Credit to our Right-Wingnuts

ml1 said:

… of the protesters disbursing.

So much for the frozen accounts.

DaveSchmidt said:

ml1 said:

… of the protesters disbursing.

So much for the frozen accounts.

Let it go!

joanne said:

Why would you like your own comment?? Isn’t that a deceptive practice on an open notice board?

- ‘Puzzled’, in another Commonwealth nation

RealityForAll said:

why would I mind my own business?

I happen to be a US/Canadian dual citizen.  But my Canadian citizenship is absolutely not necessary for me to comment on Canada eliminating civil liberties under the guise of necessity.  I am happy to discuss all of these issues related to the invocation of the Emergencies Act.  Let me know if you are ready to discuss suspension of due process and ex post facto application of law.

I am under no illusion that this particular person doesn't LOVE his own comments.

GoSlugs, can I just say that I admire your restraint in all this many-pages-long ‘debate’?  

Americans often don’t quite get the finer points in community expectations in Commonwealth nations’ laws (which is fine - we don’t fully understand theirs, either).  To contrast an abuse in Emergency Powers, try examining our wonderful federal government’s natural disasters emergency fund, worth several million? billion? dollars and never touched despite floods, fires and earthquakes. And over the weekend one federal Cabinet minister, whose flooded Seat is in Brisbane decides to start a GoFundMe for residents instead of activating that, or activating State emergency plans and funds.

Trudeau shines as exceedingly competent in contrast to Morrison & Co. 

joanne said:

Americans often don’t quite get the finer points in community expectations in Commonwealth nations’ laws (which is fine - we don’t fully understand theirs, either). 

It's ok, we Americans don't fully understand ours either.

ml1 said:

drummerboy said:

That video is largely horsesh!t, as most of the claims were based on what was best known at the time.

A much more convincing video, which does not exist, would show, in real time, someone disputing, with evidence, that those claims were wrong. (whew, commas)

i.e. Fauci says something on 4/1/20 and then someone shows he's wrong on 4/2/20. Doesn't exist cause it didn't happen.

People are so easily duped.

I'm also a dope for once again writing something imprecisely. I meant we were never told the vaccines were 100% effective in preventing infections. They are virtually 100% effective in preventing COVID fatalities. if you consider fewer than one death in 100,000 boosted people to be "virtually 100%" of course. Which a reasonable person probably does. And those headlines went by awfully fast (typically a sign of dishonesty. Why not give us a chance to read the subhead?). If for example those articles said 100% effective in preventing deaths among teens in the trial, the headlines would likely have been 100% true.

I'm suspicious of anyone who edits Fauci's sentence right after he says "virtually 100% efficacious." At what? If he said "preventing infection" after that, why was it cut? A smart person's BS detector should have gone to 11 after seeing that.

Well we were told that vaccines made you a "dead end" for covid and those who received it didn't need to distance or mask any longer. Fauci went on the Sunday shows last May and said this. People saw this as a path to normalcy.

The narrative on vaccine efficacy and safety has been changing for over a year, so I worry that your BS detector may be faulty.  You are either trying to gaslight me or have been yourself.

PVW said:

ml1 said:

the tweet did help me understand how people can be confused about vaccinations if that's what they use as a news source.

Yes, terp does seem pretty insistent on proving my point about choosing better news sources, doesn't he? Headline mashups in twitter videos are a poor source of information.

I thought the videos were a colorful way of making the point that the narrative has been changing as it clearly has been.  I think part of the disconnect is that you and most people here only trust prestige outlets.  And you REALLY trust them.  Basically you accept anything that is printed in them as true and you will do everything they tell you to do.

I recall a discussion from about a year ago on this board regarding masks.  I mentioned that I walked my dog on the trails in the reservation and people coming the other way left the trail to avoid me because I was not wearing a mask.  Of course, everyone jumped on me for being an unscientific dolt and praised the wisdom of those people.  Was that because you were getting better information than I was?

terp said:

ml1 said:

drummerboy said:

That video is largely horsesh!t, as most of the claims were based on what was best known at the time.

A much more convincing video, which does not exist, would show, in real time, someone disputing, with evidence, that those claims were wrong. (whew, commas)

i.e. Fauci says something on 4/1/20 and then someone shows he's wrong on 4/2/20. Doesn't exist cause it didn't happen.

People are so easily duped.

I'm also a dope for once again writing something imprecisely. I meant we were never told the vaccines were 100% effective in preventing infections. They are virtually 100% effective in preventing COVID fatalities. if you consider fewer than one death in 100,000 boosted people to be "virtually 100%" of course. Which a reasonable person probably does. And those headlines went by awfully fast (typically a sign of dishonesty. Why not give us a chance to read the subhead?). If for example those articles said 100% effective in preventing deaths among teens in the trial, the headlines would likely have been 100% true.

I'm suspicious of anyone who edits Fauci's sentence right after he says "virtually 100% efficacious." At what? If he said "preventing infection" after that, why was it cut? A smart person's BS detector should have gone to 11 after seeing that.

ml1 said:

I'm also a dope for once again writing something imprecisely. I meant we were never told the vaccines were 100% effective in preventing infections. They are virtually 100% effective in preventing COVID fatalities. if you consider fewer than one death in 100,000 boosted people to be "virtually 100%" of course. Which a reasonable person probably does. And those headlines went by awfully fast (typically a sign of dishonesty. Why not give us a chance to read the subhead?). If for example those articles said 100% effective in preventing deaths among teens in the trial, the headlines would likely have been 100% true.

I'm suspicious of anyone who edits Fauci's sentence right after he says "virtually 100% efficacious." At what? If he said "preventing infection" after that, why was it cut? A smart person's BS detector should have gone to 11 after seeing that.

Click to Read More

ml1 said:

I'm also a dope for once again writing something imprecisely. I meant we were never told the vaccines were 100% effective in preventing infections. They are virtually 100% effective in preventing COVID fatalities. if you consider fewer than one death in 100,000 boosted people to be "virtually 100%" of course. Which a reasonable person probably does. And those headlines went by awfully fast (typically a sign of dishonesty. Why not give us a chance to read the subhead?). If for example those articles said 100% effective in preventing deaths among teens in the trial, the headlines would likely have been 100% true.

I'm suspicious of anyone who edits Fauci's sentence right after he says "virtually 100% efficacious." At what? If he said "preventing infection" after that, why was it cut? A smart person's BS detector should have gone to 11 after seeing that.

Well we were told that vaccines made you a "dead end" for covid and those who received it didn't need to distance or mask any longer. Fauci went on the Sunday shows last May and said this. People saw this as a path to normalcy.

The narrative on vaccine efficacy and safety has been changing for over a year, so I worry that your BS detector may be faulty.  You are either trying to gaslight me or have been yourself.

you don't get it. If you can show someone telling us, with evidence, that Fauci was wrong IN MAY, then you have a point. If you can't , then you don't .

It's you that doesn't understand.  People here were saying that claims like this were NEVER made.

terp said:

It's you that doesn't understand.  People here were saying that claims like this were NEVER made.

different issue completely.

drummerboy said:

terp said:

It's you that doesn't understand.  People here were saying that claims like this were NEVER made.

different issue completely.

LMAO!  

terp said:

drummerboy said:

terp said:

It's you that doesn't understand.  People here were saying that claims like this were NEVER made.

different issue completely.

LMAO!  

obviously you're confused.

On the one hand, someone claiming that Fauci didn't say that is simply mistaken. There were an awful lot of statements made, over a continuously shifting scientific landscape. Hard to keep track of it all.

On the other hand, you are claiming that Fauci's statement is deliberate disinformation (or something). Which you're wrong about.

Two separate issues. 

terp said:

Well we were told that vaccines made you a "dead end" for covid and those who received it didn't need to distance or mask any longer. Fauci went on the Sunday shows last May and said this. People saw this as a path to normalcy.

The narrative on vaccine efficacy and safety has been changing for over a year, so I worry that your BS detector may be faulty.  You are either trying to gaslight me or have been yourself.

you win. I admit now that I was mistaken. Somehow I missed the official messaging that not a single vaccinated person would contract COVID-19.

And for the record, I've been on the "we're not getting herd immunity from these vaccines" for quite some time.   Of course, I was also an idiot for thinking that ahead of the official Science.  But, sure.  You were looking at all the evidence I'm sure.  Somehow, even Aaron Rodgers was getting the scarlet letter from polite society for some reason.

drummerboy said:

terp said:

drummerboy said:

terp said:

It's you that doesn't understand.  People here were saying that claims like this were NEVER made.

different issue completely.

LMAO!  

obviously you're confused.

On the one hand, someone claiming that Fauci didn't say that is simply mistaken. There were an awful lot of statements made, over a continuously shifting scientific landscape. Hard to keep track of it all.

On the other hand, you are claiming that Fauci's statement is deliberate disinformation (or something). Which you're wrong about.

Two separate issues. 

The issue is that even though it kept changing you all followed every word like Fauci was Moses coming down from the mountain.

I mean, you called people who didn't buy into the latest guidance a death cult.  And I'm sure our buddy ml1 really disagreed with that characterization, but could muster the finger strength to reply.

terp said:

I mean, you called people who didn't buy into the latest guidance a death cult.  And I'm sure our buddy ml1 really disagreed with that characterization, but could muster the finger strength to reply.

Anyone refusing the vaccine for asinine reasons was part of a death cult. The vaccine, while not preventing  transmissions, absolutely, by significant factors, keeps you from dying. Inarguable. If you refused the vaccine for anything other than a certified medical reason, you were an unthinking ****. And destructive to public health to boot.

And by Nov 21 (the date of your "prescient" post), who was claiming herd immunity from the vaccine anyway?

drummerboy said:

terp said:

I mean, you called people who didn't buy into the latest guidance a death cult.  And I'm sure our buddy ml1 really disagreed with that characterization, but could muster the finger strength to reply.

Anyone refusing the vaccine for asinine reasons was part of a death cult. The vaccine, while not preventing  transmissions, absolutely, by significant factors, keeps you from dying. Inarguable. If you refused the vaccine for anything other than a certified medical reason, you were an unthinking ****. And destructive to public health to boot.

And by Nov 21 (the date of your "prescient" post), who was claiming herd immunity from the vaccine anyway?

I suppose "death cult" offends some people's delicate sensibilities.  But if a person's personal beliefs lead them to refuse a vaccine that increases their rate of death by 15-20x that of vaccinated or boosted people, how is it inaccurate?

I think we an all agree to a few things.  The initial data from clinical trials suggested higher efficacy than in the real world.  The initial real world results against the early variants suggested higher efficacy than was the case against omicron.  The country never approached anything like herd immunity.  But in a parallel universe where 90%+ of eligible Americans were vaccinated, what would the omicron surge have looked like?  We can't know.

At this point I've lost the point of the argument against vaccination. Is it that it was a smart choice not to vaccinate oneself because the actual efficacy was less than what was predicted from the early data?  It's clear that despite early claims of greater effectiveness than was the case in the population over time, vaccinated people are much, much better protected against bad health outcomes.  So it's still not a smart choice to stay unvaccinated.  And why should anyone pretend it is a smart and rational choice?  It's not a smart choice to run with scissors or eat uncooked chicken either.  Should we pretend those are smart choices not to offend the people who got sick with food poisoning?

terp said:

I recall a discussion from about a year ago on this board regarding masks.  I mentioned that I walked my dog on the trails in the reservation and people coming the other way left the trail to avoid me because I was not wearing a mask.  Of course, everyone jumped on me for being an unscientific dolt and praised the wisdom of those people.  Was that because you were getting better information than I was?

It was December 2020 and people "jumped on" you for being so judgmental of them at a time when people couldn't be vaccinated yet and Covid deaths were still rampant around the country.

Hong Kong proves the efficacy of vaccines in the negative.  For some reason, Hong Kong did NOT vaccinate some at risk groups as thoroughly as they should have and now the consequences are being felt.

terp said:

Well we were told that vaccines made you a "dead end" for covid and those who received it didn't need to distance or mask any longer. Fauci went on the Sunday shows last May and said this. People saw this as a path to normalcy.

The narrative on vaccine efficacy and safety has been changing for over a year, so I worry that your BS detector may be faulty.  You are either trying to gaslight me or have been yourself.

This is a great illustration of how you seem ill informed. In May, when vaccine uptake was happening at a rapid clip and before the arrival of Delta, we really did see a dramatic drop not only with infection, but also transmission. With the arrival of Delta, we saw effectiveness against transmission drop.

What I'm trying to understand is, are you just ignoring Delta? Unaware of it? Stuck on some idea that regardless of changing facts and circumstance, people should never ever update their views and to do so is somehow a sign they were wrong? You're pretty consistent in pointing to things pre-Delta and pointing out how those haven't been as accurate post-Delta as some kind of "evidence" of something, but all it tells me is that you have a difficult time with the idea that the world isn't static.

When a general in wartime constantly updates tactics and achieves battlefield success, said general is a military genius.

When a coach in changes methods mid-game and wins, he/she is a great coach.

But when scientists are constantly updating their thinking when confronted with new and evolving threats such as Covid-19 or global warming, they apparently don't know what they are talking about.

until there are epidemiological studies we really won't know how much of a "dead end" for virus the vaccinated were.  Although some vaccinated people passed on the virus, we can't conclude that vaccinations didn't prevent spread of the virus.  During the omicron surge in NJ, the rate of positive tests among unvaccinated were five times that of fully boosted people.  

https://www.nj.com/coronavirus/2022/02/nj-reports-61-covid-deaths-2235-cases-omicron-surge-continues-sharp-decline.html

does it make any logical sense from that information to conclude that vaccinated people were spreading omicron at the same rate as the unvaccinated?

The Flu Trux Klan attempted a rally in Calgary this weekend but only about a dozen or so of the cowards turned out. 

One might hope that this particular manifestation of far right terrorism has finally reached its expiration date.

GoSlugs said:

The Flu Trux Klan attempted a rally in Calgary this weekend but only about a dozen or so of the cowards turned out. 

One might hope that this particular manifestation of far right terrorism has finally reached its expiration date.

our American "freedom" riders intended to go to DC but decided to halt their advance in Hagerstown, MD.  Instead of protesting in the nation's capital they decided to drive laps around the beltway.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/trucker-convoy-drives-laps-dc-beltway-rcna18916

so much for the courage of their convictions.  I guess they decided a parade would be more fun.

sidetrack

terp said: "Somehow, even Aaron Rodgers was getting the scarlet letter from polite
society for some reason."

Aaron Rodgers, who works in a line of business where close contact with teammates, opponents, and staff is unavoidable, and whose employer and union had agreed to very careful practices, saw fit to party against policy (hello Boris Johnson) and effectively lied in public about his vaccination status.  I'll still watch GB play, but i've lost respect for him, except as an athlete.

Cheers from the dairy state.

mjc said:

sidetrack

terp said: "Somehow, even Aaron Rodgers was getting the scarlet letter from polite
society for some reason."

Aaron Rodgers, who works in a line of business where close contact with teammates, opponents, and staff is unavoidable, and whose employer and union had agreed to very careful practices, saw fit to party against policy (hello Boris Johnson) and effectively lied in public about his vaccination status.  I'll still watch GB play, but i've lost respect for him, except as an athlete.

Cheers from the dairy state.

he didn't get vaccinated, lied about it, and then ignored protocols for unvaccinated players. The triple crown of assholery.

You'd think even anti-vaxxers would be able to see that.

ml1 said:

GoSlugs said:

The Flu Trux Klan attempted a rally in Calgary this weekend but only about a dozen or so of the cowards turned out. 

One might hope that this particular manifestation of far right terrorism has finally reached its expiration date.

our American "freedom" riders intended to go to DC but decided to halt their advance in Hagerstown, MD.  Instead of protesting in the nation's capital they decided to drive laps around the beltway.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/trucker-convoy-drives-laps-dc-beltway-rcna18916

so much for the courage of their convictions.  I guess they decided a parade would be more fun.

We have a trucker shortage. Consequently, pay is now pretty good with fantastic bonuses. Are they so rich they can afford to spend weeks traveling on their own dime while ignoring lucrative work?

Or is there dark money supporting them? Are they being used by some front?

RTrent said:

ml1 said:

GoSlugs said:

The Flu Trux Klan attempted a rally in Calgary this weekend but only about a dozen or so of the cowards turned out. 

One might hope that this particular manifestation of far right terrorism has finally reached its expiration date.

our American "freedom" riders intended to go to DC but decided to halt their advance in Hagerstown, MD.  Instead of protesting in the nation's capital they decided to drive laps around the beltway.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/trucker-convoy-drives-laps-dc-beltway-rcna18916

so much for the courage of their convictions.  I guess they decided a parade would be more fun.

We have a trucker shortage. Consequently, pay is now pretty good with fantastic bonuses. Are they so rich they can afford to spend weeks traveling on their own dime while ignoring lucrative work?

Or is there dark money supporting them? Are they being used by some front?

they are raising money online.  there is a whiff of scam to the protest.

The "People's Convoy," like Trump's new social media platform, is another right-wing grift gone bust 

Truckers' failure to breach D.C. and Trump's fake Twitter exposes the sad emptiness of the modern right

but whatever, a fool and his/her money and all that.

ml1 said:

our American "freedom" riders intended to go to DC but decided to halt their advance in Hagerstown, MD.  Instead of protesting in the nation's capital they decided to drive laps around the beltway.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/trucker-convoy-drives-laps-dc-beltway-rcna18916

so much for the courage of their convictions.  I guess they decided a parade would be more fun.

I was on rte 3 on Saturday. Tons of police and sheriff blocked the highway so our freedom fighters could drive unobstructed. Makes you wonder how so much manpower was put into this. Their convoy was about a mile long. Ridiculous.