Dallas History Professor Triggers Academic Freedom Fight Over Reference To “China Virus”

We have been following various controversies involving academics who have referred to Covid-19 as the “China Virus” or the “Wuhan Virus.” There is even a lawsuit on the issue. There is now an interesting case brewing at the University of Dallas.  Professor William Atto is accused of using the reference on a syllabus, which the student newspaper University News called “misnaming COVID-19” and violating the university policy on such references. In response, the head of the History Department, Susan Hanssen, came out in support of her colleague and denied that any such policy exists.

Hanssen threw down the gauntlet with those trying to force out her colleague and called upon the Catholic university to support academic freedom in a column with the site The College Fix.

Hanssen notes how faculty members across the country have been silenced by the fear of being tagged as racist or insensitive in fights over academic freedom. She said that she has had enough with the cancel culture and its impact on higher education in a column where she declared “I will not be silent.”

Hanssen states that the university responded to the campaign by telling Atto on August 26th to change his syllabus.  Atto complied and emailed students that the syllabus was changed to comply with “US Policy.” However, she notes that this was not sufficient for activists who have demanded his termination.

She raises what could be an important legal issue in this and other controversies: whether faculty are required to refer to the virus in a particular way:

“The article was published more than three weeks after the professor was attacked on social media for his choice of words, and reports that “University practice is to refer to this virus as COVID-19 or SARS-CoV-2 in accord with medical and scientific literature.”

The print version, published Thursday, called it a “policy,” however, and alluded to “disciplinary actions.”

As chair of the History Department, it was news to me — and likely all faculty — that the university has a policy on referring to COVID. If it does in fact have such a policy, it certainly was not circulated before faculty drafted their syllabi in August.”

That presents an interesting contractual question. (This is a private institution so the free speech protections under the First Amendment do not apply as they do with professors at state schools. However, this is still an institution of higher education that is committed to academic freedom.)  The university states in the Faculty Handbook that “any member of the community of scholars enjoys academic freedom to profess and teach objectively any intellectual position within their academic expertise.”

However, it also notes that such freedom must be exercised within a “framework”: “When a faculty member signs an employment agreement with the University, it is presumed that the faculty member knows and respects the purposes for which the institution exists. These purposes are expressed in chapter 1 of this Handbook.” Chapter 1 reaffirms the goals of a Catholic higher education.

Clearly, racist terms do not have to be spelled out in a list to be addressed by the faculty. However, I could not find any statements from the university that referring to the virus by its presumed original origin is prohibited or not protected by academic freedom.

As we have previously discussed, terms like the “Chinese virus” have been widely used by various experts and commentators, including in scientific journals. Indeed, two Chinese experts referred to this as the “Wuhan virus” until they were pressured to take down their column.

While it is widely viewed as racially insensitive and inflammatory, the use is also heavily imbued with political meaning. Many, including members of Congress continue to use this term because of its origins. Moreover, many object that China has lied about the origins of the virus and arrested scientists who tried to tell the world about its dangers. It is political speech. (I have not used the term and instead to “COVID-19” OR “coronavirus” but it is chilling to see a public university encouraging students to stop others from referring to the “Chinese” or “Wuhan” virus.) This remains a point of political debate.

The use of such labels is common in science and politics. People still refer to the “London variant” and “South Africa variant” of Covid. Other virus and diseases have been associated with areas where they originated like Zika, or Ebola. Notably, the media routinely refers to the South African variant or other variants by locations such as London and India. While the “Spanish flu” may not have started in Spain, it is still the common label for that epidemic.  Indeed, it was the term used by many scientists in the early stages and even liberals. HBO’s “Real Time with Bill Maher noted correctly “Scientists, who are generally pretty liberal, have been naming diseases after the places they came from for a very long time.”

I personally do not use the term because it is viewed as offensive by many and Covid-19 is now commonly used.  However, the question is whether academics can or should be sanctioned for opting to the reference.  That is why Hanssen’s column is so interesting. If there was no policy of the university on the question, it is hard to see how Atto could be forced to adopt the preferred name without some finding or explanation on the prohibition.

At a minimum, Hanseen is correct about the obligation of the school to be clear on such policies as well as the status (and academic freedom rights) of Professor Atto.

330 thoughts on “Dallas History Professor Triggers Academic Freedom Fight Over Reference To “China Virus””

  1. There was a comment made by another about the impeachment of Joe Biden. Here is another reason one might want to impeach the President. He is using force against American citizens and in the process might lead to their deaths.

    ‘People are going to die’: Governors, lawmakers rip Biden rationing of COVID treatment as partisan

    Moderate Maryland Republican Gov. Larry Hogan demands answers on “sudden rationing” of “life-saving treatments,” as Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis vows, “We’re going to fight like hell to make sure that our folks get what they need.”

    COVID-19 treatments popular in red states are becoming harder to obtain, leading some governors and lawmakers to accuse the Biden administration of rationing healthcare.

    “People are going to die” because the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is rationing the distribution of Regeneron’s monoclonal antibody treatment to states including Texas, Republican Rep. Brian Babin, a member of the GOP Doctors Caucus, said on the John Solomon Reports podcast.

    “This is a federal takeover, and really seemingly punishing six conservative Republican red states” that have successfully treated COVID patients while resisting the president’s mandates, said Babin, a longtime dentist who represents parts of Houston. Texas and other states “are being cut 30 to 50%,” he claimed.

    “It just goes without saying that this Biden administration doesn’t care,” said Babin, adding that “they flip-flop routinely” on vaccine mandates and lockdowns. Referring to Dr. Anthony Fauci, he said “the only thing you know that’s always certain about this man is that he’s uncertain.”

    Texas Rep. Chip Roy said a meeting with HHS left him with “more questions than answers” about the “throttling” of supply. Officials, he complained, gave him “crickets” when he asked twice for data on supply and manufacturing capacity compared to demand, and they offered “no clear evidence [of a] current shortage,” the Republican tweeted Saturday.

    continue: https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/coronavirus/people-are-going-die-texas-rep-accuses-biden-retaliatory-rationing?utm_source=daily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter

    1. Biden to “deplorables” in Texas, Florida (and elsewhere):

      “You want the medicine you need? Elect governors who kowtow to me.”

      Just as his administration sacrifices Americans in Afghanistan for a political ends, so he sacrifices Americans in Southern states for a political ends.

      This administration is incompetent, corrupt, and wicked. (And they are pathological liars.)

      1. This administration is incompetent, corrupt, and wicked. (And they are pathological liars.)

        Speaking of wicked. This story that came out yesterday shows how they have weaponized the administration against anyone that won’t bend to their will.

        Jerome Adams, the former surgeon general under Trump who has criticized President Joe Biden’s handling of COVID-19, is alleging he was denied the opportunity to refinance his mortgage after the government refused to verify his previous employment in the high-profile role.
        https://www.westernjournal.com/trumps-surgeon-general-says-tried-refinance-mortgage-biden-admin-pulled-dirty-move-stop-happening/

    2. Prohibiting access to lifesaving medicine is reprehensible. If there is a shortage, then the logistics should favor the greatest need. If there is a shortage, then the Administration needs to be transparent with plans to dramatically increase production. If they’re lying about any shortage, then there needs to be dire consequences.

      1. “If there is a shortage . . .”

        HHS is now acting as the Medicine Czar. Whenever a government socializes medicine (as it has done with monoclonal antibody treatments), it creates shortages. Then it uses those government-caused shortages to justify more controls, e.g., rationing. (For another textbook example, see Carter’s gas policies.)

        Apparently, decades of failed socialist economies is not enough evidence to realize their utter futility.

        The Left excoriated Trump for (allegedly) not ordering enough vaccines. Will they now condemn Biden for not ordering enough monoclonal antibody treatments? Don’t hold your breath.

  2. Lincoln warned in 1838:

    “I mean the increasing disregard for law which pervades the country; the growing disposition to substitute the wild and furious passions, in lieu of the sober judgment of Courts; and the worse than savage mobs, for the executive ministers of justice. This disposition is awfully fearful in any community; and that it now exists in ours, though grating to our feelings to admit, it would be a violation of truth, and an insult to our intelligence, to deny.”

    Lincoln might have said the same cautionary words after the Trumpists stormed the Capitol. Trumpists will NOT accept the “sober judgement of Courts.” Which is why in the fullness of time the Trumpists will turn on Turley because he will not disregard the law, for he has dedicated his professional life to respect it.

    Trumpists are the rebellious Southerners of our day. They are ideologically aligned with Johnny Reb not Johnny Turley.

      1. Prairie says:

        “Sowing further division is not helpful.”

        As Lincoln said:

        “This disposition is awfully fearful in any community; and that it now exists in ours, though grating to our feelings to admit, it would be a violation of truth, and an insult to our intelligence, to deny.”

        I could not have said it better! Trumpism has to be vanquished if this country is to remain united. I am doing my part right here.

      2. Prairie Rose, it’s hilarious that Jeff would have us believe Abraham Lincoln would compare one group of people who pushed into the Capitol Building to scold and take selfies as the “Rebellious Southerners”, rather than the Democrats rioting, looting, and committing arson all across Democrat cities for a year. He doesn’t think BLM threatening to burn entire cities to the ground unless they get Chauvin convicted of all counts to be comparable. Nope. It’s the fool in the bison horns and paint getting his picture taken that’s the threat to the nation. Please disregard the millions in property damage, astronomical murder rate, businesses gone forever, jobs chased out of neighborhoods where they’re needed most, and all the “reparations” looting. After all, it’s OK to destroy absolutely everyone if you’re a mad Democrat. Nothing to see here.

        1. Karen,

          You keep on referring to the people who committed crimes in the Capitol, attempting to prevent the certification of the Electoral College vote for Biden, as if they were just there to “scold and take selfies.”

          Look at the crimes they’ve been charged with: https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/capitol-breach-cases

          Discuss their goal and their actions truthfully.

          “it’s OK to destroy absolutely everyone if you’re a mad Democrat”

          No, it isn’t. It also isn’t OK if you’re a mad Republican. I condemn both. Will you join me in condemning both?

          1. Anonymous says to pathetic Karen S:

            “You keep on referring to the people who committed crimes in the Capitol, attempting to prevent the certification of the Electoral College vote for Biden, as if they were just there to “scold and take selfies.”

            It’s only because Karen does not look us in the eye that she can lie through her teeth like that. She would not dare do so were we to know her real name. She would be mortified to make up such a damnable lie anywhere else but the internet where her anonymity is assured and she can evade moral shame.

            With that lie, Karen has revealed herself as an unrepentant and dyed-in-the-wool Trumpist. I shall never let her forget she said it.

          2. Anonymous the Stupid, you keep talking about charges, most of them trumped up and your proof ends up not even occurring at the Capitol building or ends up involving a federal undercover officer. You aren’t too bright and can’t seem to get things right.

            There were some people that got out of hand. They should be punished for their actions. Even the policeman that killed Babbitt should face public scrutiny and be punished if his actions weren’t warranted. It appears they weren’t, and by hiding the evidence the feds are saying that police officer was guilty of killing an unarmed woman who ,at the time, wasn’t a threat to life or limb.

            You sound like an ignorant fool, but we all know that already.

        2. Prairie Rose, it’s hilarious that Jeff would have us believe Abraham Lincoln ….

          Karen, He posted a quote from Lincoln because I did so several hours prior from Lincoln’s Lyceum Address. Some regulars on here, including Young and Olly, commented on the Lincoln quote, used to describe the destruction of America by the Left today.

          https://jonathanturley.org/2021/09/21/dallas-history-professor-triggers-academic-freedom-fight-over-reference-tochina-virus/comment-page-1/#comment-2124329

          This in turn sent Jeff into a maniacal apoplexy. Darren Smith taught me the phrase “pyrrhic victory” when he used it on this forum to address Anon (Gainesville) 2 years ago. I think the phrase applies to Jeff as well. Jeff is now issuing threats to people like you and me. Be careful

          1. Estovir,

            How can I physically threaten you when you hide your name? If I have triggered you with a micro-aggression, I regret it, but Res Ipsa Loquitur is not a Safe Zone for Trumpists.

            If you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.

        3. Prairie Rose,

          I condemn ALL violence regardless who commits it. I don’t typically denounce BLM and Antifa violence just like I don’t typically condemn murder- it goes without saying! I am for law and order. I have stated that if Biden is found to be corrupt, impeach him! I don’t excuse any law-breaking.

          The problem with Karen is that she is whitewashing 1/6 as “a group of people who pushed into the Capitol Building to scold and take selfies.” It’s a bald-faced lie. Turkey called it a “desecration.” He called for Trump to be censured by Congress for his “reckless” speech. While he will not refer to those who stormed the Capitol as “insurrectionists,” he is adamant that they should be prosecuted for breaking several laws. I accept Turley’s attitude which is entirely contrary to Karen’s.

          You are a fair-minded person. I leave it to your judgment to decide who is telling the truth- Turley or Karen.

    1. What would Lincoln say about Democrats in government pushing the Russia Hoax, including an FBI agent who changed a CIA email exonerating Carter Page until it said the opposite, in order to lie to the FISA court? What would Lincoln say about Hillary Clinton’s fabricated dossier being used to undermine a US President?

      What would Lincoln say about Democrats burning down police precincts, and defunding police, which caused the murder rate to skyrocket? What would Lincoln say about the CHOP/CHAZ autonomous zone in Seattle, where police were barred from entering, even to respond to murders and rapes?

      I think Lincoln would have had a lot to say about the Democrat violence and arson that raged across the country for about a year. When compared with one small group of people who pushed barricades aside to take selfies in the Capitol, I think Lincoln would be very puzzled that this is where Democrats insist focus needs to lie. After all, during Abraham Lincoln’s time in the White House, it really was the People’s House. Anyone could enter, and many did. You had to step over Americans dozing on the stairs, waiting to catch a glimpse or speak to the President. The people had access to government buildings at all times.

      I don’t think Lincoln would say what you wished he would.

      1. Karen blatantly lies:

        “When compared with one small group of people who pushed barricades aside to take selfies in the Capitol,”

        Shame on you!

  3. Another report is out absolutely damning the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Does anyone think Joe Biden is capable of holding China to account? What are the chances that SARS-CoV2 is the only virus with gain of function research at that lab? How many other weaponized viruses are at WIV, at risk of escaping? Imagine what would happen if yet another pandemic broke out in addition to this one.

    https://www.dailywire.com/news/damning-new-report-reveals-what-wuhan-scientists-british-zoologist-were-up-to-in-months-before-pandemic

    “Scientists at the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV), including British zoologist Peter Daszak of EcoHealth Alliance, were reportedly planning to release “enhanced airborne coronaviruses into Chinese bat populations” to inoculate them in the months before the pandemic. The scientists also sought funding from the U.S. to “create chimeric viruses,” which are “genetically enhanced to infect humans more easily.”

    The Telegraph reported that the plans from the Chinese scientists were revealed in leaked grant proposals dating back to 2018, which a former U.S. official confirmed as being authentic, the outlet claimed.

    “New documents show that just 18 months before the first Covid-19 cases appeared, researchers had submitted plans to release skin-penetrating nanoparticles containing ‘novel chimeric spike proteins’ of bat coronaviruses into cave bats in Yunnan, China,” The Telegraph reported. “Papers, confirmed as genuine by a former member of the Trump administration, show they were hoping to introduce ‘human-specific cleavage sites’ to bat coronaviruses which would make it easier for the virus to enter human cells.”

    The report said that Daszak, who has emerged as a shadowy figure in the search for the origins of the coronavirus pandemic, submitted the bid. Daszak reportedly sought $14 million for the research from the U.S.’s Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA).

    DARPA refused to fund the project, saying, “It is clear that the proposed project led by Peter Daszak could have put local communities at risk.””

    The report said that Daszak’s team had not considered how dangerous the work was — and particularly had not considered the potential danger of releasing a vaccine by air.

    The report noted that Daszak was behind a letter in the Lancet that helped to shut down talk of whether the pandemic originated in a Chinese lab. Nearly all of the scientists that signed the Lancet letter have ties to the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV).”

    1. “Does anyone think Joe Biden is capable of holding China to account?”

      What actions would you consider “holding China to account”? (what would he have to do for you to say “good, he is holding China to account”?)

      1. China owes financial compensation for the deaths and economic catastrophe they caused. There needs to be an investigation into their activities at the WIV, especially the weaponization of viruses. This might qualify as the accidental detonation of an WMD.

        They should be sanctioned. They also need to be held accountable for their constant theft of intellectual property.

        In addition, one of China’s slow moving campaigns is to make foreign countries indebted to them, and therefore in their power, as well as to buy up strategic real estate. China has been investing heavily in the real estate of the US.

        I think we need to consider following the lead of some other countries, which ban or restrict the sale of real estate to foreign countries.

        We absolutely need to investigate what China, and many other foreign countries, are doing in pathogen research. Smallpox is still kept in two labs, one of which is in Russia. Terrorists and countries hostile to the West would have to be asleep not to notice how effective the pandemic was at harming international economies and weakening the US.

        1. During the pandemic, weaknesses in supply chains were identified, from medical supplies and medications to computer parts. We should never rely upon a foreign country for the production of key components, whether it’s medical masks or nuts and bolts. It was a mistake to offshore so much of our manufacturing to compete with every cheapening goods because when the pandemic hit, China controlled nearly the world supply of certain materials.

        2. Karen says:

          “China owes financial compensation for the deaths and economic catastrophe they caused.”

          Reparations? I think China MIGHT say that it will pay reparations AFTER Republicans agree to pay reparations to blacks whose ancestors suffered slavery. China is likely to hold up a mirror to the Republican’s two-facedness. I’m not advocating that tactic; I am simply predicting it.

          1. Jeff, you are found posting on this forum earlier than anyone else, take up the corpus of comments, and continue commenting past midnight EST. Have you thought of volunteering at a local free clinic? getting a dog? Dating a trans?

            1. Estovir,

              I don’t need a dog/god. I have you. Only you. You’re all mine.

              Whatever you write here, know that I will attend to it as if I am looking over your shoulder. Nothing you say will escape my notice.

              Keep that thought foremost in your mind as you think what you have to contribute here.

              1. God job Estovir, You are taken living in Jeff’s head rent free. Crowded I imagine, You and Trump. Cramped right, such a small space. But there is nothing else there, so that’s a positive.

                1. But there is nothing else there…..

                  😀

                  I was thinking more along the lines that Haldol might be in order for his mania and psychotic features but you do have a good point. His obsession with Karen, Young, OLLY and others is concerning.

                  1. Estovir says:

                    “I was thinking more along the lines that Haldol might be in order for his mania and psychotic features but you do have a good point. His obsession with Karen, Young, OLLY and others is concerning.”

                    Not to worry. I have multiple personalities. Thankfully, none of them Trumpist.

                    1. “Not to worry. I have multiple personalities.”

                      We know that Jeff. Mao, Stalin, Castro, Pol Pot, etc.

                    2. I should mention this. Silberman is Germanic in origin, and you demonstrate an arrogance seen during those horrific times.

                      SM

                  2. His obsession with Karen, Young, OLLY and others is concerning.

                    Silberman is on the verge of completely losing it. He began commenting on this blog fairly rational. However he’s discovered two things: 1. He is far from being the smartest guy in the room. 2. He has no evidence to support the arguments that he would sell in other venues.

                    The best thing I could do for Silberman at this point is to ignore him. He’s suffering delusions; trumpist strawman and his recent affection for JT. He is even fantasizing you want to kill him. Perhaps we should all give him some space, move out of his head and see if his mental fitness improves.

                    1. Olly,

                      “He began commenting on this blog fairly rational.”

                      Thanks.

                      “The best thing I could do for Silberman at this point is to ignore him.”

                      As I ignore several people here, I would be a hypocrite were I to advise against it.

                      “Perhaps we should all give him some space, move out of his head and see if his mental fitness improves.”

                      Sadly, that won’t help. I think Turley has the best prescription for my bad speech. Give me good speech! That’s the only cure for my NeverTrumpism.

                      H_E_L_P!!!

                    2. “He began commenting on this blog fairly rational.”

                      Quite early, one could see that rationality was hard for Jeff. He is an authoritarian that is mean-spirited with a few marbles loose. He thinks he is brighter than he is and his lack of knowledge makes him a pitiful poster on the blog. Giving him space won’t do anything because he has to unload here or elsewhere. I think most people by now recognize Jeff as a person one would want to stay away from. Fortunately, our only contact with him is virtual.

                      SM

                    3. Quite early, one could see that rationality was hard for Jeff.

                      My guess is he learned early on that JT runs a free speech blog that is armed with actual fact-checkers. This meant he wasn’t going to find a safe space to post his alternative reality of facts and events. This resulted in him going on a crusade to attack our host. When that failed, he then built his trumpist strawman and claimed JT as his ideological brother-in-arms. While JT may lean to the left on things like climate change, he remains firmly fixed in constitutional law. That’s a worldview outside Silberman’s understanding.

                    4. Olly says:

                      “While JT may lean to the left on things like climate change, he remains firmly fixed in constitutional law.”

                      The fact remains that Turley like me has never been and never will be a Trumpist like you and Karen.

                      Both of you believe the election was stolen, and we do not. Say what you will, the bottom line is that you are liars.

                    5. Olly,

                      I think you and Estovir have it right. I ignored his last few posts as just kidding since I was half kidding with him. But I should have noticed the fairly rapid decline and I don’t want to aggravate the problem. Thanks to you and Estovir for the heads up.

                    6. Are any of you three Trumpists psychiatric professionals? Seriously. I have to know what is your expertise. I already know you are competent liars.

                    7. You’re right. Jeff has declined noticeably. He used to have fairly reasonable discussions but there’s been a marked change. It’s irrational at this point. I hope whatever is going on gets better in his life.

                    8. I hope whatever is going on gets better in his life.

                      You are a compassionate woman Karen. I sense that he is having a crisis in faith in what he understood to be true. I believe he’s educated, but as an avowed atheist, he has put his faith in like-minded men. And as we have seen, without the humility that comes from a belief in a power higher than man, narcissism will flourish. That isn’t to say Christians are immune from narcissism. NPD is actually quite common among the clergy. Not long ago I too was agnostic, leaning atheist. I was arrogant about it. A major difference however between Silberman and myself is I still believed we all had natural rights that did not come from government. I’ve always had the same question for those denying natural rights; if you succeed in your fight against natural rights, what do you believe you are winning?

                    9. Olly says:

                      “if you succeed in your fight against natural rights, what do you believe you are winning?”

                      The Truth.

                      Do you believe that humans are made of stardust exploded from Supernovae?

                      Do you suppose that stardust has natural rights?

                    10. Karen S says:

                      “Jeff has declined noticeably. He used to have fairly reasonable discussions but there’s been a marked change. It’s irrational at this point. I hope whatever is going on gets better in his life.”

                      The more I have challenged you, the more you have had to lie to me. Stop lying, and we will get along swimmingly.

            2. By this all men will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another.

              Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs.

          2. Jeff “AFTER Republicans agree to pay reparations to blacks whose ancestors suffered slavery.”

            You do know, don’t you, that the Democrats were the principal slaveholders and founders of the KKK? Even Biden has a slave owning ancestor.

            1. Young thinks he scored a point:

              “You do know, don’t you, that the Democrats were the principal slaveholders and founders of the KKK? Even Biden has a slave owning ancestor.”

              And?

                1. Young sadly is having a bad day:

                  “Biden and his slimy son, Hunter, should pay reparations to all of us.”

                  Look, don’t waste my time. Don’t sound like S.Meyer. I’m going to give you another opportunity to provide an *intelligent* answer. I’ll pretend you never uttered this inanity.

                  Everyone! Please ignore this comment by Young. We all know that he can do much better.

                  So, get some sleep and try once more. Let’s pick up where I left off:

                  And?

                  1. “Look, don’t waste my time. Don’t sound like S.Meyer. “

                    Jeff, young is one of the smartest on the blog. He even reads, something you have yet learned to do. If you want to sound smart instead of dumb, think how Young handles himself, and discard your habits that are those of a ten-year-old.

                    SM

            1. Sam says:

              “Blood guilt. Charming.”

              Well, you can’t trust those Chinese. They enjoy pointing out America’s problems to deflect from criticism of their human rights abuses.

          3. Jeff, you think China shouldn’t compensate nations who suffered millions of deaths and terrible damage to their economies because they negligently allowed a weaponized virus to escape, and then lied about it until it went pandemic, until the United States pays even more money to black people?

            The two are not related. That’s classic false logic.

            If China ever made such a claim, simple logic is a defense. As is the Uyghur genocide.

            Why do you think that fighting a civil war to end the ubiquitous evil of slavery was not enough?Slavery existed throughout human history. Black tribes captured their enemies and sold them into slavery to European and Barbary slavers. It was a black tribe who put each and every one of the black slaves into slavery. In fact, slavery is still commonly practiced in African nations.

            It was the West that abolished slavery. Without the West, slavery would likely still be the common state of man. Are you furious that Western society didn’t evolve faster?

            The US is the only country that I know of that fought a bloody civil war to free slaves. Very few people owned slaves, yet a great many fought to free perfect strangers. A great many people were killed or maimed. Families suffered the loss of the breadwinners for many years.

            The US should be lauded for its role in ending slavery. Claiming that the US owes an eternal debt is propaganda promoted by China and Russia in order to weaken the country. We should be proud of our country’s efforts.

            Why would you think that prejudice against black people would end the day after slavery ended? If Abraham Lincoln hadn’t been assassinated, I think many problems could have been averted. But the reality was that it took years for blacks to take their rightful place as equals in society. That long process is over. Racism against blacks is not culturally acceptable anymore. Mixed relationships are perfectly acceptable, which is a measure of any country’s level of racism. The US is one of the least racist countries on Earth.

            We’ve already spent billions of dollars to help black minorities. Yet for some, nothing will ever be enough. This is because it’s not about fairness. It’s a political scheme to constantly convince black people that they are helpless victims, that they must rely upon white people to survive, and that they’d better vote Democrat forever so that the benevolent government can take care of them. It’s a racist ideology.

            Under reparations, a black man could sell his slaves, immigrate here to the US, and then he or his descents could get paid reparations. This black man could have descended from a tribe who made a fortune capturing and selling rivals into slavery. Because of his skin color, he could get paid by Democrats here in the US.

            BLM claims that proven steps for success – getting married before kids, studying, punctuality, personal responsibility, and staying out of trouble, are whiteness, while steps proven to lead to failure are “black culture”. That’s an insult to successful black people.

            At what point does someone’s choices cause their situation in life?

            1. Karen mistakenly thinks:

              “Jeff, you think China shouldn’t compensate nations who suffered millions of deaths and terrible damage to their economies because they negligently allowed a weaponized virus to escape, and then lied about it until it went pandemic, until the United States pays even more money to black people?”

              I did not say that, damn you! I said that CHINA would! In the past, China has thrown in our face this country’s failures to deflect our criticism of their CURRENT human rights abuses. Can you understand the distinction?

              You ask:

              “Why do you think that fighting a civil war to end the ubiquitous evil of slavery was not enough?”

              Was Germany’s defeat enough to settle its debt to the victims of the Holocaust and their heirs decades after the end of the war? The South should be forgiven for losing the war?

              You claim:

              “a great many fought to free perfect strangers.”

              That is a false historical narrative.

              You say:

              “The US should be lauded for its role in ending slavery. Claiming that the US owes an eternal debt is propaganda promoted by China and Russia in order to weaken the country. We should be proud of our country’s efforts.”

              You sound just like those Germans who will not forgive the Jews for the Holocaust. You simply will not forgive blacks for slavery. Instead they should be thanking whites! Disgusting.

              You say:

              “But the reality was that it took years for blacks to take their rightful place as equals in society.”

              Just when I thought you couldn’t say a more bone-headed statement, you say this- “it took years *for blacks* to take their rightful place” as if to imply that it was the fault of blacks not to become equals sooner! They were *held back by whites*! Jesus!

              You say:

              “It’s a political scheme to constantly convince black people that they are helpless victims, that they must rely upon white people to survive, and that they’d better vote Democrat forever so that the benevolent government can take care of them. It’s a racist-ideology.”

              Anti-Semitic Germans probably made similar arguments that giving reparations to Jews would be treating them as helpless victims and would be doing them a greater disservice than not aiding them at all. Fortunately, people saw through that bogus argument.

              You ask:

              “At what point does someone’s choices cause their situation in life?”

              When a family grows wealthy from the labor of generations of slaves, this immoral choice at the expense of blacks CAUSES a situation in which the undue economic windfall should be repaid to those who would have inherited the generational wealth of their slave ancestors had they not been deprived of an income.

              1. “When a family grows wealthy from the labor of generations of slaves . . . the undue economic windfall should be repaid . . .”

                Name one such “family” and their alleged “victims.”

                And if you can identify such parties, then file a civil suit. Under an *individualist* system of civil law, that’s justice. But what you’re advocating (and the “reparations” gangsters want) is *collectivist* guilt and collectivist punishment.

        3. That doesn’t really answer my question.

          Sanction them how?
          Get financial compensation how?
          Held accountable how?

          1. “Sanction them how?
            Get financial compensation how?
            Held accountable how?”

            **
            I imagine Trump would have thought of something. China has a lot of assets in the United States. A sanction isn’t any good unless you can take something and that is something to take.

            It is pathetic that you can watch while an reckless government lets loose a plague that kills million of people and costs billions of dollars and then just whine, “But what can we do?” You don’t have much of the American ‘Can Do’ spirit.

            Nobody here will solve the problem, but someone can probably do it.

            1. You don’t get it. I’m asking Karen what *she* wants done.

              Because you don’t discuss things in good faith, you apparently do not understand the desire to understand someone else’s thinking.

              1. And I gave you a reasonable response. If she wants to give you her ideas she will. I’m not holding her back. She’s smart and may have better ideas. Apparently you haven’t thought of anything.

                1. Young: I couldn’t find your ideas, so these might be repetitive:

                  A class action suit is a good start.

                  And for compensation: China is holding some $1.1 *trillion* in U.S. Treasuries — enter judgment, exit debt. And China owns billions in U.S. land, real estate, and corporations.

                  This is a time for clever attorneys, and their forensic investigators, to shine.

  4. OT: The left is malicious. That can lead to suits. We might see Sullivan bend in the future to curtail malice etc. by any side.

    ‘Actual malice’: Courts greenlight Devin Nunes defamation lawsuits against mainstream media
    Eighth Circuit rules that tweeting old story in response to defamation lawsuit is a “republication” that may trigger liability.

    “The appeals court determined that Lizza tweeting the story after Nunes filed suit counts as “republication” that creates a “new audience” for a work identified as defamatory.”

    https://justthenews.com/government/courts-law/actual-malice-courts-bless-devin-nunes-defamation-lawsuits-against-mainstream?utm_source=daily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter

  5. China, its communist (liberal, progressive, socialist, democrat, RINO) allies and apologists’ feigned concern with the titling of “China Flu, 2019” is a red herring.

    China must be compelled to financially compensate every nation on earth for damages caused by “China Flu, 2019.”

    This amount could exceed $50 trillion.

    China maliciously released a lethal virus, or China maliciously failed to assure the security of lethal viruses at the Wuhan Institute of Virology in Wuhan, China.

    China maliciously failed to warn other countries of the release or escape of the “China Flu, 2019” virus.

    China deliberately, willfully and maliciously stopped the spread of “China Flu, 2019” inside China.

    China deliberately, willfully and maliciously allowed the spread of “China Flu, 2019” outside China.

    If China could not do the time, china should not have committed the crime.

    1. Which “China” are we talking about? /SARC. The Republic of China? The Peoples Republic of China? Red China? Communist China? Mainland China? Han China?

      This virus came from the Chinese mainland ruled by the Red Chinese Communist Party. period!!!!

      Ipso facto, anything coming from the mainland is Chinese as in China. The professors were. right and the university leftists/woke/PC administrators wrong. In the real world , they would have to apologize to him for their arrogance, stupidity, etc. but they won’t.

      Welcome to 1984!

  6. This Professor better clean up his act. When he teaches history about 1918 he better not call the Flu epidemic of the time the Spanish Flu. He might cause the students itty bitty hearts to flutter.

  7. The pigs are trying to get everyone at the factory fired. They are outraged because the workers are calling it the Swine Flu.

  8. There are myriad montages of the media and Democrat politicians calling Covid-19 the “Wuhan Coronavirus” or the “China virus.”

    And why did they do that? Because viruses are often named after their geographic source. See Ebola, Lyme’s Disease, etc.

    https://youtu.be/9PM2ckqfGkg

    China took preemptive measures to defend itself from blame. Its officials knew full well that the Wuhan Institute of Virology had conducted gain of function, and that it was the source of the outbreak. It spread propaganda that holding China in any way accountable, or even linking the virus to China, was xenophobic as a means to deflect association from a global pandemic the CCP caused.

    Millions dead. Economies battered. People out of jobs. Loved ones gone. That can be laid directly at the feet of the CCP.

    If this had just been a lab accident, and China promptly alerted global health officials, it would have sympathy and help. Nations could have thrown resources at the initial outbreak, slammed a lid on it, confined it to one area, and rendered it extinct. We all could have helped China cope with the economic cost that such an intense lockdown would have incurred.

    Instead, the CCP hid the outbreak from the world, giving it time to go global. It punished the doctors who warned the world of the pandemic. Researchers had to go against the CCP to publish the genetic code of the SARS-CoV2. The CCP shut them down, and then later released the data itself to save face. Then it spread this absurd propaganda that even mentioning the association of the virus with China was xenophobic.

    The CCP does this on top of spreading propaganda that the US is a racist nation. I don’t know how they do that with a straight face, considering their genocide against the Uyghur.

    The next time some fool parrots the talking point that referring to China’s connection to the virus it engineered and unleashed is xenophobic, you tell them that you don’t cooperate with the Chines Communist Party propaganda.

    God bless the Chinese citizens who risked their lives to warn us about Covid. The CCP who abuses its people can go jump off a bridge.

    1. Karen S says:

      “And why did they do that? Because viruses are often named after their geographic source. See Ebola, Lyme’s Disease, etc.”

      You have convinced me. I’m going to call it the “Trump Virus” because it proliferated in America on his watch.

      Done!

        1. Anonymous says:

          “Trump vaccine sounds a lot better and makes more sense.”

          Nope. It’s the “Biden Vaccine” which is explains why many Trumpists refuse to take “the jab.”

          Morons. That’s right, I said it, “Morons!”

          1. Jeff, let me introduce this complete stranger to you, known as Truth.

            It was Operation Warp Speed that brought us this EUA vaccine by the end of 2020, a feat that Democrats claimed couldn’t be done.

            Blacks and Latinos are the demographic group least likely to get vaccinated. This is also the group that is most likely to vote Democrat.

            In addition, the science does not support those with naturally acquired immunity from recovery from Covid getting vaccinated. Vaccination just approximates an illness to generate immunity. Only a total moron would consider someone with naturally acquired immunity to be an underclass to someone vaccinated.

            So you are right to use the term; you just misapplied it. There, I fixed it for you. Now I’ll leave you with the Truth so you two can become acquainted. Clearly you’ve never met before.

            1. Karen S:

              No Trumpist such as you should flatter yourself about being acquainted with the Truth. I am not unmindful of the science.

              The Morons of which I speak are those who have NO REASON not to take “the jab” but for “sticking it to the Libs.”

              You are not a moron since I presume you have had the good sense to get the Biden Vaccine to avoid the Trump Virus.

              1. Jeff, please explain why you call it the “Biden vaccine” since it was developed under Trump’s Operation Warp Speed, and distributed under him.

                When Biden took office, the vaccine was already EUA, manufactured, and getting distributed. Biden just converted O2 to CO2.

                If you want to be respected, you have to take this more seriously.

                1. Karen says:

                  “If you want to be respected, you have to take this more seriously.”

                  Neither of us respects the other. Let’s face it.

                  I call it the “Biden Vaccine” and the “Trump Virus” for the same reason that Trumpists call Covid the “Wuhan Virus” or “Kung Flu,” that is, just to be obnoxious.

                  I want to give you people a taste of your own *medicine* as it were. Apparently, you don’t like the taste of it.

                  1. Jeff, lots of people respect Karen and even some avowed leftists have said so. You garner no respect from anyone except from those that are mentally deficient and are looking for numbers rather than quality.

                  2. To Jeff, September 21, 2021 at 9:12 PM
                    The label “Wuhan” is affixed because that is the location where it was first reported. As Prof. Turley mentions, Ebola, Zika etc. are location names affixed to the disease or virus etc. because that is where they were first reported. The “Spanish” flu is a bit of an exception because it is not where the disease or pathogen was first discovered, but rather where it was first widely reported, due to WW I censorship in many countries, when it was decided to keep that news secret lest focus on the war be diminished, and leading to the reports originating from Spain being most widely known.
                    Note that “Trump” is not a place name, whereas “Wuhan” and “China” are. This seems confusing to you.
                    Also, in spite of the fact that a vaccine effective against Biden would be welcomed around the world, there does not seem to be such a thing, so “Biden vaccine” is also probably not a valid name.

                    1. Edo,

                      I’ll let Turley speak for me:

                      “I personally do not use the term because it is viewed as offensive by many and Covid-19 is now commonly used.”

                      You got a complaint; take it up with Turley because I stand with him.

                    2. “I’ll let Turley speak for me:”

                      The term Wuhan Virus became offensive because instead of treating it as a disease, the left treated it as a weapon while attempting to satisfy the CCP over logic and decency. I think Turley used the Term Wuhan Virus before the left and mindless people decided they would misuse the disease and make it part of their political theater.

                      Though Turley is too polite to say so, if he responded to your postings, he would think you to be an idiot.

                    3. Remember what I said. JS hates everyone who disagrees with him even JT who works some at Fox and is married to a Jew. JS even hates JT’s wife and kids even though they are democrats. They just are not far left enough! See JS sees himself as a godlike figure and needs a complete makeover into a nice, decent person. But gods always want total control of their world. Let’s just isolate him and keep his world as small as possible.

                    4. HJF1949, I agree with you about JS’s personality. It is hate mixed with envy and stupidity. He is repetitive, because aside from his hate of Trump and Fox for reasons not yet sufficiently disclosed and his envy of Turley, he says absolutely nothing.

                    5. It’s just very sad to see our country falling apart. I recently met 2 black gentleman riding my bicycle, both 60+ and we talk, cuss and laugh about the state of the union. They have lived very close to the beach on Hilton Head Island for generations. Both very religious and Baptist, both still working and know all the history of the island. They have a lot of sand that could easily sell for over 10 million $ but it will just stay in the family and both live in extremely well kept trailers with cars and beach furniture outside. We have become very very close friends. I do not know their politics nor do I care. Chester said to me my mother told me you will know good people when you meet them and get to know them. It’s just like the Supreme Court Justice said I will know pornography when I see it. These 2 wonderful men are all I need to know I’m a good person. I certainly don’t pay any attention to what JS says. JS would not give a Trump supporter air, food, or water if they were dying. JS would just sit and laugh and watch us die. Chester and Carl would take me into their homes and take care of me until I was able to be independent again. Good people do that. I would do the same for them. I am not rich. I am not poor but I sleep well knowing I have done all I can to make the world a better place. I have done my charity work and still do. I am not at all afraid of death because I am a Christian man. Maybe JS will have his come to face God moment and it will change him into a kinder person. I truly hope so.

                    6. Hjf claims:

                      “JS even hates JT’s wife and kids even though they are democrats. They just are not far left enough! See JS sees himself as a godlike figure and needs a complete makeover into a nice, decent person.”

                      You are completely mad. I’m putting you on my no-contact list with S.Meyer, JohnSay, n.n., George, and phergus. You earned it. Congratulations!

                  3. JS hates everyone who disagrees with him

                    Saul Alinsky “Rules for Radicals”

                    Rule 4: Make opponents live up to their own book of rules. “You can kill them with this, for they can no more obey their own rules than the Christian church can live up to Christianity.”

                    Rule 5: Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon. It’s hard to counterattack ridicule, and it infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage.

                    Rule 6: A good tactic is one your people enjoy. “If your people aren’t having a ball doing it, there is something very wrong with the tactic.”

                    Rule 8: Keep the pressure on. Use different tactics and actions and use all events of the period for your purpose. “The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition. It is this that will cause the opposition to react to your advantage.”

                    Rule 10: The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative. Avoid being trapped by an opponent or an interviewer who says, “Okay, what would you do?”

                    Rule 11: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, polarize it. Don’t try to attack abstract corporations or bureaucracies. Identify a responsible individual. Ignore attempts to shift or spread the blame.

                    https://citizenshandbook.org/rules.html

                  4. Jeff, the difference is that you are deliberately lying when you call it the “Biden Vaccine” or the “Trump Virus”, or when you claim that vaccine hesitancy is only a Trump phenomenon.

                    The vaccine was developed under the Trump Administration. Giving credit to Biden is simply lying.

                    Trump did not start the virus. Trump is not the reason why it spread. When we thought we identified the first cases on that cruise ship, they were whisked away to a military facility for hard core quarantine and treatment. Spouses were not allowed to see each other if one was positive and the other was not.

                    Democrats fought tooth and nail to prevent closing our border. That allowed new cases to stream in.

                    Then it was discovered that SARS-CoV2 had legs since last November because the CCP hid its origin and initial outbreak, allowing a local epidemic to go global.

                    Stop blaming Trump. Stop lying, if you can.

                    Biden has let in over one million illegal aliens, many of whom were sick with Covid. It is homicidal negligence to do this during a pandemic. This moron is killing people, has already caused the death of many in his disastrous surrender to the terrorist Taliban of Afghanistan. The one time he authorized a strike it was against an Afghan aid worker with no terrorist ties whatsoever. Now people are wondering if they relied upon the Taliban for their intel.

                    We want China to take responsibility and be held accountable, for its actions that engineered a dangerous virus, allowed it to escape, hid its local epidemic, and allowed it to grow into a pandemic that killed over a million people. The Democrats are doing the Chinese Communist Party’s bidding, spreading propaganda intended to deflect blame and responsibility. It is ludicrous to claim that connecting the CCP’s actions to the virus is racist or xenophobic. It is doubly ironic, as the Democrats blatantly discriminate against Asians in university admissions, high performing high school admissions, and hiring practices, as well as deeming traditional Asian culture that values education to be “whiteness.”

                    Your lying is unbecoming and beneath you. You don’t even want to attempt to understand the validity and sincerity of the argument. You’ve been reduced to hurling road apples. It’s sad.

                    1. “When we thought we identified the first cases on that cruise ship, they were whisked away to a military facility for hard core quarantine and treatment. ”

                      First, there were multiple cruise ships with infected American passengers. Some Americans were left on the cruise ships for weeks overseas, as more people on the ships became infected.
                      Second, Trump did not allow the passengers of ships at US docks to disembark promptly and quarantine, again promoting spread on the ships.
                      Third, some of the infected American passengers disembarked in other countries and flew back to the U.S., without waiting for test results prior to boarding the planes, and there were no federal plans for possible spread during the flights or quarantining of most of those passengers upon disembarking in the US.
                      At the time, Trump complained “I don’t need to have the numbers double because of one ship that wasn’t our fault.”

                      So your claim just isn’t accurate. If you want to discuss it further, with both of us providing evidence for our claims, let me know.

                      “Democrats fought tooth and nail to prevent closing our border.”

                      The border was never closed. There were limits placed on entry by foreign nationals from some locations, and Democrats didn’t fight that. Again, there was little effort to prevent Americans returning from those locations from transmitting it during flights, and there was insufficient care taken at US airports upon their return.

                      Trump publicly denied the seriousness for quite a while, saying things like “We have it totally under control. It’s one person coming in from China. It’s going to be just fine,” “Looks like by April, you know in theory when it gets a little warmer, it miraculously goes away,” and “The 15 (cases in the US) within a couple of days is going to be down to close to zero,” and falsely claiming in March, 2020 that “anybody that needs a test gets a test.” Privately, he admitted that it was quite serious.

                      “Stop blaming Trump.”

                      I will blame Trump for his mistakes. This is not a situation where he is either responsible for all mistakes (he isn’t) or responsible for none (he isn’t). He is responsible for a number of serious mistakes, and there is no reason not to blame him for the mistakes that were his.

                      “Biden has let in over one million illegal aliens”

                      You were already corrected on that this week (the # you are counting started under Trump, and it’s the # of apprehensions, not the # of people). Why do you keep saying this?

                      “The one time he authorized a strike it was against an Afghan aid worker with no terrorist ties whatsoever”

                      Bush, Obama, Trump, and Biden all authorized many strikes. Trump killed more Afghan civilians than any other president.

                      “We want China to take responsibility and be held accountable, for its actions that engineered a dangerous virus, allowed it to escape, hid its local epidemic, and allowed it to grow into a pandemic that killed over a million people.”

                      I want them to take responsibility too, but I doubt they will. According to you, what does holding them accountable involve?

                      “The Democrats are doing the Chinese Communist Party’s bidding”

                      BS. If you’re going to tell others to be honest, do it yourself.

                    2. The British cruise ship Diamond Princess quarantined at Yokohama. That was the first one I can recall. Eventually, dozens of cruise ships had confirmed cases. This was, again, because China had lied about the pandemic and allowed it to spread. Diamond Princess had left Yokohama on Jan 20, and accounted for the spread of about half of initial cases outside of China.

                      Since China had hidden aspects of the disease, world governments initially thought it would not spread. Passengers who were asymptomatic were thought to not be at risk at first. The US government chartered aircraft to evacuate its people, who would be quarantined for 14 days. They picked them up on February 17th, 13 days after the ship began isolation. Other countries followed suit.

                      More passengers became ill either during the trip home, or after getting back to the US. This is why they were quarantined for 14 days. Why was anyone removed before all results were in? Because no matter what, we were going to take care of them in the US. It was originally thought that they wouldn’t be contagious, or as contagious, before they showed symptoms. They were going to be strictly quarantined. The disease was spreading like wildfire on the cruise ship, so simply leaving them on the ship, or in Japan, was not what the Trump administration wanted to do. We wanted to take care of our own people.

                      I was acquainted with one of the people on these ships. The quarantine on a military base they described was hard core. This is one of the reasons why the claim that Covid wasn’t taken seriously makes no sense to me. These people were quarantined on military bases as if they had the most infectious Ebola on Earth.

                      Since the world didn’t know that Covid had legs since Nov 2019, most nations believed that Covid-19 was going to get wiped out. All you had to do was quarantine, and contact tracing, and you could beat it. And we could have, too, if the Chinese Communist Party had only fessed up as soon as they knew of the outbreak. The whole world could have pitched in to help contain it. Once it spread globally, it eventually became clear that it was too late to contain it.

                      Don’t judge the actions on days 1-25 based on what you know now.

                    3. Anonymous, look, if you’re going to deny that the Biden Administration has created an illegal immigration crisis at the border, or its order of magnitude, then there is no point arguing with you. Your house in on fire and you’re refusing to admit it’s happening, interfering with the fire department, and calling everyone a liar who tells you that it’s burning. You also apparently have amnesia about Democrats calling Trump racist and xenophobic on Covid travel restrictions. Nancy Pelosi went to China Town and said, on camera, for people to stop worrying about Covid. Fauci said Covid was not going to be a big deal. Like I said, we originally thought we had identified all the global early cases, and that we’d get a lid on it. Trump did share Pelosi and many other politicians’ early perspective that we’d handle it, and there was no need to panic, although he did want to guard our border to prevent importing it.

                      If you can’t live in reality, I can’t debate dissonance.

                      I think Biden has come to realize that it’s a lot easier to bash a president’s performance than it is to sit at the Resolution Desk or run a press conference. He’s in the hot seat now. And Trump is probably enjoying criticizing an administration’s actions when he’s not in that hot seat.

                    4. “The US government chartered aircraft to evacuate its people, who would be quarantined for 14 days.”

                      Yes, but the US waited 2 weeks after Japan initially quarantined the ship before evacuating most of the Americans. Then on the flights back to the US, the government had passengers who’d already tested positive on the same flights as other evacuees.

                      “These people were quarantined on military bases as if they had the most infectious Ebola on Earth.”

                      I’d be glad to be convinced of that with evidence.

                      The first question would be: how were the people who met them when the flights landed protected? Here’s an article from that time which says “A whistleblower at the Department of Health and Human Services is seeking federal protection after complaining that more than a dozen workers who received the first Americans evacuated from Wuhan, China, lacked proper training or protective gear for coronavirus infection control. … The report alleges that staff were sent into quarantined areas ‘without personal protective equipment, training, or experience in managing public health emergencies, safety protocols, and the potential danger to both themselves and members of the public they come into contact with.'”
                      https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/27/politics/hhs-whistleblower-coronavirus/index.html

                      “Don’t judge the actions on days 1-25 based on what you know now.”

                      I’ll judge it based on whether it was handled according to proper procedures then, whether they followed the pandemic playbook that they’d been given in 2017, whether Trump was honest, …

                      “You also apparently have amnesia about Democrats calling Trump racist and xenophobic on Covid travel restrictions. ”

                      No, I don’t, and it’s counterproductive for you to make false claims about me. We weren’t discussing whether people called him racist. They did call him racist. I was responding to your false claim “Democrats fought tooth and nail to prevent closing our border.” That is not about what names Trump was called. As for the complex issues on the border currently, you made a false claim about the #s, and if you want to discuss it truthfully, then the first step is to stop repeating things that were already shown to be false.

                    5. Karen says:

                      “Your lying is unbecoming and beneath you. You don’t even want to attempt to understand the validity and sincerity of the argument. You’ve been reduced to hurling road apples.”

                      I have said repeatedly that I had my tongue in my cheek when I used the labels “Trump Virus” and “Biden Vaccine.” I used these terms to give Trumpists a taste of their own lying by infuriating them. It worked.

                      I will NOT be lectured by Trumpist liars about honesty. When YOU freely admit that Trump is an inveterate liar, then we’ll talk about lying.

                2. Karen, please don’t bother trying to reason with people that call the vaccine the “Biden Vaccine” because their baseline of reality is not something with which you can reason.

                  Maybe more people would get the vaccine, as I did at the first opportunity, if we didn’t have Harris and others saying they wouldn’t take it. Maybe Jeff and the other morons that claim it is Trumpists that won’t get the jab should take a peek at the vaccine rate among Blacks and Latinos, two DEMOCRAT supporting blocs.

                  Frankly trying to debate with a person that says the vaccine is the Biden vaccine is a waste of time.

                  1. Hullbobby advises:

                    “Frankly trying to debate with a person that says the vaccine is the Biden vaccine is a waste of time.”

                    Quite correct. Exactly my attitude when Trumpists call COVID “Wuhan Virus” or “Kung Flu.” Debating with such Trumpists is a waste of time which is why I called the vaccine the “Biden Vaccine” to prove my point.

                    You Trumpists don’t appreciate the wrongfulness of your lies until it is thrown back in your face by Never Trumpers. For instance, the Durham Investigation is a WITCH-HUNT! How do you like that? Huh?

                    1. Jeff, you are covering up your ignorance. You believed the media when some called it the Biden vaccine, and you have been calling it that ever since. Trump brought the vaccine to the marketplace. The problem exists because of you and your type of thinking (Biden and Harris talking about refusing the vaccine on TV). Your type of rhetoric that confuses the public is wrong. If anyone should want to cancel anyone, it should be you.

                      The entire spectrum of politics was calling Covid the Wuhan Virus or the China Virus. Suddenly the hyper-partisan Jeff’s decided to play politics and call Trump a racist. It had nothing to do with reality. Most simply put, it was the mean, ignorant and bitter hyper-partisanship of the left.

                  2. “Maybe Jeff and the other morons that claim it is Trumpists that won’t get the jab should take a peek at the vaccine rate among Blacks and Latinos, two DEMOCRAT supporting blocs.”

                    Compare it for yourself:
                    https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#vaccination-demographic

                    Now check out white evangelicals and the uninsured (scroll down to the section titled “Black adults about as likely as White adults to have received a COVID-19 vaccine”):
                    pewresearch.org/science/2021/09/15/majority-in-u-s-says-public-health-benefits-of-covid-19-restrictions-worth-the-costs-even-as-large-shares-also-see-downsides/
                    And Trump voters vs. Biden voters:
                    kff.org/policy-watch/the-red-blue-divide-in-covid-19-vaccination-rates/

                    1. 1) Read the disclaimer up at the front of the CDC report and learn what constitutes a meaningful study.

                      2) Re kff: Again read what they are comparing. They are comparing districts not individuals that voted. Your ideas involving proof are very embryonic. Thou you tell us that you have some science background, you don’t show it in your responses

                  3. Hullbobby, you’re right, of course. Jeff knows full well that Democrat blacks and Latinos are the least likely to get the Covid vaccine, which means he’s deliberately spreading propaganda he knows is untrue.

                    It takes a legion of such useful soldiers to promote falsehoods and propaganda. It is their efforts by which many abusive regimes have rise to power, from the Chinese Communist Party, to Pol Pot.

                    I’m allowing myself to be manipulated by responding to obviously provocative and blatantly false propaganda. It’s like someone proclaiming the sun is the moon, and then laughing when people try to convince them otherwise.

                    1. “Jeff knows full well that Democrat blacks and Latinos are the least likely to get the Covid vaccine”

                      This is false Karen.

                      White evangelical Protestants and the uninsured are less likely to get it than Democratic Blacks and Latinos.

                      Here are data again (scroll down to the section titled “Black adults about as likely as White adults to have received a COVID-19 vaccine”):
                      https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2021/09/15/majority-in-u-s-says-public-health-benefits-of-covid-19-restrictions-worth-the-costs-even-as-large-shares-also-see-downsides/

                      So why do YOU keep making that false claim?

                    2. Anonymous – I’ll check out your link. Thank you for providing it. I based my statements on blacks and Latinos showing vaccine hesitancy based on data made available previously. However, when I just checked, it appears that gap is narrowing due to increased efforts to vaccinate those demographics. There is still a gap in the vaccination rates of whites (53%) and blacks (45%) that is greater than your article suggested. However, to be fair, that gap has been decreasing. The reasons for this decrease were not studied. I wondered if the increase in vaccinations could be due to mandates forcing people to get vaccinated to go to school, access public places, or attend schools. The paper conjectured on these reasons, as well, although the authors wondered if it was due to outreach and increased access: “At the same time, the data show that these disparities are narrowing over time, particularly for Hispanic people. This may reflect a combination of efforts focused on increasing vaccination rates among people of color through outreach and education and reduction of access and logistical barriers to vaccination, increased interest in getting the vaccine as the Delta variant continues to spread, and the increases in vaccinations among younger adults and adolescents who include higher shares of people of color compared to other adults. Despite this progress, the ongoing disparities in rates highlight the importance of continued efforts to increase vaccination rates and to address gaps in vaccination both geographically and across racial/ethnic groups.”

                      As of September 9, 2021:

                      “Overall, across these 43 states, the percent of White people who have received at least one COVID-19 vaccine dose (53%) was 1.2 times higher than the rate for Black people (45%) and 1.1 times higher than the rate for Hispanic people (49%) as of September 20, 2021. White people had a higher vaccination rate compared to Hispanic people in most reporting states, except Missouri, Vermont, Tennessee, DC, Louisiana, Virginia, Nevada, New York and South Carolina. White people also had a higher rate than Black people in every reporting state, except Oregon, Alaska, Idaho, Mississippi, Washington, and Louisiana. The size of these differences varied widely across states, and they have been narrowing over time. The overall vaccination rate across states for Asian people was higher compared to White people (69% vs. 53%), which is consistent with the pattern in most reporting states”

                      “Between September 7 and September 20, Black and Hispanic people experienced a slightly larger increase in vaccination rates compared to White and Asian people, narrowing the disparities in vaccination rates (Figure 4).”

                      https://www.kff.org/coronavirus-covid-19/issue-brief/latest-data-on-covid-19-vaccinations-race-ethnicity/

                    3. Anonymous:

                      Drilling down on black vaccine hesitancy. This was from August 2021. Note that HCW stands for “health care workers”. Multiple studies have come to similar conclusions about vaccine hesitancy. Note that someone can be mandated to get a vaccine in order to go to school or keep their job, but that does not affect their hesitancy or concerns about the vaccine. Although there has been polls, such as the one you mentioned, that showed that vaccination rates are increasing in black and Latino communities, they are still behind white vaccination rates, and those polls did not track how the participants felt or thought about the vaccine, such as not wanting to get it.

                      Hopefully this clarifies why many of us conclude that vaccine hesitancy is highest among blacks and Latinos. It has been repeatedly shown to be true. The data is what it is, just like the data also shows that there has been a narrowing of the gap in actual vaccination rates, regardless of how these groups feel about it.

                      https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2783615

                      “This survey study of 10 871 HCWs from 2 academic hospitals found that, compared with White HCWs, vaccine hesitancy was increased nearly 5-fold among Black HCWs, 2-fold among Hispanic or Latino HCWs, and by nearly 50% among Asian HCWs and HCWs who were members of other racial/ethnic groups.

                      Meaning These findings suggest that interventions focused on addressing vaccine hesitancy among HCWs are needed, particularly for Black and Hispanic or Latino HCWs, among whom hesitancy is highest.”

                      If you posted your information before, I wasn’t ignoring you. I just didn’t see it.

                    4. Karen says:

                      “I’m allowing myself to be manipulated by responding to obviously provocative and blatantly false propaganda. It’s like someone proclaiming the sun is the moon, and then laughing when people try to convince them otherwise.”

                      Liberals and Turley have been doing it since Trump came down from the escalator. It’s a little late for you Trumpists to be complaining about “provocative and blatantly false propaganda!”

                      If only you could see me smiling at your hysterical accusation!

              2. The Morons of which I speak are those who have NO REASON not to take “the jab” but for “sticking it to the Libs.

                Wow, you just learned that blacks and Hispanics are the largest defined group of hestitant vaccine participants.

                You promptly lable all of them. morons. I have always known leftist are the racists.

                1. People as far left as JS are so full of hate that it totally consumes their ability to reason. Just saying all Trump supporters are bad people is a very sick, evil state of mind. To disagree is one thing but to hate millions of patriots is just wrong. Their heart is so dark that all judgement is clouded. They will never change so the best thing to do is to just eliminate these people from your life. JS’s home is Israel, I think he should move back and deal with Hamas and all Israel’s neighbors that hate all Jews and want all of them eliminated. The problem is he, and all far left Jews, will never move back, to afraid of what will happen if they do move back. They would much rather bring more hate here with open borders. Let at least 200,000 illegals into the US, especially the ones who are criminals, sick with many diseases, drug cartel connections, and of course Muslims who believe in Sharia Law. Can you imagine what would happen to JS if he tried to enter a Muslim community that worshipped strict Sharia law and Mohammed? That movie has already been filmed. The Jewish nation started when Abraham made the covenant with God. I wonder what God thinks of the hate filled people like JS when their total story is supposed to be about FREEDOM and LOVE! JS needs to have a long. serious talk with an Orthodox rabbi!

                  1. Hjf claims:

                    “Just saying all Trump supporters are bad people is a very sick, evil state of mind.”

                    Not quite. Trumpists are liars which makes them deplorable. I have never called anyone “bad.” My moral criticisms are specific.

                    You say:

                    “JS’s home is Israel, I think he should move back.”

                    I was born here. I’m as American as you are though you think of me as a Jew only.

                    You say:

                    “I wonder what God thinks of the hate filled people like JS.”

                    Jews are the CHOSEN PEOPLE and don’t you goyim forget it.

                2. “blacks and Hispanics are the largest defined group of hestitant vaccine participants.”

                  That’s false. I have already provided evidence in my 8:51 AM comment that it’s false. So stop repeating it.

                  1. Anonymous, although your article included data that vaccinations have increased among blacks and Latinos, the gap still exists. It also did not in any way address hesitancy or not wanting the shot. You can be forced to get the shot in order to go to school or keep your job, but you still have the same hesitancy about it.

                    This is the data, consistent across studies, upon which the statements about black vaccine hesitancy are based.

                    https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2783615

                    “This survey study of 10 871 HCWs from 2 academic hospitals found that, compared with White HCWs, vaccine hesitancy was increased nearly 5-fold among Black HCWs, 2-fold among Hispanic or Latino HCWs, and by nearly 50% among Asian HCWs and HCWs who were members of other racial/ethnic groups.

                    Meaning These findings suggest that interventions focused on addressing vaccine hesitancy among HCWs are needed, particularly for Black and Hispanic or Latino HCWs, among whom hesitancy is highest.”

                    1. Karen,

                      You made a claim about “the largest defined group of hestitant vaccine participants.” I wasn’t attentive enough to the distinction you’re drawing between vaccination hesitancy (which your article define “as not planning on, being unsure about, or planning to delay vaccination”) and vaccination rates (regardless of whether one was hesitant). Thanks for drawing my attention to the difference.

                      “You can be forced to get the shot in order to go to school or keep your job, but you still have the same hesitancy about it.”

                      That’s possible. It’s also possible that you’re initially hesitant but talk with your doctor and friends and become less hesitant as your concerns are addressed through these conversations and as you see the news that most of the people ending up hospitalized now are unvaccinated.

                      “This is the data, consistent across studies, upon which the statements about black vaccine hesitancy are based.”

                      But it isn’t consistent across studies. For example, here’s a different study:

                      “Hispanic Protestants and white evangelical Protestants remain the least likely religious groups to be vaccine accepters (56% for both groups), but both groups nonetheless saw double-digit increases in acceptance since March (43% and 45%, respectively). … The proportions of religious groups that say they will not get vaccinated have held steady since March. The highest refusal rate is still among white evangelical Protestants (24%).”
                      https://www.prri.org/research/religious-vaccines-covid-vaccination/

                      And another:

                      “The July KFF COVID-19 Vaccine Monitor finds the key demographic differences between the “wait and see” and the “definitely not” groups still center on racial and ethnic identity and political partisanship. Four in ten of those in the “wait and see” group are people of color, while the most vaccine resistant group, those who say they will “definitely not” get a COVID-19 vaccine, is overwhelmingly made up of White adults (65% of the group compared to 50% of the “wait and see” group). Partisanship also plays a major role with more than half (58%) of the “definitely not” group identifying as Republican or Republican-leaning. In addition, religious identity also plays a role as White Evangelical Christians make up nearly twice the share of the “definitely not” group (32%) as the “wait and see” group.”
                      https://www.kff.org/coronavirus-covid-19/dashboard/kff-covid-19-vaccine-monitor-dashboard/

                    2. Anonymous, it’s good to identify demographic groups’ response to vaccine availability for outreach.

                      What I would add is that naturally acquired immunity from recovery from Covid should be included in herd immunity analysis. Some countries have included this in their estimation of herd immunity.

                      I also prefer outreach and compassion over hostility to people are who genuinely worried about a new vaccine to take.

                    3. Karen says:

                      “I also prefer outreach and compassion over hostility to people are who genuinely worried about a new vaccine to take.”

                      We should treat people who selfishly refuse to take the vaccine as we do smokers who threaten non-smokers with their toxic second-hand smoke. We tell them to keep their distance.

            2. “It was Operation Warp Speed that brought us this EUA vaccine by the end of 2020, a feat that Democrats claimed couldn’t be done.”

              Pfizer — the first vaccine to get an EUA — did not take federal funds to develop the vaccine.

              “Blacks and Latinos are the demographic group least likely to get vaccinated.”

              No. Trump voters and white evangelicals are less likely as groups to get vaccinated than either Blacks as a group or Latinos as a group.

              “the science does not support those with naturally acquired immunity from recovery from Covid getting vaccinated.”

              Wrong again. The immunity of people who have had Covid is stronger after vaccination than natural immunity alone.

              “Now I’ll leave you with the Truth so you two can become acquainted. Clearly you’ve never met before.”

              Maybe you shouldn’t be so snarky when you get so much wrong yourself.

              1. Anonymous the Stupid is being deceitful again and lying. the US government bought Pfizer vaccine before it was produced. A financial dummy might not recognize what that means, but I think most others do.

                Does anyone think a good study, unflawed by selection bias, has an accurate assessment of who voted for Trump? I guess Anonymous the Stupid doesn’t understand how studies are done. I know of no studies that compared a Trump group to blacks. Such a study doesn’t exist except those produced by political hacks. That type of study is meaningless much like ATS.

                ATS doesn’t understand immunity and he is being deceptive. He also isn’t replying to what was said.

              2. Pfizer — the first vaccine to get an EUA — did not take federal funds to develop the vaccine.

                On July 22, Pfizer agreed to a $1.95 billion deal with the Trump administration “for large-scale production and nationwide delivery of 100 million doses of a COVID-19 vaccine in the United States following the vaccine’s successful manufacture and approval.”

                I wasn’t sure about the whole funding thing, but I did catch the blinding obvious use of qualifying language you inserted.

                I have my opinion, but I will allow others to judge your veracity for themselves.

                1. Development (prior to drug/vaccine approval) is distinct from production (after approval).

                  My claim that Pfizer — the first vaccine to get an EUA — did not take federal funds to **develop** the vaccine is true.

                  1. Anonymous, Pfizer accessed taxpayer money through a more oblique method, and they did so during the development process. As was pointed out, they were also granted an enormous contract that hinged upon FDA approval. This was guaranteed income. Besides any ATI contracts, Pfizer could beg, borrow, and steal to support its R&D because it had the government contract. This allowed Pfizer to avoid taxpayer protections, price control, and to retain more intellectual property rights. The GAO also noted critical supply chokepoints. Pfizer couldn’t even meet the amount in the contract, and had to keep reducing expectations. Yet Biden has claimed that Trump didn’t order enough vaccines as if this was an option.

                    Why didn’t Trump order a billion vaccines? Because at the time the government created these contracts, the vaccines weren’t even approved yet. They were still in the development process.

                    “Officials knew early on that Pfizer wouldn’t accept federal funding for research and development, but the company was making moves to be part of Operation Warp Speed in its own way. Sometime that summer, it joined a group of academics and companies called the Medical CBRN Defense Consortium, according to an August 2020 notice in the Federal Register. The consortium is run by a defense contract management firm called Advanced Technology International Inc.

                    Pfizer’s Coronavirus Vaccine Supply Contract Excludes Many Taxpayer Protections Nov. 24, 2020
                    Instead of entering into contracts directly with vaccine makers, more than $6 billion in Operation Warp Speed funding would be routed through Advanced Technology International, which then awarded contracts to companies working on COVID-19 vaccines.
                    The contracts could be more tailored to the company’s wants and needs and include fewer standard taxpayer protections because Advanced Technology International specializes in nontraditional government contracts.

                    But Operation Warp Speed needed to be sure all the vaccine studies had similar designs so they could be compared with one another, Slaoui said.

                    “The hardest one was with Pfizer because they were saying, ‘I’m not getting any money from you. So I don’t have to agree.’ The answer was, ‘Yes, we understand. However, if you want to get the commit[ment] to buy the vaccine, we have to be able to compare it to the Moderna vaccine, to the J&J vaccine, to the Oxford vaccine.'””

                    “In exchange for doing its research and development without government help, Pfizer got a contract that let it retain almost all of its intellectual property rights and forgo the taxpayer protection clauses found in most government contracts that fund inventions.”

                    https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2021/08/25/1029715721/pfizer-vaccine-operation-warp-speed-delay

                    1. “Pfizer accessed taxpayer money through a more oblique method, and they did so during the development process.”

                      But my claim was about whether they took public funds FOR development, which you elide.

                    2. Anonymous – could you explain the difference between receiving taxpayer funds during, compared with for, development?

                      Pfizer did accept taxpayer money, but they did so in a way that allowed them more control over the product, the research, and the intellectual property, reduced government oversight and visits, and avoided taxpayer protections such as price controls.

                      They absolutely did get taxpayer funds, they received some of these funds as part of R&D, but by receiving it under a different umbrella it was advantageous to them as a company.

                      The Trump Administration also negotiated a contract for millions of Pfizer doses. Although Pfizer did have trouble meeting the quantity of the contract, having this order and funding in place, as well as receiving the aforementioned funding, allowed Pfizer to hit the ground running and deliver vaccines far ahead of a normal schedule.

                      The approval process of a novel vaccine usually takes years. Manufacturing is not ramped up until and unless the FDA approves it. New vaccines trickle out over a long period of time until the supply chain is established.

                      Under Trump’s Operation Warpspeed, the Administration bet that the FDA was going to approve the vaccines, and committed a great deal of money towards getting manufacturing infrastructure into place. It also addressed critical supply bottlenecks. We discovered that some vaccine ingredients are only manufactured overseas, which was an obvious problem during the pandemic.

                      We would have to see the grants and contracts from ATI to know what, specifically, Pfizer used the money for.

                      Even ignoring the public funds distributed during development via ATI, one can see a direct impact of Operation Warpspeed on the Pfizer vaccine. Without OW, Pfizer would have struggled with the supply chain of critical ingredients. It would have taken longer to get EUA from the FDA. It would have held off on designing manufacturing logistics until the FDA granted EUA. It would have then taken the normal amount of time, years, from inception through trials to manufacture and distribution that vaccines normally take.

                      It was Operation Warpspeed that brought our vaccines to arms in the shortest time ever recorded.

                      Instead of politicizing this, resenting any scores from the other team, we really need to put politics aside and evaluate what worked and what didn’t. Covid 19 is here to stay. The way it replicates constantly generates new variants, which will be selected for based on their ability to circumvent immunity, either naturally acquired or vaccine acquired. We could get a super variant. Future variants might affect young people worse than older people, as the Spanish Flu did.

                      We should also assume that the CCP was not only working on one strain of virus. There could be more in the WIV.

                      For years, bioethicists have cautioned against some of the research going on around the world, from saving Smallpox samples to experiment on, to creating humanized lab animals, to doing gain of function. The purported reason for most of this research is to study super viruses in contained environments in order to figure out weapons to fight them. That sounds so grand that the research does get funded often.

                      However, like Africanized bees, this kind of research containment is not foolproof. Much of this research occurs in countries around the world with questionable biosafety records.

                      We need to learn from this disastrous mistake and immediately evaluate what sort of research is going on in China, Russia, North Korea, Western Europe, here…

                      What do you think the chances are that this beastie was the only pathogen they were working on at this lab alone?

                      https://www.dailywire.com/news/damning-new-report-reveals-what-wuhan-scientists-british-zoologist-were-up-to-in-months-before-pandemic

                      Scientists at the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV), including British zoologist Peter Daszak of EcoHealth Alliance, were reportedly planning to release “enhanced airborne coronaviruses into Chinese bat populations” to inoculate them in the months before the pandemic. The scientists also sought funding from the U.S. to “create chimeric viruses,” which are “genetically enhanced to infect humans more easily.”

                      The Telegraph reported that the plans from the Chinese scientists were revealed in leaked grant proposals dating back to 2018, which a former U.S. official confirmed as being authentic, the outlet claimed.

                      New documents show that just 18 months before the first Covid-19 cases appeared, researchers had submitted plans to release skin-penetrating nanoparticles containing ‘novel chimeric spike proteins’ of bat coronaviruses into cave bats in Yunnan, China,” The Telegraph reported. “Papers, confirmed as genuine by a former member of the Trump administration, show they were hoping to introduce ‘human-specific cleavage sites’ to bat coronaviruses which would make it easier for the virus to enter human cells.”

                      The report said that Daszak, who has emerged as a shadowy figure in the search for the origins of the coronavirus pandemic, submitted the bid. Daszak reportedly sought $14 million for the research from the U.S.’s Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA).

                      DARPA refused to fund the project, saying, “It is clear that the proposed project led by Peter Daszak could have put local communities at risk.””

                      The report said that Daszak’s team had not considered how dangerous the work was — and particularly had not considered the potential danger of releasing a vaccine by air.

                      The report noted that Daszak was behind a letter in the Lancet that helped to shut down talk of whether the pandemic originated in a Chinese lab. Nearly all of the scientists that signed the Lancet letter have ties to the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV).”

                    3. “Anonymous – could you explain the difference between receiving taxpayer funds during, compared with for, development? ”

                      Sure. Suppose development runs from January through June, and production runs from June through December. Suppose further that the government pays you in advance, in June, for vaccine you’ll produce from June to September. This means that you’ve received government funds during the Jan.-June period (because you got the funds in June), but the funds were for production, not for development. Put differently, “during” refers to the timing, but “for” refers to the purpose. Does that help?

                      “they received some of these funds as part of R&D”

                      What funds were they? It’s possible that what I said (“Pfizer — the first vaccine to get an EUA — did not take federal funds to develop the vaccine”) is wrong, and I should have said “Pfizer — the first vaccine to get an EUA — did not take Operation Warp Speed funds to develop the vaccine.”

                      “The Trump Administration also negotiated a contract for millions of Pfizer doses”

                      Yes. That’s for production, not development.

                      “Covid 19 is here to stay”

                      Possibly. We don’t know yet.

                  2. Your claim is not valid. Pfizer’s job is researching and producing new medications and the like. They do that with or without government aid. Knowing they had a contract for a buyer permitted them to deliver the vaccine without worrying about who would buy it and at what price.

                    You do not understand economics or business, yet you pretend to know things that do not exist. You are deceptive, or you are lying.

                    SM

                  3. My claim that Pfizer — the first vaccine to get an EUA — did not take federal funds to **develop** the vaccine is true.
                    Money is fungible. $1.9 billion fungible
                    Using intentionally vague qualifying language is deceptive. I see those words in bright contrasting colors when I read. That’s one of many clues I use to know if a person is honest.
                    Again I know, I just provide a public service for others, not yet acclimated to the leftist play book

                    It really does matter what the meaning if ‘is’, is.

              3. Wrong again. The immunity of people who have had Covid is stronger after vaccination than natural immunity alone.

                There are no per reviewed data to support that statement.

                evidence is accumulating showing this spike in cases is due to transmission from vaccinated and unvaccinated with no natural immunity.

                That’s the only pool large enough to account for the rise in cases.

                  1. All that is laboratory theory. No trials or statistical evaluations. The CDC is not even tracking the rate of breakthrough infections with natural immunity.

              4. https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2021/08/25/1029715721/pfizer-vaccine-operation-warp-speed-delay

                “Operation Warp Speed was depending on Pfizer to deliver more than two-thirds of the vaccines expected in late 2020. But the company’s initial contract, worth nearly $2 billion, contained limited reporting requirements to the federal government when there was a delay. As a result, the government didn’t know how many doses were really coming, and Pfizer’s estimates kept dropping, according to several people familiar with the matter.

                Every delay in vaccine production meant that the U.S. was slower to contain the pandemic…

                Vaccine development usually takes years. But by spending billions of dollars right away, the Trump administration was trying to condense that timeline to less than a year. A big chunk of the money was earmarked to help companies gear up their manufacturing so they could begin making vaccines even before they knew for sure if they worked…

                Overall, Slaoui said having tens of millions of doses of a 95% effective vaccine within a year of the virus’ genetic code being sequenced is an “unbelievable” accomplishment. Slaoui said Operation Warp Speed was able to complete tasks in six months that normally take seven years.

                Although Slaoui said he wished Pfizer had been more transparent in its communications with the government, he said the supply delays that arose in late 2020 weren’t the result of a lackluster effort on the company’s part. “It’s more because that’s life in manufacturing of vaccines,” he told NPR. “We had to have aggressive timelines to try and meet them while knowing we may not meet them.””

      1. No, dear. Viruses are named for their geographic source.

        Covid 19 did not originated in the Trump Institute of Virology in Trumpakistan.

        It originated in the Wuhan Institute of Virology in China, hence it was called by the press the “Wuhan Virus” or the “China Virus.”

        However, China worked overtime to avoid being associated with unleashing the global pandemic. It relied on Democrat useful idiots to perpetuate the myth that naming a virus for its origin was suddenly racist.

        If you want to blame people for Covid’s growth, you could start with the Democrats who fought tooth and nail against Trump closing the border to Europe and Asian travel. New Zealand and Canada slammed their border shut with a clang, and have had far fewer cases.

        You can also blame the Biden Administration for letting in over one million illegal immigrants, many of them sick with Covid 19. That is criminally stupid to do during a pandemic, but the media has scrambled to put the best face on this clown show possible.

        If Biden was in the marines, his drill sergeant would have told him that if his brains were dynamite, he wouldn’t have enough to blow his nose.

        Seriously, what kind of moron throws the border open to limitless illegal immigration during a global pandemic, and then complains that the border states have rising Covid cases? That takes a serious lack of critical reasoning.

        1. Karen S claims:

          “It originated in the Wuhan Institute of Virology in China, hence it was called by the press the “Wuhan Virus” or the “China Virus.”

          Is that an unassailable fact?

          Or are people just saying it? Which is good enough evidence for Trumpists.

          1. The only “unassailable fact” (a big word for jeff) is that Mr. Silberman likes to see his name in print and will wax prolix ad nauseam just to try and get the last word in. Can’t wait until he strikes back at this post…

          2. Jeff, I can’t tell if you’re being facetious or you sincerely don’t know.

            Double CGG has never been found in a haploid virus in nature. It’s a footprint of gain of function research. Fauci blatantly lied when he denied the US knowingly paid for gain of function research at WIV for coronaviruses. In addition, SARS-CoV2 has a higher affinity for humans than it does for bats.

            https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-science-suggests-a-wuhan-lab-leak-11622995184

            https://www.dailywire.com/news/top-scientist-on-new-report-about-research-in-chinese-labs-its-clear-fauci-was-untruthful

              1. Karen preaches:

                “This is why politics has no place in science.”

                Now, who is being serious or facetious??

              2. Lancet has changed directions and is critical of the group behind the previous article that called the lab leak ideas implausible conspiracy theories.

                Now it seems those authors had conflicts of interest. Fauci certainly didn’t like the lab leak explanation since we know it could lead straight back to him and his involvement with the lab.

                The lab leak is now the only plausible explanation. No animal reservoir has been found.

                https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)02019-5/fulltext?utm_campaign=lancetcovid21&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social

                1. Thanks for posting, Young.

                  Contrary to the first letter published in The Lancet by Calisher and colleagues, we do not think that scientists should promote “unity” (“We support the call from the Director-General of WHO to promote scientific evidence and unity over misinformation and conjecture”). As shown above, research-related hypotheses are not misinformation and conjecture. More importantly, science embraces alternative hypotheses, contradictory arguments, verification, refutability, and controversy. Departing from this principle risks establishing dogmas, abandoning the essence of science, and, even worse, paving the way for conspiracy theories. Instead, the scientific community should bring this debate to a place where it belongs: the columns of scientific journals.

                  Medical science is messy, noisy, disorderly, rambunctious. Data can be ornery, voluminous and confusing. Duodenal ulcers were once thought to be caused by stress, anxiety, spicy foods and acidic ingredients (e.g. tomato sauce). For more than 3 decades, atherosclerosis was thought to be caused by “bad cholesterol”. Aspirin was embraced by cardiologists as capable of preventing heart attacks in primary prevention. The immune system was once thought to be relevant only for people with allergies. None of these are believed today.

                  Medical science changes often and anyone involved in benchtop medical research embraces the fact that we literally know nothing. Lay people who claim “follow the science” is solid dogma are as religious about their belief in science as a Jew, Christian and Muslim are in their faith journey.

                  True believers of religion and science ask questions continually because they seek understanding.

                  1. “Lay people who claim “follow the science” is solid dogma are as religious about their belief in science as a Jew, Christian and Muslim are in their faith journey.”

                    BS. Following science — including attention to evidence, and a willingness to conjecture, to test conjectures, to revise hypotheses in light of what’s been learned — is not a matter of religious faith.

                    1. B.S. Anon,

                      Typical of you is the way you changed the mantra that I mentioned “Follow the Science” to “Following the Science’.

                      ‘Follow the Science’ is the latest version of ‘Do What I Tell You To Do’ and you know it.

                      ‘Following the Science’ is what many hesitant to take the vaccine do. Hence the study showing many who are hesitant carefully look at the evidence and make rational decisions about it. Also there was the study that found PhDs to be the largest group by education to be hesitant.

                      You truly are dishonest.

                    2. “Typical of you is the way you changed the mantra that I mentioned”

                      Young, I was responding to Estovir, which should be clear from the fact that I quoted Estovir and my comment is threaded as a reply to Estovir.

                      I didn’t address you, much less change something you said. Unless, that is, you and Estovir are the same person, which I doubt.

                      “You truly are dishonest.”

                      You are looking in the mirror.

                      “‘Follow the Science’ is the latest version of ‘Do What I Tell You To Do’ and you know it.”

                      This is not the first time you’ve insisted that you know better than I do what my beliefs are. It’s a form of trolling.

                    3. Anon- “This is not the first time you’ve insisted that you know better than I do what my beliefs are. It’s a form of trolling.”

                      —-

                      When I said ‘and you know it’ I was being kind and assuming as a matter of course that you know something that was of common knowledge, something like public Judicial Notice, if you will.

                      If you are ignorant of it and assume that I should be aware of your ignorance, I can’t help that.

                      The point remains. By changing ‘Follow the Science’ to ‘Following the Science’ you were creating a straw man to criticize. You do that often, you know.

                    4. Young: Also there was the study that found PhDs to be the largest group by education to be hesitant.

                      It is expected that the least qualified members of society, the liberal lay media, is lynching Governor Ron DeSantis’ newly appointed surgeon general, Dr Joseph A. Lapado, MD, PhD. Dr Lapapdo has authored 97 pubmed scientific articles.

                      https://profiles.ucla.edu/joseph.ladapo

                      Apparently that he is black does not grant him immunity (pun not intended) from their drawing and quartering him. Clarence Thomas, Thomas Sowell, Walter Williams, Condoleeza Rice, and other notable black scholars have shown us the depravity of Democrats. Once again, the more histrionics and apoplexy the Democrats utilize in skewering their perceived opponents, the more they appear desperate, insecure and morally bankrupt.

                      Governor Ron DeSantis Announces Dr. Joseph A. Ladapo as Florida Surgeon General

                      On September 21, 2021, in News Releases, by Staff

                      TALLAHASSEE, Fla. – Today, Governor Ron DeSantis announced the appointment of Dr. Joseph A. Ladapo, MD, PhD, as Florida Surgeon General and Secretary of the Florida Department of Health.

                      Dr. Ladapo was recently granted a professorship at the University of Florida (UF) College of Medicine. Prior to joining UF, he served as an associate professor at the David Geffen School of Medicine at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) caring for hospitalized patients. A graduate of Wake Forest University, Dr. Ladapo also holds an MD from Harvard Medical School and a PhD in Health Policy from Harvard Graduate School of Arts and Sciences.

                    5. Estovir: “It is expected that the least qualified members of society, the liberal lay media, is lynching Governor Ron DeSantis’ newly appointed surgeon general”

                      I like that about the media. Someone quite close to me first took a BA in Communications [journalism] and then a BS in Biology, and then an MD.

                      We discussed it often and the conclusion was that the journalism course was pathetically weak and the students in the program were some of the most ignorant encountered during the journey through the three degrees. Their ignorance extended even to current affairs, and from what we see now they have done very little to improve their level of information.

                      You probably remember the physicist Gell-Mann who noticed that when he read a news article on his field he was dismayed at how ignorant the author was. Then he would proceed to read the rest of the paper as if the information were authentic. I think it became known as the Gell-Mann amnesia.

                      In these dangerous times with a corrupt national government and a world in chaos none of us can afford the luxury of Gell-Mann Amnesia. We need to remember as we turn pages or switch channels we are interfacing with people who know very little about what they are talking about and cannot be fully trusted.

                    6. Young wisely warns:

                      “We need to remember as we turn pages or switch channels we are interfacing with people who know very little about what they are talking about and cannot be fully trusted.”

                      We may NEVER agree on which people cannot be trusted…

                      Manufacturing doubt is an intractable problem besetting this country.

            1. Karen, there is no scientific consensus on the origin of SARS-CoV-2, and if you care about truthfulness, you shouldn’t claim to know for certain what the origin was.

              1. Anonymous says:

                “Karen, there is no scientific consensus on the origin of SARS-CoV-2, and if you care about truthfulness, you shouldn’t claim to know for certain what the origin was.”

                We must not forget, however, that Trumpists believe in “alternative facts” like the election was stolen on account of MASSIVE fraud.

                1. It is you who has no facts and only a limited number of opinions repeated several times a day. All are without merit.

                2. Jeff is the same guy who claimed I lived in a trailer park because he didn’t like my opinions. You can’t take trolls seriously.

                  1. Karen S says:

                    “Jeff is the same guy who claimed I lived in a trailer park because he didn’t like my opinions. You can’t take trolls seriously.”

                    I didn’t CLAIM it, I WONDERED about it BECAUSE of your constant descriptions of encounters with the homeless and the mentally deranged, e.g., your fabrication of “a naked woman dancing on glass” led me to speculate so.

              2. “. . . there is no scientific consensus . . .”

                Truth is not determined by consensus.

                After the “Earth is flat,” and consensus-busters such as Galileo, Newton, Pasteur — you’d think an educated person would realize that.

                1. “Truth is not determined by consensus.”

                  I agree, nor have I ever suggested otherwise!

                  It’s determined by a careful, truthful, informed investigation of relevant evidence and counterevidence. Such an investigation has not yet come to a conclusion.

                  “you’d think an educated person would realize that.”

                  I do realize that. You’d think an educated person would choose not to project garbage onto others.

                  1. “I agree, nor have I ever suggested otherwise!”

                    Yet that premise exists in your original statement.

                    I long ago realized that you are incapable of, or are unwilling to, identify the underlying premises of your own arguments. That’s part of your not-so-charming intellectual dishonesty.

                    1. “Yet that premise exists in your original statement.”

                      No, it does not.

                      That you inferred it does NOT mean that I implied it or that it is necessary to what I actually wrote.

                      “I long ago realized that you are incapable of, or are unwilling to, identify the underlying premises of your own arguments. ”

                      That you believe this does not make it true.

                      The premise of my response is only that Karen shouldn’t present her claim as a fact because we do not yet know the truth about the origin of SARS-CoV-2.

                      And had you been aiming for a good faith discussion, you could have just asked me to state the premise instead of attributing a premise to me that isn’t mine and then insisting on the above.

                    2. Anon– “And had you been aiming for a good faith discussion, you could have just asked me to state the premise instead of attributing a premise to me that isn’t mine and then insisting on the above.”

                      —-

                      Okay. Fair enough. State your premise.

                    3. Young — “Okay. Fair enough. State your premise.”

                      I already did. Apparently my saying “The premise of my response is …” wasn’t a big enough hint for you.

                    4. Anon– State your premise.

                      “I already did. Apparently my saying “The premise of my response is …” wasn’t a big enough hint for you.”

                      No, it wasn’t, so state it again.

                    5. Young — “state it again.”

                      No. You literally quoted the sentence from my comment that came right after the sentence where I stated the premise, and now you’re too lazy to go back and reread the previous sentence for yourself. Too bad.

                  2. ANON TS

                    “Karen, there is no scientific consensus on the origin of SARS-CoV-2, and if you care about truthfulness, you shouldn’t claim to know for certain what the origin was.”

                    ANON-TS ““Truth is not determined by consensus.”

                    I agree, nor have I ever suggested otherwise!”

                    ***
                    Actually, a fair reading of your original statement that “there is no scientific consensus” PLUS if you care about truthfulness you shouldn’t claim to know for certain what the origin is” does appear to link ‘scientific consensus’ to ‘truth’. If not, why say it that way?

                    If one person discovers the actual truth beyond doubt I don’t think he needs your ‘scientific consensus’. To the extent ‘science’ has been politicized and influenced by big bucks the ‘scientific consensus’ isn’t what it used to be. There was no ‘scientific consensus’ that the Pfizer vaccine could cause cardiac problems but, it turns out, that it can. On that issue you were relying on the consensus and I was making sense of multiple reports for and against and coming to the conclusion that it did cause cardiac problems more than a week before Pfizer admitted it in its public statement.

                    Scientific consensus on the origin of the Wuhan virus would be nice to have but highly improbable because bureaucrats like Fauci are heavily invested in ‘proving’ that it could not have originated from that lab, and he is not alone among those who are in a conflict of interest. See the Lancet article I posted.

                    The other difficulty in reaching certainty is that China is refusing to release records, is accusing multiple others of being the source of the virus, and is waging a propaganda [not scientific] war against anybody who tries to show that the Wuhan lab is the source.

                    That leaves us with a mountain of circumstantial evidence that is sufficient for making the case that the Wuhan lab was the origin. See the Nicholas Wade article I posted previously.

                    At this point I would set your ‘scientific consensus’ aside. You admit truth is not determined by scientific consensus. However, a pragmatic approach to truth can be found in law much of the time. A purely circumstantial case can be proven fairly easily to the civil standard of ‘preponderance of the evidence’ and often to the criminal standard of ‘beyond a reasonable doubt’.

                    From what I have seen if all of the available circumstantial evidence were presented in a fair American courtroom then proving that the virus escaped [or was released] from the Wuhan lab can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

                    What’s your view Anon? Do you think it is more likely than not that the virus originated in the Wuhan lab? Or have you even come to a conclusion? Perhaps you are waiting for scientists to vote on the issue.

                    1. Anon’s Premise: “The premise of my response is only that Karen shouldn’t present her claim as a fact because we do not yet know the truth about the origin of SARS-CoV-2.”

                      Actually, No, that was not your premise. You originally said:

                      “Karen, there is no scientific consensus on the origin of SARS-CoV-2, and if you care about truthfulness, you shouldn’t claim to know for certain what the origin was.”

                      As Sam was pointing out you originally were linking ‘scientific consensus’ to truth. You tried to sneak away from your original claim that made that linkage between truth and scientific consensus. Dishonest.

                      But, ” if you care about truthfulness” you should recognize that the evidence as it presently stands nails the origin of the virus to the Wuhan lab beyond a reasonable doubt.

              3. Karen, there is no scientific consensus
                Science is not consensus. That is idiocy required to sustain the CAGCC hoax
                Science is always challenged. Always questioned. It was the “scientists” who claimed the lab leak was debunked….it just lacked any sciency stuff to back up their assertion

                It is obvious you have never made decisions based on science. If you had, you would understand research statistics will prove about anything you are pushing.

                A great example is knowing how many joules are needed to power a small city, and then converting that number in windmills and solar panels.

                When you understand science like that, you start to see the deception surrounding the “carbon free” energy grid.

                1. “Science is not consensus.”

                  Understanding whether there is or isn’t a scientific consensus on something is part of doing science. If there is no consensus, then it’s an area that needs research. If there is a consensus that you believe is mistaken, and you can provide research demonstrating that, providing that counterevidence is also significant research.

                  “Science is always challenged. Always questioned.”

                  No, not “always.”

                  Science is OFTEN questioned, but eventually, some issues are settled and no longer challenged or questioned. For example, it is a scientific fact that multiple chemical elements exist, and these elements have different properties and sometimes combine in chemical compounds.

                  That you insist it is “always” indicates that you either don’t know enough science or that you’re not aiming for accuracy in your own claims.

                  “It is obvious you have never made decisions based on science. ”

                  That’s false. That you believe it doesn’t make it true.

                  1. “Understanding whether there is or isn’t a scientific consensus on something is part of doing science.”

                    No it’s not. That’s poll taking, and an appeal to majority.

                    Apparently, you’ve kinda, sorta gleaned that you can’t wiggle out of your original (false) premise, so now you’re trying to shoehorn it into “science.”

                    1. Yes, understanding whether there is or isn’t a scientific consensus on something is part of doing science.

                      As I explained: if there is no consensus, then it’s an area that needs research. If there is a consensus that you believe is mistaken, and you can provide research demonstrating that, providing that counterevidence is also significant research. Deciding what to research is part of the process of doing science, whether or not you are willing to admit it.

                      “you’ve kinda, sorta gleaned that you can’t wiggle out of your original (false) premise”

                      Again, my premise was that Karen shouldn’t present her claim as a fact because we do not yet know the truth about the origin of SARS-CoV-2. That is not false.

                    2. “[W]e do not yet know the truth about the origin of SARS-CoV-2.”

                      “We” don’t?

                      And what evidence do you think is missing from such a proof?

              4. Anonymous, are you saying that you will only believe the virus originated in the Wuhan Institute of Virology if the lab admits it? Its fingerprints are all over the crime scene.

                Did you read the articles I posted where in it was admitted that WIV was working on gain of function in coronaviruses, making them more infectious to humans, that double CGG does not exist in nature in haploid viruses and is a track of GOF research, or about the alleged patient 0 at WIV who disappeared?

                Are you holding out for an admission of guilt from a hostile nation that has been proven to have hidden the outbreak, lied repeatedly, and allowed a local epidemic to go global pandemic?

                You’re not going to get 100% scientific consensus because some scientists already admitted they didn’t want to agree with Trump, others receive funding from CCP, and others just don’t want to believe China did this.

                You could tell 5 scientists that there is a 1 in 1 billion chance this virus developed naturally. 4 will say it was engineered. The 5th will say, “So, you’re saying there is a chance this was naturally occurring.”

                1. “Anonymous, are you saying that you will only believe the virus originated in the Wuhan Institute of Virology if the lab admits it?”

                  No.

                  “Are you holding out for an admission of guilt from a hostile nation that has been proven to have hidden the outbreak, lied repeatedly, and allowed a local epidemic to go global pandemic? ”

                  No.

                  “Did you read the articles I posted”

                  I read the part of the WSJ article that wasn’t paywalled. I read the Daily Wire article. And scientific discussions don’t primarily take place on the pages of the WSJ and the Daily Wire. They take place in scientific journals, scientific conferences, … Your own source notes “Yes, it could have happened randomly through mutations.”

                  I will turn to scientific literature to see what researchers are presenting as evidence for and against the different conjectures. They simply do not know yet, and I’m not going to join you in saying that we do know. Maybe we will know at some later point, maybe we will never know.

            2. Karen asks:

              “Jeff, I can’t tell if you’re being facetious or you sincerely don’t know.”

              Both.

              The WSJ article is behind a paywall but the headline states “suggests.” So your assertion is NOT an established fact as of yet. TBD

              The DailyWire is- dare I pull a page from the Trumpist playback- “fake news.”

              1. Two quotes from the WSJ article. Shi Zhengli directs the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

                “When the lab’s Shi Zhengli and colleagues published a paper in February 2020 with the virus’s partial genome, they omitted any mention of the special sequence that supercharges the virus or the rare double CGG section. Yet the fingerprint is easily identified in the data that accompanied the paper. Was it omitted in the hope that nobody would notice this evidence of the gain-of-function origin?”

                “The presence of the double CGG sequence is strong evidence of gene splicing, and the absence of diversity in the public outbreak suggests gain-of-function acceleration. The scientific evidence points to the conclusion that the virus was developed in a laboratory.”

                By far the number one theory is that the virus originated from the Wuhan Lab.

            3. “Jeff, I can’t tell if you’re being facetious or you sincerely don’t know.”

              Along with lacking critical thinking skills, Jeff isn’t very bright and he demonstrates that with each and every post he writes. Many make absolutely no sense.

          3. No it is not an unassailable fact – very very very few things are.

            However it is FAR more likely than not. There is still ongoing debate.

            At the moment all possible origins are permutations of either laboratory development or a jump from animals to humans in nature.

            If you have some other thesis – I and the WHO etc would all like to hear it.

            Virus’s jumping species is rare – at the same time it is not so rare that it is how we get the flu all the time.

            Regardless, when virus’s jump from animals to humans, they leave lots of evidence.
            We find close precursor viruses in animals quickly, and we find that the initial human infects are NOT well adapted to humans and it takes several mutations for the virus to adapt to humans.

            Despite massive efforts to find evidence of either of these so far we have not found any evidence of immediate precursors in the animal kingdom – the RATG13 virus that is the likely ancestor for Covid can not infect humans and is many permutations away from doing so.

            Further the earliest human infections known are from strains that are already well adapted to humans.

            Basically the natural origens theory has huge wholes that have never been filled.
            The longer we move forward without finding precursors both in the animal and human domains the less likely the natural origens hypothesis is.

            I would further note that the “wet markets” thesis is fairly debunked – the bats that had RATG13 lived over 1000 miles from Wuhan. They were not being brought to wet markets. they were however present in the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

            I beleive that the natural origens theory now has about a 1:13000000000 chance of being true.

            Conversely we KNOW that WIV was working with the RATG13 bats, with humanized mice, with Coronaviruses generally.
            And we know that all of the initial cases that we know about are within very short distances of bus routes that serve the WIV.

            There is now about a 1:75000 chance the Virus did NOT originate somoewhere on those bus routes.

            Absolute proof ? Nope.

            I can not absolutely prove the sun will rise tomorow.
            but we both accept it will.

            Truth is not absolute – but it is also not merely opinion – it is inherently probabilistic,
            Those things with a very high probabilty of being true – “probably are” – that is a tautology.
            Those with a low probability – – are not.

            At this point in time the evidence for C19 coming from the WIV is substantially more likely than it originating naturally.

          4. Your rant at the evidentiary standard of Trumpists is humerous.

            We have an incredibly long list of things that Trumpists have “beleived” – that have ultimately proven to be true,
            While YOU have disbeleived in many instances beleiving the opposite – and proven false.

            “statistically” speaking – the EVIDENCE is that either “trumpists” are incredibly good at guessing the truth, or
            more likely – they are better at assessing the evidence than YOU.

            In the real world there has been significant disagreement amoung “experts” over issues from the collusion delusion to the origens of the virus. Though the lefts efforts at censorship have tried to hide this.

            But even if you wish to oversimplify the world into a conflict between purported experts, and red necks, the Red Necks have an enviable record of correctness, and the exerts an unenviable record of failure.

          5. Don’t appeals to authority, require actual authorities – people who are right far more than they are not ?

            How is one an “expert” if they are nearly always wrong ?

            If measured by accuracy – “Trumpist” and “expert” appear to be synonyms.

    2. Biden and Democrats have no concern for life, be it in the womb or Americans have COVID-19. Read it and weep.

      ……

      Joe Biden’s ship has started to sink

      In Florida, for example, which is experiencing a high volume of cases despite its high vaccination rate, Biden’s administration has seized control of the distribution system for monoclonal antibody treatments and dramatically scaled back the number that will be made available to less than half of existing demand. The administration’s stated excuses for this are not remotely believable. There is no shortage of the treatments elsewhere, and this is a straightforwardly vindictive decision. He will let Florida’s hospitals be overwhelmed, and more people will die needlessly, apparently because Florida’s governor refuses to comply when Biden demands that he impose needless mask mandates on schoolchildren.

      Biden’s cruelty in arbitrarily depriving people of a cure to a disease that will hospitalize or kill them is outrageous even in the lamentable catalog of his odious decisions. It is worse than anything his predecessor did, including the acts for which he was twice impeached. It is a deadly abuse of power by a president unfit to govern the country.

      No wonder Biden’s approval ratings are collapsing. But there is a silver lining. Biden, or whoever makes decisions for him, has so fallen out of favor that no Republican or centrist Democrat will feel pressure to help pass his inflationary, unnecessary, and radical $3.5 trillion spending bill.

      https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/editorials/joe-bidens-ship-has-started-to-sink

      1. Thanks for the article Estovir. It shows that the Stalinists of today will act like the Stalinists of yesteryear.

      2. “Biden’s administration has seized control of the distribution system for monoclonal antibody treatments and dramatically scaled back the number that will be made available . . .”

        Biden administration to Southern state “deplorables:”

        Die. Painfully.

        Why? Payback for your governors, who refused to “bow to the cap.”

        1. Biden administration to Southern state “deplorables:” Die. Painfully. Why? Payback for your governors, who refused to “bow to the cap.”

          Vicious and vindictive is the nature of the left and all too many Democrats. Compare Biden to Trump. When Democrat NYS was in trouble, Trump spent an enormous amount of his resources on NY. He wanted to save lives, not generate fear hoping to punish those who didn’t support him. That was primarily Democrat lives Trump was trying to save. Trump helped the Democrat governor (Cuomo), who killed many a New Yorker with his policies. He supplied the governor with Ventilators that the governor previously refused to purchase, and he provided him beds that weren’t used or appropriately used. The Democrat governor could talk to the press, but he didn’t correctly utilize his resources.

          Trump saved lives. Biden, with intention, will purposely kill lives.

          That is the difference between the left (Democrat) and the right (conservative). Hate and the culture of death on the left, love and life on the right (conservative).

    3. “That can be laid directly at the feet of the CCP.”

      And on the bloody hands of those scientists in China and out (e.g., Fauci) who lent their brains to dictators. Those scientists are just as responsible for destruction and death, as were the Nazi scientists who built Hitler’s weapons.

      P.S. Good comment.

      1. Sam says:

        “Those scientists are just as responsible for destruction and death, as were the Nazi scientists who built Hitler’s weapons.”

        I hope you don’t mean the V2 rocket scientists which we smuggled out of Germany at the end of the war (despite their war crimes) to give America a jump start in the space race against the Soviet Union.

  9. “Hanssen notes how faculty members across the country have been silenced by the fear of being tagged as racist or insensitive in fights over academic freedom.”

    This is why it is essential for people to go to Project Veritas and block the lock on speech (automatically post PV video’s on Twitter) so that speech remains free. Free speech anywhere helps free speech everywhere. By doing so one is taking the pledge, “I will not be silent.”

    https://www.projectveritas.com

Leave a Reply