take credit for California, which is superbly successful, huge economy, vast majority of people are in good shape, they can pretend they have the environmental issues figured out, and Newsom is very presentable. His negative issues are comparatively minor (homelessness, California whacko image). I’m going to assume he’s the one — who else could it be? In the 2020 New Hampshire primary, Kamala Harris received 1/10th of the number of write-in votes for Donald Trump. She got 129 votes out of 153,000. She had far fewer votes than (in order) Klobuchar, Warren, or Gabbard, and only 30 more than Marianne Williamson. Harris would be a disaster, and every blue voter knows it.
Newsom, on the other hand, he’d be very tough to defeat.
Biden now below Trump, officially.
Inflation drives President Biden’s approval rating below what it ever was for Donald Trump (msn.com)
And just think how bad it will get when the recession hits…
Kamala Harris is so awful, the Dems will look to a pure politician for redemption, a professional. In all likelihood, it will be Newsom. If Harris refuses to step down, he might run against her in the primaries. Because Joe Biden is doing an awful, terrible, horrible, no-good job. And 82% of Americans think so:
Poll: Just 18% of Americans say Biden should run for reelection in 2024 — a new low (yahoo.com)
Take note Greta, Hollywood, and Prince Charles. This is what the reaction looks like to destructive green policies. They are saying anarchy is a better option than starvation.
I can’t believe anyone listens to those half-wits.
In the wake of this major reversal is the deterioration of the famed collegiality of the U. S. Supreme Court.
Supreme Court justices aren’t pretending to respect each other (msn.com)
For me, the elimination of the formerly cordial atmosphere has its roots in four core areas:
- The leftward drift of the court, which started decades ago, and the expectation of the Left that the USSC would be their property, essentially another legislating arm for the Left’s agenda. And Leftist nominees adhered to the Left agenda and judicial activism, whereas nominees from Republican presidents were rarely committed to the Right or to strict interpretations of the Constitution. Many of the Republican nominees turned out to be centrist moderates or liberal. As long as the Left maintained its majority, they could afford to be collegial. Everyone’s a good winner.
- Republicans started to nominate justices who were reliably conservative and the Left, when they could, Borked those candidates. Yes, I recall when Justice Robert Bork’s last name became a verb, when he was nominated by Reagan in 1987 to succeed Justice Powell. And, well…here’s Senator (and noted feminist) Ted Kennedy: “Robert Bork’s America is a land in which women would be forced into back-alley abortions, blacks would sit at segregated lunch counters, rogue police could break down citizens’ doors in midnight raids, [and] schoolchildren could not be taught about evolution…”
- Both sides turned to polemicists. Most of the existing court were nominees who fit the political preferences of the politicians who named them, and many — on both the left and right — were selected because of what they represented politically rather than their substantive judicial record.
- The Left is still butt-hurt from Justice Ginsberg’s colossally stupid decision to stay on the court rather than retire when President Obama could nominate a Leftist nominee. Instead, Trump got to nominate 1/3rd of the court, so much of the Left wants to pack the court.
How Robert Bork’s Failed Nomination Led to a Changed Supreme Court – HISTORY
Short-term note yield is inverted. Get ready for a wild ride…
Wall Street’s Favorite Recession Signal Is Back as Yield Curves Invert – Bloomberg
Not 100% the same thing, but the year before I matriculated at SCU, a famous men’s magazine ranked the Jesuit school the 8th best party school in the nation — because they had Wednesdays off, ostensibly to have quietly reflective hangovers — the next year, they eliminated kegs from dorms. Year after that, no alcohol in common areas. Year after that, your door had to be closed, no alcohol anywhere else. So, the enterprising students moved the partying off campus. SCU turned dry, sober and very unhappy. Football, gone. Frats, gone. Fun, gone.
My sophomore year, we had a party in two conjoined rooms, cleared out the furniture, and invite 1/2 dozen Jesuits, 100 girls, and about five guys, If you wanted your party to be a success, you invited Jesuits — because they’d always bring a bottle of something really, really interesting. At any rate, that was done for by my senior year. Santa Clara continued to climb the academic rankings, I think they’re around Ohio State now in the USN&WR list. And it’s so boring, I want to weep
That’s the one. Quick story…..
She was a student at Willow Glenn as well. When we were introduced, she was teaching history. I made some quip about “Welcome Back Kotter”, which she totally failed to get. I mean, just because it was off the air before she was born? 🙂
A very welcome vignette BD. A history teacher that doesn’t teach pop culture…priceless. Perhaps your daughter-in-law’s students will have some understanding of our history, our institutions & generational change and focus a little less on current media content.\
My Mom taught in Campbell, and we got to talking about the lack of respect in schools, and when and how it occurred. Mom said, “I’ll tell you exactly when it occurred…1978, when a show called “Welcome Back Kotter” was popular. Overnight, both parents and students went from respectful to disrespectful. It was that quick,” said Mom.
My daughter-in-law is principal at Willow Glenn Middle school. We don’t talk politics, but she has a pretty clear vision of what schools should be and do. Keeping is short, Sacramento is out of touch. Kids can’t be kicked out of school for bad behavior, and now that same behavior can’t even be reported? Geez….
Hey Beeg Dawg, Mrs. Mick left the teaching profession for all those reasons. BTW, is she at the Willow Glen Middle School in San Jose? That’s about a mile from my house.
Biden approval now down to 29%. Only 2 in 10 American adults think the country is moving in the right direction.
Biden’s approval dips to lowest of presidency: AP-NORC poll | AP News
Has anyone done a comprehensive list of Chesa Boudin’s damage since he’s been AG? We can start with the fifty career prosecutors he fired.
Also, 57% of likely voters intend to vote him out with the recall. 22% will vote to allow him to keep his job. 24% don’t know.
52% strongly disapprove of Boudin and 18% somewhat disapprove. 8% strongly approve and 22% somewhat approve. Only 5% of voters feel more safe. 30% say the same and 65% either feel less safe or much less safe.
- 73% support arrest of those who commit minor property crimes
- 66% support forced treatment for potentially dangerous drug users
- Only 46% support sending low-level criminals to diversion programs instead of jail
Biden is correct on one thing….Scott’s plan will increase taxes on 75M Americans. According to Scott’s plan, everyone will have a little skin in the game at tax time. The 75M Biden is referring to are not currently playing federal income tax. I have no problem with that.
It always amused me to see the Brits vote out their titans (Churchill, Thatcher) in favor of weaker politicians.
Scott’s plan sounds a bit like Margaret Thatcher’s poll tax in the U.K. Tories tried to get everyone to pay a fair share, went over like a lead balloon, many refused to pay, opposition stated they would repeal it. People voted with their wallets. Out went Thatcher.
There was a recession during Watergate, GDP went down 0.5% and 0.2% in 1975 and 1975. Fed lowered rates in 1976, enjoyed 5.4%, 4.6% and 5.5% growth the next two years, but with significant inflation (remember Ford’s WIN “Whip Inflation Now” buttons?).
Volcker then did the 20% Fed rate hike, which ended inflation, but GDP for the next four years were 3.2%, -0.3%, 2.5%, and -1.8%.
He’s still better than any career politician out there. We were all better off under him despite the nonstop attempts to delegitimize his Presidency. F the career politicians, they all suck, and the world and our quality of living has deteriorated since this senile fool was pushed into office by all the gutless fucks who switched over to vote against Trump. I challenge any of you to tell me how life is better here or abroad under the fucktards and their leader Biden.
I don’t disagree, believe me.
