"Of course, coercive measures should be a last resort. The preferred order of intervention is education, then persuasion, then incentivization, and, finally, coercion. That said, the new mandates offer the hope of greater overall liberty and are therefore justified."
Now there's some cognitive dissonance on display. If coercion is on the …
"Of course, coercive measures should be a last resort. The preferred order of intervention is education, then persuasion, then incentivization, and, finally, coercion. That said, the new mandates offer the hope of greater overall liberty and are therefore justified."
Now there's some cognitive dissonance on display. If coercion is on the table, then the other interventions are meaningless. And for "forced medical treatment will make you more free", that's some Stalin-worthy double-speak.
I think "Stalin-worthy" is nothing more than putting some red meat out there. This is a public health issue, not communism. For those paying attention, though, the ongoing nature of this pandemic and all of the distortions it's causing really could be a threat to democracy.
Despite right-wing America having nutjobs for a long time, I still doubt it's a coincidence that we've had such large social unrest as an outgrowth of this pandemic. January 6th may very well have never happened if people were employed and living the lives they had before the pandemic disrupted them.
There's rarely a single explanation for everything, I know. Pandemic does not automatically mean social unrest, etc.... but serious observers can likely see the kernel of truth that without the pandemic, all kinds of other bad things last year would not have been as plausible.
I see little that's controversial about mentioning that coercive measures come into the decision-making and governing process, especially after more positive measures. All kinds of other vaccines have been required for decades to have access to public goods like schools. What do you think law enforcement does if not coerce respect for law?
If you are sincere in your "Stalin-worthy" feelings, please also tell us about the other vaccines you have forgone. Tell us about the court dates you decided to skip because you are a Sovereign Citizen that can't be subjected to such indignities.
If this was a vaccine for a cancer that would grow over years, and for which we had cheap, effective treatments, people would not care so much. You wouldn't be able to give it to me, and the illness would progress over a long-enough time period that it wouldn't cause the same abrupt disruptions to families and society that an illness like this can present.
Your freedom ends where mine begins on a lot of matters, so please don't use these silly Red Scare terms about a matter that could hurt or kill me, or others close to me. It already has.
Be mindful, though, that we're closing in on about as many deaths as there were political executions under Stalin. If you're against masking and vaccines, I'd argue you don't have to look far for your Stalin. You'd see him in the mirror every day.
". . . and finally coercion? Seriously? This is the United States of America. We have a Constitution and laws. We don't engage in coercion on any level for any reason. Please, people, get a grip and engage your cognitive skills more deeply.
It's not just about going to the movies and restaurants. People are being denied enrollment in schools and forced to resign from their jobs because they won't "choose" to get vaccinated. What if they already had Covid? Some doctors and other medical professionals are refusing to treat unvaccinated patients even for things unrelated to Covid. That's effective coercion. You actually do have a general right not to be vaccinated or have any unwanted medical care forced on you. You also have the right to earn a living.
It’s not. Yes, people are experiencing consequences for refusing to get vaccinated.
If an employer changes a job classification to require a college degree, are they coercing you into going to college? No. Coercion has a special meaning.
Oh okay, so "experiencing consequences" is not the same as coercion. Please share your special meaning of coercion. Apparently many people feel they are being coerced because they are saying so in demonstrations and speaking out. Your comparison of a college degree to getting a shot in your arm is ridiculous. The degree is an actual qualification to do a job; a shot is not. There is a declared constitutional right to bodily privacy free of government interference, or so our SCOTUS says. You can't cherry-pick what matters you want that applied to. It either applies universally or it doesn't. If Biden is trying to mandate that employers mandate a violation of personal bodily choice, that does an end-run around the constitution. He's trying to hedge a little bit by allowing the option of continual testing, but we'll see what the courts say. At a certain point, Covid infections and deaths will recede on their own, and he'll no longer have as compelling of a justification for these measures.
my employer wouldn’t offer the option of frequent testing, as they figured that‘s too easy for us, instead they chose to re-assign us to inconvenient locations/shifts, even if they were to grant us religious or medical exemptions. Joe, unless you’re in my shoes, you won’t know what is coercion. When I was coerced to take the jab, on the informed consent, I had to agree that I will not hold my employer and Pfizer liable for any unwanted consequences from the vaccine. Mandated to take a drug that no one will be responsible for, or lose my job. It sure feels like coercion.
I'm pretty sure this is less about whom she's friends with and more about presenting the range of arguments out there (especially those that aren't getting platformed). That said, Lee makes a very good point.
Yep. The fact is that the Jacobson decision was used to justify mandatory sterilization and government eugenics.
People who advocate THE SCIENCE forget that THE SCIENCE was used to justify Nazi eugenics + KKK racists within living memory and that, at the time, it was very popular with progressives.
Science isn't a replacement for morality. It's a tool to be used, hopefully, by moral people.
I really recommend following Robert Barnes - he's a civil rights lawyer. Kinda kooky but he's been, by far, the most accurate commentator among political outsiders these last few years.
AND - from the start - he said that forced experimental vaccination was obviously a violation of the Nuremberg Code formulated in response to Mengele.
I live near a Temple (I’ve lived in heavily Jewish neighborhoods most of my life). Many of my Jewish neighbors, who I still adore even though they hate me for voting for Trump, are preoccupied with supporting woke “causes.” They are confused as to why those they support - who are clearly secular - are too often anti-Semitic. They vote woke……. They are confused as to why Dems look the other way, at best, when there is blatant anti-Semitism, yet the personally promote overtly secular wokeness even though part of wokeness is to deem Jews and Israel “oppressors.”
I feel ya. I've been a shabbos goy Zionist living among Jews all my life and... damn this shit is frustrating.
SO MANY Jews seem pathologically consumed with advancing political causes that are flagrantly antisemitic, while obsessing over to conspiracy theories about Republicans.
The Trump admin was packed to the gills with Jews and his was probably the most Pro-Israel presidency in American history.
If born after 1960 or '65, could it be more about what whent on in our public school classrooms that we didn't know was going on? A 1984 interview of a defecting Russian journalist described the four steps, of which only one was aired by Fox, to take to destroy a country from the inside without fire a shot.
The first takes at least 20 yrs. he said because it involves indoctrination of children in schools such that when adults they will make decisions contrary to their values, principles and best interests of their families even though they know at some level they're doing it.
Isn't that what we're seeing around us? Mark Zuckerburg is Jewish. Given his ancestral history, censorship is something he'd never even consider yet he's doing it and doing it a lot as if he's qualified to be the arbiter of true/false and right/wrong when no human being is. What do ya think?
I think these sentiments are too extreme. I am not afraid of everyone airing different viewpoints. This is probably a reasonable distribution of what is out there as opposed to legacy media which is only presenting one side of the picture. It's the same reason I like RealClearPolitics.
In principle, I am not afraid of *everyone* airing different viewpoints, but much hinges who the "everyone" is, and on the range of issues put on the table.
A Greenwald, with his 15+ year track-record of showing good judgement, is a far more appropriate choice to be on this panel, than a psychiatrist in Washington, D.C., whose track-record is dwarfed by Greenwald's, and whose Wiki entry is a fraction of the length of his, and of Bari's.
If the main dichotomies are
passports vs. "license", or "Enabling Act" vs. "chaos", but not
rigorous probing/ prosecution of Fauci (for fraud) vs. only putting him on a MSM pedestal,
I fear that the "debate" is rigged, before the first words are recorded.
Since legacy media is only presenting one side, why does she need to bring others (with weaker credentials than Greenwald or Prasad) regurgitate the Party Line, which already gets far more than its share of attn.?
For anyone who had a loved one die from AIDS early on he’s a monster for spending years blocking Bactrim while there lived one suffered an awful death in isolation. The way he attacks Ivermectin is nothing compared to what he threw at trying to block Bactrim - which became the treatment of choice until better ones were developed.
Of note, I have Ivetmectin in my cabinet, but I’m not yet convinced by the research quality on its effectiveness. I do think anyone who wants to try should have the opportunity, though monoclonal antibodies appear very effective and safe.
Anywho, Likewise, Neal Ferguson is responsible for decades of hysterical over reactions in the UK (mad cow, HFM, swine flu, bird flu), yet his imperial college model was the statistical basis for all the wildly inaccurate models used to justify the shutdowns. (He used similarly crazy things to cull tens of thousands of livestock over the years).
A few examples of Ferguson - he thought 50,000 would die from mad cow in the mid 90’s. Like 16 actually did. He projected 40 million deaths globally from bird flu, 218 people total actually did,
Yet we ignored the GBD authors and John Ioannidis who are more qualified than either Fauci or Ferguson, and have more esteemed careers with track records of actual accuracy.
So what's really happening here to cause this flight from reason and truth? Who's really in charge? Who's orchestrating all the s*** going on, and what's their end game?
Everything is about causing our destruction from the inside. If that's what they want, who or what convinced them that's a good thing?
Sally Satel's reputation among conservatives and freedom-lovers is not going to recover from this weird "freedom is slavery" post. She is going to have to find some new friends.
Satel will have no trouble getting new friends, among those who push for the deportation/ liquidation of "anti-vaxers", Deplorables, and "insurrectionists".
If she is "a rising GOP star", be prepared to be stuffed into the boxcars, unless you're willing to toe the Party Line down to the last scintilla.
"Of course, coercive measures should be a last resort. The preferred order of intervention is education, then persuasion, then incentivization, and, finally, coercion. That said, the new mandates offer the hope of greater overall liberty and are therefore justified."
Now there's some cognitive dissonance on display. If coercion is on the table, then the other interventions are meaningless. And for "forced medical treatment will make you more free", that's some Stalin-worthy double-speak.
I think "Stalin-worthy" is nothing more than putting some red meat out there. This is a public health issue, not communism. For those paying attention, though, the ongoing nature of this pandemic and all of the distortions it's causing really could be a threat to democracy.
Despite right-wing America having nutjobs for a long time, I still doubt it's a coincidence that we've had such large social unrest as an outgrowth of this pandemic. January 6th may very well have never happened if people were employed and living the lives they had before the pandemic disrupted them.
There's rarely a single explanation for everything, I know. Pandemic does not automatically mean social unrest, etc.... but serious observers can likely see the kernel of truth that without the pandemic, all kinds of other bad things last year would not have been as plausible.
I see little that's controversial about mentioning that coercive measures come into the decision-making and governing process, especially after more positive measures. All kinds of other vaccines have been required for decades to have access to public goods like schools. What do you think law enforcement does if not coerce respect for law?
If you are sincere in your "Stalin-worthy" feelings, please also tell us about the other vaccines you have forgone. Tell us about the court dates you decided to skip because you are a Sovereign Citizen that can't be subjected to such indignities.
If this was a vaccine for a cancer that would grow over years, and for which we had cheap, effective treatments, people would not care so much. You wouldn't be able to give it to me, and the illness would progress over a long-enough time period that it wouldn't cause the same abrupt disruptions to families and society that an illness like this can present.
Your freedom ends where mine begins on a lot of matters, so please don't use these silly Red Scare terms about a matter that could hurt or kill me, or others close to me. It already has.
Be mindful, though, that we're closing in on about as many deaths as there were political executions under Stalin. If you're against masking and vaccines, I'd argue you don't have to look far for your Stalin. You'd see him in the mirror every day.
". . . and finally coercion? Seriously? This is the United States of America. We have a Constitution and laws. We don't engage in coercion on any level for any reason. Please, people, get a grip and engage your cognitive skills more deeply.
Coercion is “the use of intimidation or threats to force (or prevent) someone to do something they have a legal right to do (or not to do).”
You do not strictly have to get a vaccine and would not be forced to. You have no general right to be unvaccinated. Thus it is not coercion.
Coercion is her choice of term, not mine. I’m just taking her at her word.
But if being barred from stores, education, work, travel, etc… isn’t coercion in your book, then you and I aren’t going to agree on much.
The law describes what conduct is legitimate vs illegitimate, and is distinct from how it is effectuated.
When an establishment informs you that your entrance is prohibited because you choose not to get vaccinated, i would expect people to simply leave.
Force would be necessary only for those who refuse to abide by the law.
It's not just about going to the movies and restaurants. People are being denied enrollment in schools and forced to resign from their jobs because they won't "choose" to get vaccinated. What if they already had Covid? Some doctors and other medical professionals are refusing to treat unvaccinated patients even for things unrelated to Covid. That's effective coercion. You actually do have a general right not to be vaccinated or have any unwanted medical care forced on you. You also have the right to earn a living.
It’s not. Yes, people are experiencing consequences for refusing to get vaccinated.
If an employer changes a job classification to require a college degree, are they coercing you into going to college? No. Coercion has a special meaning.
You have no right to be unvaccinated.
Oh okay, so "experiencing consequences" is not the same as coercion. Please share your special meaning of coercion. Apparently many people feel they are being coerced because they are saying so in demonstrations and speaking out. Your comparison of a college degree to getting a shot in your arm is ridiculous. The degree is an actual qualification to do a job; a shot is not. There is a declared constitutional right to bodily privacy free of government interference, or so our SCOTUS says. You can't cherry-pick what matters you want that applied to. It either applies universally or it doesn't. If Biden is trying to mandate that employers mandate a violation of personal bodily choice, that does an end-run around the constitution. He's trying to hedge a little bit by allowing the option of continual testing, but we'll see what the courts say. At a certain point, Covid infections and deaths will recede on their own, and he'll no longer have as compelling of a justification for these measures.
my employer wouldn’t offer the option of frequent testing, as they figured that‘s too easy for us, instead they chose to re-assign us to inconvenient locations/shifts, even if they were to grant us religious or medical exemptions. Joe, unless you’re in my shoes, you won’t know what is coercion. When I was coerced to take the jab, on the informed consent, I had to agree that I will not hold my employer and Pfizer liable for any unwanted consequences from the vaccine. Mandated to take a drug that no one will be responsible for, or lose my job. It sure feels like coercion.
Ahhhh yes….
The end justifies the means. Arguably the most dangerous idea in history
And the hallmark of the Left in many other issues besides this
Thank you! Stalin-worthy doublespeak frames it very well.
Uncle Joe would blush at some of the propaganda and lies spewed by our leaders and media
Bari needs some new friends. I found that specific passage particularly galling as well.
I'm pretty sure this is less about whom she's friends with and more about presenting the range of arguments out there (especially those that aren't getting platformed). That said, Lee makes a very good point.
If so, is she also going to be" presenting the range of arguments out there" for resumption of the Enabling Act, and then the Holocaust?
Yep. The fact is that the Jacobson decision was used to justify mandatory sterilization and government eugenics.
People who advocate THE SCIENCE forget that THE SCIENCE was used to justify Nazi eugenics + KKK racists within living memory and that, at the time, it was very popular with progressives.
Science isn't a replacement for morality. It's a tool to be used, hopefully, by moral people.
I'm aghast that Bari would be trotting out such shills for Big Bro.
Eichmann & Mengele must be dancing in their graves.
I’m waiting for Jewish Americans - and the Israelis - to make the connection. They simply won’t. Wake up, Bari! We need your voice!
I really recommend following Robert Barnes - he's a civil rights lawyer. Kinda kooky but he's been, by far, the most accurate commentator among political outsiders these last few years.
AND - from the start - he said that forced experimental vaccination was obviously a violation of the Nuremberg Code formulated in response to Mengele.
You are.
Can you come talk to all my neighbors? They are consumed with woke caused and confused it’s backfiring
Please clarify "caused and confused it’s backfiring".
Who is confused? What’s backfiring?
Sorry - “causes” is what I meant to write.
I live near a Temple (I’ve lived in heavily Jewish neighborhoods most of my life). Many of my Jewish neighbors, who I still adore even though they hate me for voting for Trump, are preoccupied with supporting woke “causes.” They are confused as to why those they support - who are clearly secular - are too often anti-Semitic. They vote woke……. They are confused as to why Dems look the other way, at best, when there is blatant anti-Semitism, yet the personally promote overtly secular wokeness even though part of wokeness is to deem Jews and Israel “oppressors.”
I feel ya. I've been a shabbos goy Zionist living among Jews all my life and... damn this shit is frustrating.
SO MANY Jews seem pathologically consumed with advancing political causes that are flagrantly antisemitic, while obsessing over to conspiracy theories about Republicans.
The Trump admin was packed to the gills with Jews and his was probably the most Pro-Israel presidency in American history.
FFS Trump himself is a freakin zeyde.
Agree!
If born after 1960 or '65, could it be more about what whent on in our public school classrooms that we didn't know was going on? A 1984 interview of a defecting Russian journalist described the four steps, of which only one was aired by Fox, to take to destroy a country from the inside without fire a shot.
The first takes at least 20 yrs. he said because it involves indoctrination of children in schools such that when adults they will make decisions contrary to their values, principles and best interests of their families even though they know at some level they're doing it.
Isn't that what we're seeing around us? Mark Zuckerburg is Jewish. Given his ancestral history, censorship is something he'd never even consider yet he's doing it and doing it a lot as if he's qualified to be the arbiter of true/false and right/wrong when no human being is. What do ya think?
I'm at the next umbrella over! You're not alone!
I think these sentiments are too extreme. I am not afraid of everyone airing different viewpoints. This is probably a reasonable distribution of what is out there as opposed to legacy media which is only presenting one side of the picture. It's the same reason I like RealClearPolitics.
In principle, I am not afraid of *everyone* airing different viewpoints, but much hinges who the "everyone" is, and on the range of issues put on the table.
A Greenwald, with his 15+ year track-record of showing good judgement, is a far more appropriate choice to be on this panel, than a psychiatrist in Washington, D.C., whose track-record is dwarfed by Greenwald's, and whose Wiki entry is a fraction of the length of his, and of Bari's.
If the main dichotomies are
passports vs. "license", or "Enabling Act" vs. "chaos", but not
rigorous probing/ prosecution of Fauci (for fraud) vs. only putting him on a MSM pedestal,
I fear that the "debate" is rigged, before the first words are recorded.
Since legacy media is only presenting one side, why does she need to bring others (with weaker credentials than Greenwald or Prasad) regurgitate the Party Line, which already gets far more than its share of attn.?
That's interesting. Fauci has gone from being a suppressed saint to a potential fear monger since the presidential election.
The truth is probably somewhat in the middle, although no one can debate the lousy pitch that he threw out on MLB opening day.
For anyone who had a loved one die from AIDS early on he’s a monster for spending years blocking Bactrim while there lived one suffered an awful death in isolation. The way he attacks Ivermectin is nothing compared to what he threw at trying to block Bactrim - which became the treatment of choice until better ones were developed.
Of note, I have Ivetmectin in my cabinet, but I’m not yet convinced by the research quality on its effectiveness. I do think anyone who wants to try should have the opportunity, though monoclonal antibodies appear very effective and safe.
Anywho, Likewise, Neal Ferguson is responsible for decades of hysterical over reactions in the UK (mad cow, HFM, swine flu, bird flu), yet his imperial college model was the statistical basis for all the wildly inaccurate models used to justify the shutdowns. (He used similarly crazy things to cull tens of thousands of livestock over the years).
A few examples of Ferguson - he thought 50,000 would die from mad cow in the mid 90’s. Like 16 actually did. He projected 40 million deaths globally from bird flu, 218 people total actually did,
Yet we ignored the GBD authors and John Ioannidis who are more qualified than either Fauci or Ferguson, and have more esteemed careers with track records of actual accuracy.
So what's really happening here to cause this flight from reason and truth? Who's really in charge? Who's orchestrating all the s*** going on, and what's their end game?
Everything is about causing our destruction from the inside. If that's what they want, who or what convinced them that's a good thing?
Nice to see someone here, beside me, caring about track records.
Sally Satel's reputation among conservatives and freedom-lovers is not going to recover from this weird "freedom is slavery" post. She is going to have to find some new friends.
Satel will have no trouble getting new friends, among those who push for the deportation/ liquidation of "anti-vaxers", Deplorables, and "insurrectionists".
If she is "a rising GOP star", be prepared to be stuffed into the boxcars, unless you're willing to toe the Party Line down to the last scintilla.
I think the rising star is the Miami mayor.