Printable View
Travelled to NYC. I had known that they’re asking for vaccine proof to enter public places but man, it felt just wrong staff barking orders to show vaccine proof and accompanying ID or get the fuk out (I’m exaggerating but not by much even I appreciated knowing that hundred of people around me are all vaccinated)
[QUOTE=Plateauplower;1623484721]Nope...I’ll leave my doses for those in higher risk groups.[/QUOTE]Just saw this. If true, Wow!
[url]https://twitter.com/PeterSweden7/status/1446867912313262081?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1446867912313262081%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Ftruthlion.com%2Ficeland-sweden-and-denmark-have-all-now-banned-the-moderna-jab%2F[/url]
[QUOTE=KeepItMoving;1648672703]Just saw this. If true, Wow!
[url]https://twitter.com/PeterSweden7/status/1446867912313262081?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1446867912313262081%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Ftruthlion.com%2Ficeland-sweden-and-denmark-have-all-now-banned-the-moderna-jab%2F[/url][/QUOTE]
It's true from what I have seen
Got offered it in February
If everyone made the effort to find out why the mainstream media, the governments, the pharmaceutical companies etc etc want the world to happily line up to take this satanic clot shot, instead of just going along with it like single minded lambs to the slaughter, nobody would have it.
People with balls stand up to tyranny, something that is amiss in this gynocentric world.
Not had it, nor will I
[img]https://i.imgur.com/uGH8qFN.jpg[/img]
In DC there is a whole debate about vaccinated local gov't and public servants.
[QUOTE=x-trainer ben;1648688193]In DC there is a whole debate about vaccinated local gov't and public servants.[/QUOTE] As long a Brandon keeps letting thousands of illegal aliens into the country untested and deem who is and isn't required to get it I will never take this vaccine requirement seriously and consider it a scam..
Biden’s federal vaccine mandate does not apply to Americans on welfare, illegal immigrants, and several other groups.
But for reasons unexplained, Biden refuses to mandate vaccines for the 59 million Americans who receive welfare benefits.
Put another way, Biden is mandating that the Americans who supply most of the tax revenue to pay for America’s welfare system be vaccinated or lose employment. But the beneficiaries of the welfare state are exempt. í ¾í´·í ¾í´·í ¾í´·í ¾í´·. I know, I don’t get it either.
Biden’s vaccine mandate is not about getting the vulnerable vaccinated. It is about the Biden administration unfairly and unnecessarily forcing hard-working Americans to choose between their bodily autonomy and their livelihood.
[QUOTE=Tommy W.;1648692223]
But for reasons unexplained, Biden refuses to mandate vaccines for the 59 million Americans who receive welfare benefits.
[/QUOTE]
Congress passed the Occupational Safety and Health Act in 1971. OSHA's powers are delegated to the Executive branch. That's the authority through which Biden is using to enforce a vaccine mandate on the American people. If someone receiving a welfare benefit is also in the workforce, then it is mandated for them as well.
[QUOTE=7Seconds;1648693213]Congress passed the Occupational Safety and Health Act in 1971. OSHA's powers are delegated to the Executive branch. That's the authority through which Biden is using to enforce a vaccine mandate on the American people. If someone receiving a welfare benefit is also in the workforce, then it is mandated for them as well.[/QUOTE] interesting about the welfare recipients if true. Still too many other holes though.
[QUOTE=Tommy W.;1648693863]interesting about the welfare recipients if true. Still too many other holes though.[/QUOTE]
Green card applicants are required to get vaccinated as well, what other groups are you talking about?
[QUOTE=Tommy W.;1648688753]As long a Brandon keeps letting thousands of illegal aliens into the country untested and deem who is and isn't required to get it I will never take this vaccine requirement seriously and consider it a scam..[/QUOTE]
Well mayor Muriel Bowser is the decision maker for local government, not sure who Brandon is.
[QUOTE=x-trainer ben;1648694573]Well mayor Muriel Bowser is the decision maker for local government, not sure who Brandon is.[/QUOTE] Brandon is Biden’s new nickname
[QUOTE=7Seconds;1648694263]Green card applicants are required to get vaccinated as well, what other groups are you talking about?[/QUOTE]Doubtful those thousands and thousands of illegals are getting green cards when they cross.
[QUOTE=Tommy W.;1648695213]Doubtful those thousands and thousands of illegals are getting green cards when they cross.[/QUOTE]
I’v already had the immigrant discussion with Mark, not much point in going over that again. Your post above said Americans on welfare, illegal immigrants, and several other groups. What are the other groups?
[QUOTE=7Seconds;1648695503]I’v already had the immigrant discussion with Mark, not much point in going over that again. Your post above said Americans on welfare, illegal immigrants, and several other groups. What are the other groups?[/QUOTE]i didn't read 170 pages and not about to however I seriously doubt there’s a valid excuse for illegals being allowed in un vaxed.
[QUOTE=Tommy W.;1648696223]i didn't read 170 pages and not about to however I seriously doubt there’s a valid excuse for illegals being allowed in un vaxed.[/QUOTE]
It was on the last page. Didn’t really care if you read it, I just didn’t feel like making the same points over again. Anyway, what were the other groups you were referencing in your post?
[QUOTE=7Seconds;1648696473]It was on the last page. Didn’t really care if you read it, I just didn’t feel like making the same points over again. Anyway, what were the other groups you were referencing in your post?[/QUOTE]so I’m guessing you had no valid argument for illegals and no vax requirement. The postal workers and Congress come to mind for starters and unemployed welfare recipients are not required to vax since these mandates are based on employment status.
It seems that most of the vax vs no vax goes in line with political beliefs.
Anyone that deems the last and current administration had similar immigration policies I just can’t understand their logic on anything so keep doing you. Good luck.
[QUOTE=7Seconds;1648695503]I’v already had the immigrant discussion with Mark, not much point in going over that again. Your post above said Americans on welfare, illegal immigrants, and several other groups. What are the other groups?[/QUOTE]
It was never resolved. Tommy has the same immigration concerns I and millions of others have. Bottoms line is that the administration is wanting a vaccine mandate for our citizens, but not applicable to Southern border illegals. Green cards not being issued or required. Not to mention the literal tone of drugs coming across freely.
I am done with this conversation, but even though we are gentlemen, you don’t have an explanation of why the admin is doing all this. We can speculate but I am not interested in starting division in our mutual section.
:)
[QUOTE=Tommy W.;1648697143]so I’m guessing you had no valid argument for illegals and no vax requirement. [/quote]
No reason to guess, my reasoning is a page or two back.
[quote]The postal workers and Congress come to mind for starters and unemployed welfare recipients are not required to vax since these mandates are based on employment status. [/QUOTE]
Postal workers are required under the osha mandate. But no the executive branch can’t set policy for congress. It’s the same for the judiciary, that’s why they’re also exempt.
[QUOTE=Mark1T;1648698203]It was never resolved. Tommy has the same immigration concerns I and millions of others have. Bottoms line is that the administration is wanting a vaccine mandate for our citizens, but not applicable to Southern border illegals. Green cards not being issued or required. Not to mention the literal tone of drugs coming across freely.
I am done with this conversation, but even though we are gentlemen, you don’t have an explanation of why the admin is doing all this. We can speculate but I am not interested in starting division in our mutual section.
:)[/QUOTE]
I never said it was resolved. I just stated my opinions on the matter had already been expressed. And to be clear I am not defending the Biden administration. I don’t support President Biden, I did not vote for him and don’t believe I will vote for him in 2024. I just disagree with the way you frame the immigration discussion.
[QUOTE=Tommy W.;1648697143]
Anyone that deems the last and current administration had similar immigration policies I just can’t understand their logic on anything so keep doing you. Good luck.[/QUOTE]
I missed this edit.
Biden has deported just under 700k immigrants this year under title 42. He’s deported more in his first 8 months in office than trump did in 4 years. How are they different?
[url]https://www.cato.org/blog/bidens-border-policy-not-open-borders[/url]
Drugmaker Merck asks U.S. regulators to authorize its pill against COVID-19 in what would add an entirely new and easy-to-use weapon to the world's arsenal against the pandemic.
[QUOTE=mtpockets;1648713703]Drugmaker Merck asks U.S. regulators to authorize its pill against COVID-19 in what would add an entirely new and easy-to-use weapon to the world's arsenal against the pandemic.[/QUOTE]
InB4 Anti-Pill crowd forms.
[QUOTE=mgftp;1648713913]InB4 Anti-Pill crowd forms.[/QUOTE]
LMAO yup!! For them we have a special treat
[spoiler][img]https://i.imgur.com/7REoYq3.jpg[/img][/spoiler]
Tulsi Gabbard is a democrat.
[b]Tulsi Gabbard accuses Biden's Homeland Security Sec. Mayorkas of boldly lying to Congress[/b]
[url]https://www.foxnews.com/media/tulsi-gabbard-joe-biden-southern-border-illegal-immigration-alejandro-mayorkas-kamala-harris[/url]
[QUOTE=Mark1T;1648718463]Tulsi Gabbard is a democrat.
[b]Tulsi Gabbard accuses Biden's Homeland Security Sec. Mayorkas of boldly lying to Congress[/b]
[url]https://www.foxnews.com/media/tulsi-gabbard-joe-biden-southern-border-illegal-immigration-alejandro-mayorkas-kamala-harris[/url][/QUOTE]
So 7Seconds posts a link to an article written by some research fellow at a libertarian organization (one who's also a member of the Federalist Society) who describes legal/policy issues you can validate, and which show Biden isn't doing things very differently than Trump. The article also contained links to more detailed articles about the issues the better define the policies and changes.
You then posted an article by Fox that gave snippets of a rant by some democratic congresswoman who wants to be president, where the congresswoman appears to have expressed an opinion that: more people are trying to get across the border, our border policies may not be humane or secure, and the current president isn't being honest about it?
Were you trying to confirm 7Seconds opinion is correct, that the Biden administration's policies are very similar to the Trump administration's (which does seem to be the case) or was the Fox article supposed to be some kind of a rebuttal? It doesn't seem to do either well so I honestly couldn't tell what purpose you thought it would serve.
[QUOTE=JustTheDad;1648720533]So 7Seconds posts a link to an article written by some research fellow at a libertarian organization (one who's also a member of the Federalist Society) who describes legal/policy issues you can validate, and which show Biden isn't doing things very differently than Trump. The article also contained links to more detailed articles about the issues the better define the policies and changes.
You then posted an article by Fox that gave snippets of a rant by some democratic congresswoman who wants to be president, where the congresswoman appears to have expressed an opinion that: more people are trying to get across the border, our border policies may not be humane or secure, and the current president isn't being honest about it?
Were you trying to confirm 7Seconds opinion is correct, that the Biden administration's policies are very similar to the Trump administration's (which does seem to be the case) or was the Fox article supposed to be some kind of a rebuttal? It doesn't seem to do either well so I honestly couldn't tell what purpose you thought it would serve.[/QUOTE]
No. But, your post shows your dedication to your party and that you are not paying attention. What I have posted is the truth, but I have to repeat myself for motherfukkers like you who like to make enemies instead of debating.
Not like Trump's border. Biden's order is an open border. Period.
If you really believe the border is just fine and the exact same as the previous four years, please believe that.
Thank you, though.
I am seeing that people here in the DC area are experiencing Covid fatigue and not wearing masks in elevators, gyms, and a few other indoor places because of lack of enforcement. Oh well.
"Dr. Anthony Fauci has said Covid-19 cases would need to go 'way down' before vaccinated Americans can attend indoor public gatherings without wearing masks.
Fauci told CNN's State of the Union on Sunday that the virus was still spreading too rapidly throughout the country to consider changing recommendations on mask wearing.
It's about 95,000 [daily cases] as the seven-day average. That's still way too high,' the White House chief medical adviser said."
[QUOTE=Mark1T;1648720663]No. But, your post shows your dedication to your party and that you are not paying attention. What I have posted is the truth, but I have to repeat myself for motherfukkers like you who like to make enemies instead of debating.
[/QUOTE]
Ah, so now I have a party. So did I vote for more democrats or republican candidates in the last election or the last 3 elections? Hazard a guess lol.
The problem you have is that I actually am paying attention, and unlike you, I don't consider partial quotes to be evidence of anything.
Have you actually looked at Biden's Executive Order on the Revision of Civil Immigration Enforcement Policies and Priorities
The one that shifted the focus from deporting immigrants that have been here to years to terrorists, individuals apprehended while trying to enter illegally after last November, and individuals who had been incarcerated this year and have felonies. But shifting the priorities doesn't actually change the laws, it just changes which illegal immigrants you focus on, all of them, or the high risk ones. Have you read any others. If you look at the number of ICE deportations and see why they dropped by 90% since Biden took office, you find out that Title 42 played a bigger role than anything Biden did. Or are you talking about the MPP, because that did turn people back, sort of. Unfortunately, even though the SCOTUS didn't side with Biden on scrapping it, its implementation doesn't correlate with a decrease in people looking to come in. So another non-solution. There have been changes in the past 10 months or so, but have you actually read the orders?
Don't mistake my pointing out that you post fluff pieces as choosing a side. The issue here is that you don't appear to have looked at the policies or their effects in a critical or logical way. You instead appear to be letting others think for you and you happen to have chosen the red kool-aid over the blue kool-aid. But it's still just kool-aid.
There's no need to repeat anything you've said for MF'ers like me, because it won't matter if you do. Not unless you step up your game immensely. But you won't. You'll go back to forming an opinion based on Fox selectively quoting Gabbard, which is sort of like others on the misc who are doing the same thing, but listening to CNN selectively quoting Ted Cruz. I'm sure Tucker Carlson or Don Lemon are good entertainment if that's what you like, but I'll stick to the WSJ, the AP, and actually reading the text if it's about something important.
In America, our immigration courts take about 1,000 days before they hear your case, and then six months to two years to process it.
[url]https://trac.syr.edu/phptools/immigration/court_backlog/apprep_backlog_avgdays.php[/url]
The system needs to be fixed. Not only will we both deport and accept asylum seekers at a faster pace — which should be a win for both sides — but it will prevent people from being lost in the system (not just people who shouldn’t be here, but children separated from their parents) and keep our facilities from being overwhelmed to the point that it becomes a humanitarian disaster.
The backlog is indeed the real problem. We were presented over the last couple administrations with really a false dichotomy: that the choices are either catch and release or holding people without trial for three+ years. Yes, both of those problems are bad. While I think the latter worse (Constitutional rights are cool), neither should be accepted.
I'm slightly hopeful. The current plan from the Biden administration includes the following focus:
[quote]TITLE IV—IMMIGRATION COURTS, FAMILY VALUES, AND VULNERABLE INDIVIDUALS
Subtitle A—Promoting Efficient Processing of Asylum Seekers, Addressing Immigration Court Backlogs, and Efficiently Repatriating Migrants Ordered Removed
Sec. 4101. Expanding alternatives to detention.
Sec. 4102. Eliminating immigration court backlogs.
Sec. 4103. Improved training for immigration judges and members of the Board of Immigration Appeals.
Sec. 4104. New technology To improve court efficiency.
Sec. 4105. Court appearance compliance and legal orientation.
Sec. 4106. Improving court efficiency and reducing costs by increasing access to legal information.
Sec. 4107. Facilitating safe and efficient repatriation.
Sec. 4308. Improvements to application process for Afghan special immigrant visas.
Sec. 4309. Special immigrant status for certain surviving spouses and children.
Sec. 4310. Special immigrant status for certain Syrians who worked for the United States Government in Syria.[/quote]
If nothing else from this bill manages to reach bipartisan approval, this needs to be broken out of the greater proposal and passed on its own. There really is no good excuse not to address this particular problem. Whether you want to import or deport more refugees, this system is not working well, we should be able to agree on that.
[QUOTE=JustTheDad;1648730073][b]Ah, so now I have a party.[/b] So did I vote for more democrats or republican candidates in the last election or the last 3 elections? Hazard a guess lol.
The problem you have is that I actually am paying attention, and unlike you, I don't consider partial quotes to be evidence of anything.
Have you actually looked at Biden's Executive Order on the Revision of Civil Immigration Enforcement Policies and Priorities
The one that shifted the focus from deporting immigrants that have been here to years to terrorists, individuals apprehended while trying to enter illegally after last November, and individuals who had been incarcerated this year and have felonies. But shifting the priorities doesn't actually change the laws, it just changes which illegal immigrants you focus on, all of them, or the high risk ones. Have you read any others. If you look at the number of ICE deportations and see why they dropped by 90% since Biden took office, you find out that Title 42 played a bigger role than anything Biden did. Or are you talking about the MPP, because that did turn people back, sort of. Unfortunately, even though the SCOTUS didn't side with Biden on scrapping it, its implementation doesn't correlate with a decrease in people looking to come in. So another non-solution. There have been changes in the past 10 months or so, but have you actually read the orders?
Don't mistake my pointing out that you post fluff pieces as choosing a side. The issue here is that you don't appear to have looked at the policies or their effects in a critical or logical way. You instead appear to be letting others think for you and you happen to have chosen the red kool-aid over the blue kool-aid. But it's still just kool-aid.
There's no need to repeat anything you've said for MF'ers like me, because it won't matter if you do. Not unless you step up your game immensely. But you won't. You'll go back to forming an opinion based on Fox selectively quoting Gabbard, which is sort of like others on the misc who are doing the same thing, but listening to CNN selectively quoting Ted Cruz. I'm sure Tucker Carlson or Don Lemon are good entertainment if that's what you like, but I'll stick to the WSJ, the AP, and actually reading the text if it's about something important.[/QUOTE]
I can not even tell you how many times I have been called a liberal on these forums, yet I have never voted for anything other than red. This forum has become very extreme. The notion of a person having their own thoughts on individual subjects rather than extreme party blanket views seems like an impossibility to most miscers these days.
[QUOTE=mgftp;1648757583]I can not even tell you how many times I have been called a liberal on these forums, yet I have never voted for anything other than red. [/QUOTE]
Well, you are liberal. Super liberal compared to most. You just haven't realized it.
It's not a red/blue thing. You're liberal about allocating cognitive effort to a political or social topic.
Both the democrats and the republicans actually prefer it if you are super conservative when you decide how much effort you'll devote to checking on what they're selling you. Because the less you think, the better they look.
[QUOTE=JustTheDad;1648765043]Well, you are liberal. Super liberal compared to most. You just haven't realized it.
It's not a red/blue thing. You're liberal about allocating cognitive effort to a political or social topic.
Both the democrats and the republicans actually prefer it if you are super conservative when you decide how much effort you'll devote to checking on what they're selling you. Because the less you think, the better they look.[/QUOTE]
Yea. I am too. I'm super open to all ideas. You tell me something, I think about it for days..and then I change my mind if more info comes along. It's not that deep. I don't see anyone having any deep feelings towards Biden unlike the ex orange P-grabber in chief. He seems to have become some kinda cult leader..which is so weird and difficult to understand..and trust me I am tryna understand it cos I have no problem with trying to understand different points of view.
[QUOTE=Cass40;1648765663]Yea. I am too. I'm super open to all ideas. You tell me something, I think about it for days..and then I change my mind if more info comes along. It's not that deep. I don't see anyone having any deep feelings towards Biden unlike the ex orange P-grabber in chief. He seems to have become some kinda cult leader..which is so weird and difficult to understand..and trust me I am tryna understand it cos I have no problem with trying to understand different points of view.[/QUOTE]
First off, nobody likes Biden. He's a very old white unlikable dude.
Secondly, but why u need to understand, doe
Finally, sorry for budding in, yo. :p
but while I'm at it, it would be totally awesome if JTD and Mark Dude could maybe apologize to each other for maybe crossing the line and reset chit. Maybe. I freakin promise these will be the last words I type tonight. That's gotta be enuf motivation. :D
[QUOTE=ChazWood;1648766963]
but while I'm at it, it would be totally awesome if JTD and Mark Dude could maybe apologize to each other for maybe crossing the line and reset chit. [/QUOTE]
Sorry Mark. I'll try to be less petty and more civil.
[QUOTE=ChazWood;1648766963]First off, nobody likes Biden. He's a very old white unlikable dude.
[/QUOTE]
I try to remind myself that it could be worse.
Like Schumer. My least favorite of the bunch right now...
So I think I'll grab a booster and this Merk pill if approved. All-in.
[QUOTE=JustTheDad;1648765043]Well, you are liberal. Super liberal compared to most. You just haven't realized it.
It's not a red/blue thing. You're liberal about allocating cognitive effort to a political or social topic.
Both the democrats and the republicans actually prefer it if you are super conservative when you decide how much effort you'll devote to checking on what they're selling you. Because the less you think, the better they look.[/QUOTE]
Well yes, in many ways you are right but my views on certain issues would also be considered super conservative.
I was also just referring to the fact on the main misc being called a liberal means you lean left on every issue with no exceptions and is often followed by an assumption you vote and support every democratic candidate that has ever lived.
The problem lately is that politics drives even the smallest topics.
If I said it was raining outside and warm on this forum, I would be accused of mentioning global warming because I used the word warm and a liberal because I brought it up. It is way to extreme.
This is why I constantly say in posts, are we still talking about topic xyz when it seems to drift from the original topic post.
And then there are those of us who are liberal on some issues and moderate or conservative on others.There is not a one size fits all model.
[img]https://i.imgur.com/KZXsTlw.jpg?1[/img]
Again, I am an Independent. I do lean right, but that has nothing to do with my opinions in this thread. If anyone needs to know, I did not support Trump the man. I did support many of his policies, especially concerning economics. I just want the truth, no matter what the politics are.
I do apologize to JustTheDad for name calling, but to be accused of not agreeing with a wall of text of information that does not directly relate, is BS. I will explain. All I was trying to see if anyone, even if they lean left, can admit that the Southern Border is open, because it is. The border is a humanitarian crisis and a major national security issue. The frustration is when I mention this, I am replied with a wall of text which I do not bother to read. It tells me that the 'replier' is avoiding the obvious.
Our government is not protecting us as citizens as a result of the border. The laws and green cards, ad nauseam, etc....... do not apply to the illegals crossing the Southern Border. The laws apply to those who come to the USA to apply for citizenship legally. So, to even mention laws, green card, etc., is a moot point.
The President of the USA can relatively instantly solve these crises. It is not a matter of both parties coming together. The President has sole power to stop these crises.
Lastly, many people, including me, believe that since the border crisis has not been solved, it is an intentional catastrophe because it is literally being ignored by our politicians.
Furthermore, border crossers are not even vaccinated or tested and still shipped who knows where. But, the WH and the MSM preach getting the vaccine. ?????? We are being played.
[QUOTE=x-trainer ben;1648777343]...And then there are those of us who are liberal on some issues and moderate or conservative on others.There is not a one size fits all model.[/QUOTE]
You just don't get politics do you? of any country...
People want straw men arguments and blanket stereotypes, avoids uncomfortable stuff like thinking.
;)
[img]https://i.imgur.com/XSp2Nk7.jpg[/img]
[QUOTE=OldFartTom;1648784963]You just don't get politics do you? of any country...
People want straw men arguments and blanket stereotypes, avoids uncomfortable stuff like thinking.
;)[/QUOTE]
Well when i was in school the most popular testing method after the scantron test(multiple choice a-d) was filling out the blue book essay exam with compare/contrast or explain some concept.
You not only had to know your chit, but you had to know how to explain it in detail to others, oh well.
[img]https://i.imgur.com/v6tVaPc.jpg[/img]
[QUOTE=mtpockets;1648785653][img]https://i.imgur.com/XSp2Nk7.jpg[/img][/QUOTE]
Too much truth
[QUOTE=Mark1T;1648784173] All I was trying to see if anyone, even if they lean left, can admit that the Southern Border is open, because it is. The border is a humanitarian crisis and a major national security issue. The frustration is when I mention this, I am replied with a wall of text which I do not bother to read. It tells me that the 'replier' is avoiding the obvious.[/QUOTE]
You're going to have to define "open". I'm 99% certain most healthy adults with a few bucks and a brain could find a place where they have a decent shot at sneaking across a 1900 mile long border protected by a bunch of fences. Especially since Mexico decided not to pay for a wall.
If you're talking about legal crossings, there are something like 300 million border crossings a year, so that's pretty open. But that's not what's driving our COVID pandemic. Can't blame Mexico, we have to own that one.
The term "open" shouldn't be used. It doesn't mean the same thing to everyone. I don't consider it open simply because some people do have to sneak across.
Topic made me remember this: [url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sCyzdD0vYOw[/url]
Not really related, but it made me laugh when I saw it back then.
Edit: On a brighter note, our US 7 day moving average of new cases is approaching 80K. Another month and maybe we'll get to the 20s. :)
[QUOTE=JustTheDad;1648798343]You're going to have to define "open"[/QUOTE]
A lazy description of a complex problem used by talking heads to push the emotional buttons of those on the right.
Immigration policy is hard at the best of times. But the fact that it has been overly politicized and the effect of the pandemic on Latin America has made immigration policy that much harder.
Wow. This doc is saying what I've heard from 2 different, separate ID doc's that I know about how the Delta variant is a spawn of the shots...
God bless him. He will be mercilessly attacked for this.
[url]https://generaldispatch.whatfinger.com/dr-richard-urso-pandemic-of-fear-vaccines-created-delta-variant/[/url]
[QUOTE=KeepItMoving;1648819193]Wow. This doc is saying what I've heard from 2 different, separate ID doc's that I know about how the Delta variant is a spawn of the shots...
God bless him. He will be mercilessly attacked for this.
[url]https://generaldispatch.whatfinger.com/dr-richard-urso-pandemic-of-fear-vaccines-created-delta-variant/[/url][/QUOTE]
Vaccine caused delta? That makes perfect sense, given the first time we found the delta variant was in India in December 2020, which was only a month or two before the first person in India got a vaccine against SARS CoV2.
Oh, wait. Maybe it doesn't.
[QUOTE=JustTheDad;1648822003]Vaccine caused delta? That makes perfect sense, given the first time we found the delta variant was in India in December 2020, which was only a month or two before the first person in India got a vaccine against SARS CoV2.
Oh, wait. Maybe it doesn't.[/QUOTE]
but his eye doctor friend said it did.
and I for one kinda enjoyed his video. Particularly, the articulate hand and arm movement which is what I look for in an eye doctor. Particularly a surgeon. :)
EDIT: and good to see we're back to civil discourse. For now anyway. :D