We're still here, Liberals! And my Local Homeless dudes are still here too!

Vaccinated are dying
Unvaccinated are dying

Everyone just Mind your own f’n business. If you are afraid, stay in your basement.

Number of deaths I've encountered in the last 2 years:

COVID and Unvaccinated : 1
COVID and Vaccinated : 1
Death because of vaccination : 1
Unrelated cause of death : 1

The vaxxed are doomed. No big deal to us pure bloods.

Covid-19 has a low mortality rate. The problem is that it is highly infectious, and if enough people get it, that low mortality rate translates into a lot of people (800,000 Americans) dying.

It translates into a lot of people allegedly dying WITH Covid, but not because of Covid . . . and now that an alleged variant shares some traits with the Common Cold, you can bet the number of false positives will go through the roof.

And just in time for Christmas- it's a liberal's Christmas Miracle.

I'm not a liberal. I was a registered Republican for 20 years and am a Libertarian. I oppose mandates and passports, but I support individuals masking up and getting vaccinated.

https://perfectlygoodink.com/2021/11/01/against-mandates-in-favor-of-personal-responsibility/

"it's a liberal's Christmas Miracle"

Weird take. If there's an economic slowdown over Christmas, who would you expect to bear the brunt of the political cost from that? Democrats or Republicans? And if this were a big-government conspiracy, why did Fauci report that Omicron appears to be *less* dangerous?

https://www.chicagotribune.com/coronavirus/ct-aud-nw-coronavirus-fauci-omicron-20211205-nd7nix4s65g65jmzld3ucxm5da-story.html

"a lot of people allegedly dying WITH Covid, but not because of Covid"

I suggest looking into the research regarding excess deaths, which compares the number of deaths a country has been experiencing compared to typical years. The evidence indicate that the official covid-19 death count is undercounting (probably because test kits are reserved for the living).

https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/coronavirus-excess-deaths-estimates

They've already gotten what they wanted. Trump is out.

As to Fauci "report[ing] that Omicron appears to be *less* dangerous", the man changes his story at least weekly. And no, that is NOT because the "science" has somehow evolved.

I mentioned masks earlier. No doubt you have seen his March 2020 interview where he essentially mocked the general public needing to wear masks, and he spoke of how masks might catch a few droplets, etc. He said this because 50+ years of clinical data, and decades of anecdotal observations, informed us that masks do nothing to prevent the spread of infectious disease. That was the collective wisdom of the medical and science professions. Then suddenly, overnight, all of this wasn't so? Well, they realized that telling people to wear masks to prevent the spread wouldn't work for very long, once reality became clear, so they crafted the narrative that 'wearing masks will slow the spread", a nonsensical, non-scientific premise that would be difficult to disprove.

No, Fauxci is a bureaucratic hack, plain and simple, and an intensely liberal one to boot. The liberal part is only relevant because this means he will lie without remorse. And why ANY thinking (alleged) Libertarian would use a hack like Fauxci, the man at least partially to blame for C-19 even existing in the first place, as some sort of proof of the voracity of any of this is sketchy.

"I suggest looking into the research regarding excess deaths . . . "

I did this, and I am not surprised that you have a source that concluded something different from what I did, based on the raw numbers I found myself on the CDC website. It was clear when I researched this that the number of deaths from 2020 vs 2019 were DOWN. Where those numbers are today, after the requisite bureaucratic numbers cooking took place (they effectively promised this in the content on the site), I have no idea. I just know that BEFORE the cooking took place, overall deaths were down.

But this is still not proof of anything, scientifically. Deaths could be way up 2021 vs 2020, and have absolutely nothing to do with C19, the Flu, the Common Cold, or toasters falling into bathtubs. The baby boomers are in/entering into their geriatric phase of their lives, so the raw numbers of deaths will certainly be higher over the next number of decades.

"He said this because 50+ years of clinical data, and decades of anecdotal observations, informed us that masks do nothing to prevent the spread of infectious disease. That was the collective wisdom of the medical and science professions. Then suddenly, overnight, all of this wasn't so?"

My blog post covers this, so I'm guessing you still haven't read it?

The evidence before covid-19 was that masks do not control the flu, probably because the flu is not airborne. Also, acquiring consent to perform RCTs involving masks is problematic because the main benefit is to other people that the mask-wearer comes into contact with. The benefit for such a study did not outweigh the cost until covid-19, at which point they were able to get enough funding for a RCT in Bangladesh where they put whole villages into the control and treatment groups.

"But this is still not proof of anything, scientifically. Deaths could be way up 2021 vs 2020, and have absolutely nothing to do with C19, the Flu, the Common Cold, or toasters falling into bathtubs. The baby boomers are in/entering into their geriatric phase of their lives, so the raw numbers of deaths will certainly be higher over the next number of decades."

You can never prove anything in science, but if your theory about baby boomers is true, the excess deaths should vary by country depending upon their demographics. Japan in particular has a much older population than the U.S., and yet they are seeing *fewer* deaths than typical.

Also, given that the excess death pattern largely holds across multiple countries, the odds of your other theories being true are statistically negligible. I would submit that Occam's Razor holds here. The simplest explanation is that the official covid-19 statistics are undercounting the true impact.

"You can never prove anything in science . . . "

I find it fascinating how the younger a person is, the more that the concept of science (lit. knowledge) is not understood.

*Man did not land on the Moon using unproved science.
*The process of Vulcanization is not unproved, so says the billions of rubber tires that do what they are supposed to do on the world's roads every day.
*My bread pops up out of the toaster, toasted, using things proved by science.

You have believed a lie.

The ONLY things that "you can never prove [with] science" are those things which have an ideological and biased motive underlying them. At that point, folks like yourself are more than willing to accept a complete 180, just so long as they call is "science". The whole point of a theory is to postulate a premise, and then dutifully research it until the theory can be proved or disproved. The problem with having it founded on ideology rather than fact is that it MUST be proven at all costs, regardless of where the facts take us.

Given that this virus was either created and released in order to be used by those in certain positions to push the "great reset", or whatever, or it was released accidentally while being developed for other nefarious purposes, groups of individuals clearly coordinated after the fact to use it for their own designs.
Certainly, one of those reasons was to defeat the Bad Orange Man, but I have seen enough to realize that liberals/Democrats/etc are using this to grab more power, and at a faster rate than ever before.

I can tell you have jumped into a rabbit hole, and therefore cannot see what you cannot see. It is scary to see how this plays out for you. And seriously, I can discern no noticeable difference between what you are saying and the average unthinking liberal I come across- you are just more certain of your research than they are.

Against my better judgment, let me say this. I get the impression you spend a lot of time here and places like it. As a former economics educator, I'll freely admit that there are many things that economics gets wrong, but one thing that it definitely gets right is the importance of incentives.

There is no incentive for accountability on social media. None. Controversy and eye-catching sensationalism is far more likely to go viral and keep people addicted to their phones. And it it those people who are the most likely to believe lies.

Yes, I would love more people to come to my blog, but it's not for money (there are no ads on it), nor fame (I've already have my 15 minutes). As a former educator, I simply want to help inform people, especially in this age of so much misinformation. As I think you'll see, I aim to make the content as rationally nonpartisan and well-researched as I can.

As this crowd clearly prefers sports-fan-like shouting matches over reasoned policy debates, this is *obviously* the worst place to try and drive traffic to it. But I spent a lot of time and effort, and I took pains to consider evidence regardless of whether or not it contradicted my pre-existing beliefs, and I think what I put together would be well worth your time if you are willing to be better than your average unthinking partisan.

And no, nothing researched is ever certain, and if you find an error or have some evidence to present that casts my findings in doubt, I'll gladly consider it. Yes, you can have a very high degree of confidence in some things, enough to build things. But to ever have absolute certainty in something is a recipe for blinding oneself.

This is exactly why it's important to always consider evidence and sources from all angles, and to do one's utmost to *prevent* one's political beliefs and ideology from affecting how one interprets evidence, even though that goes against human tendencies. As such, I strongly recommend to everybody to hold their beliefs lightly.

Nothing I have presented should be threatening to your politics. I am still comfortable with my belief that mandates are counterproductive. Believing that vaccines and masks are effective does not contradict the belief that government power tends to create more harm than good. Indeed, I would say the reaction of most people on this thread is Exhibit A of that.

Welcome to Imgflip! It's basically been a dumpster fire of false / misleading memes about covid, vaccines, and any preventative measures ever since the pandemic began..... Blatantly misleading memes about various parts of the pandemic often even making it to the top of the front page, no less! They were/are so common that I actually made a stock response to deal with them.

Thanks for the welcome. To be honest, though, I intend to follow my own advice and spend as little time on here as possible, as the misinformation here seems to be worse than even Facebook.

Indeed, the only reason I'm on here at all is to create memes for the California Ranked Choice Voting Coalition so we can promote a voting system that we hope will halt the spiral of political polarization. I'm also hopeful it will also reduce mindless partisanship by making parties more ideologically coherent so that political discussions stop being shouting matches and return to being more substantive discussions about policy.

But I do like to try and be a positive influence wherever I drop by.

https://twitter.com/perfctlyGoodInk/status/1291070012174655489

Well it sounds like you know where you're at. Everything here should definitely be taken with a grain of salt.... if at all.

Good luck with your efforts.
👍

"Given that this virus was either created and released in order to be used by those in certain positions to push the "great reset", or whatever, or it was released accidentally while being developed for other nefarious purposes, groups of individuals clearly coordinated after the fact to use it for their own designs."

What little we know about the origin of the virus does not back up your assertion:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/new-reconstruction-points-to-animal-origins-for-covid-19-11637262041

"A scientist known for investigating viral origins has reconstructed the first known weeks of the Covid-19 pandemic, adding to a growing body of evidence that the virus behind it jumped from infected animals to humans rather than emerging from laboratory research.
...
Dr. Worobey’s work adds to mounting evidence of a natural, or so-called zoonotic, origin of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes Covid-19. While many virologists and others who study epidemics say a laboratory accident in Wuhan can’t be ruled out, they believe it’s far more likely that the new virus’s origin occurred in nature."

Not to mention that you can spread viruses from the eyes and pores.

As to Covid deaths being undercounted, I must warn you that falling for that line means you are in serious danger of sliding from being a Republican, right past Libertarianism, and straight into the nightmare hell of Progressive Liberalism.

Cases might be undercounted, because the vast majority of people that have had it didn't even realize it, the symptoms being so mild. I knew I had it because I felt the drain for around three weeks, but I also had issue with taste and smell. Perhaps had we known more at the time, or had the Progressive narrative been ramped up at the time, I would have panicked, but it was gone before that could happen. Of course, I am not one to panic like that in the first place, and since I ignore the MSM and the Democrat Party, I would probably have not known I "needed" to panic at all.

My job takes me into retail and grocery stores, where I work among the general public for hours on end. Mask mandates and recommendations came MONTHS after this thing was well into the public, and once the scamdemic panic buying started, people were crammed into these stores like never before. EVERYTHING the Liberal narrative resulted in was the exact opposite of what any intelligent, informed person would have wanted to happen.

For most of that, no one was wearing a mask. Once the real panic set in, in spite of this not touching most people's lives (that's just the odds), EVERYONE was wearing a mask. Yet it spread faster.

And now that more than ever are vaccinated, people are back to wearing masks en masse, cases are (allegedly) on the rise. I have stopped wearing a mask, yet I continue to be exposed DAILY to the general public- literally hundreds of people each day. Am I just on the lucky end of a game of Russian Roulette? At some point we are going to have to acknowledge that it isn't just luck.

I guess being a self-proclaimed Libertarian doesn't mean you have to pay attention to the world around you? You approach, again, seems decidedly liberal after all.

"As to Covid deaths being undercounted, I must warn you that falling for that line means you are in serious danger of sliding from being a Republican, right past Libertarianism, and straight into the nightmare hell of Progressive Liberalism."

In my opinion, one's politics should *not* affect how one interprets facts and evidence. It should *only* inform your supported policy responses (e.g., mandates, which as a Libertarian I oppose).

"Cases might be undercounted,"

I was talking about excess deaths, not cases.

"For most of that, no one was wearing a mask. Once the real panic set in, in spite of this not touching most people's lives (that's just the odds), EVERYONE was wearing a mask. Yet it spread faster."

I would suggest this is probably due to exponential growth due to the high R0 of covid-19. Earlier on, few people were infected and the odds of coming into contact with an infected person was low. Later on, the odds increased steeply.

You don't have a natural experiment unless you keep everything constant and change just one variable. See my blog post for a better natural experiment that looked at counties in Kansas during the *same* time period. I'll spare linking it yet again, as I've already done so twice.

"I'm not a liberal."

Everything isn't always about you, but given the normal nastiness found on this site, I can understand the misunderstanding.

" . . . but I support individuals masking up and getting vaccinated."

I support people deciding for themselves what is best. Given that masks cannot prevent the spread of infectious disease, I see no point in "masking up"- it accomplishes nothing, apart from the State creating a bunch of mindless drones. Which is something I would have thought a Libertarian would see immediately. I am especially fond of watching people driving alone, or walking around outside, dutifully wearing their masks. If nothing else, this nonsense makes it clear who the dangerous non-thinkers are. But that was fairly evident already.

As to getting vaccinated, why? All indications are that it accomplishes little, if anything, apart from likely weakening a person's immune system. And given that these are all still experimental, given the short-term data available, no one knows what the long-term side effects will be. The *possibility* that the side effects from the vaccines *might be* lesser than those of the virus is exactly like playing Russian Roulette.

My own experience from having Covid in Feb of 2020 is that I have had worse colds. The normally vulnerable crowd, the elderly and immune-compromised, have had a much different experience, but that is nothing new.

"Weird take. If there's an economic slowdown over Christmas, who would you expect to bear the brunt of the political cost from that? Democrats or Republicans? And if this were a big-government conspiracy, why did Fauci report that Omicron appears to be *less* dangerous?"

Given that your response is somewhat reasoned, I want you to understand that I am not intending to insult you in any way, but your responses are more akin to that of an actual liberal. The reasoning here is weak, at best.

Liberals, aka Democrats, routinely vote along lines that are not in their best interests, nor the best interests of the country. They vote based on a warped set of morals and ideals. They shoot themselves in the foot with their personal life choices and shoot the country in the foot with their representative choices. Everything negative that has resulted from the Biden Admin was entirely predictable. Democrats cannot govern successfully, something they have demonstrated over the last 50 + years.

DTuck: "I support people deciding for themselves what is best. Given that masks cannot prevent the spread of infectious disease, I see no point in 'masking up'- it accomplishes nothing"

I agree with the first part, but not the second. Please read my blog post to see why (in short, masks reduce transmission, particularly as source control, and they are an extremely low-cost and low-risk measure).

https://perfectlygoodink.com/2021/11/01/against-mandates-in-favor-of-personal-responsibility/

"As to getting vaccinated, why?"

My post is mostly about masks, but I do briefly discuss vaccines at the end. It's a slightly higher risk than masks, but the benefits are a much lower risk of hospitalization and death. Here's a good source on that:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/highly-vaccinated-states-keep-worst-covid-19-outcomes-in-check-as-delta-spreads-wsj-analysis-shows-11628328602

Remember that covid-19 is also known to have long-term side effects, particularly neurological.

DTuck: "[Omicron is] a liberal's Christmas Miracle."

pgi: "Weird take. If there's an economic slowdown over Christmas, who would you expect to bear the brunt of the political cost from that? Democrats or Republicans? And if this were a big-government conspiracy, why did Fauci report that Omicron appears to be *less* dangerous?"

DTuck: "The reasoning here is weak, at best. Liberals... vote based on a warped set of morals and ideals."

In my experience, political discussions quickly go downhill if they focus on people instead of policies. Please focus on what policies you support and why, and also please answer my questions.

"Remember that covid-19 is also known to have long-term side effects, particularly neurological."

You are making my brain hurt now. Exactly how long are those long-term side effects lasting? We have a little over 2 years of data currently available- that is not "long-term" in my book. You are regurgitating a scripted narrative, either from being deceived, or from a desire to have people read your blog. Saying we have any long-term anything with regards to C19 is 100% absurd.

Also, since it is well established that the vaccinated DO catch C19, what are the long-term effects going to be from having both the virus AND the vaccination side effects to contend with?

NONE of this is known, nor can it be at this point, so for you to make concrete assertions like this is intellectually foolish and/or dishonest.

https://www.thelancet.com/action/showPdf?pii=S2215-0366%2821%2900084-5

https://www.alz.org/aaic/downloads2021/COVID-19_and_Long-Term_Cognitive_Dysfunction.pdf

https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/coronavirus/in-depth/coronavirus-long-term-effects/art-20490351

"One's politics should not affect how one interprets evidence."

And yet, they most certainly do affect how people interpret the evidence, just as it is clearly affecting you. Politics is certainly a profession, but in the more general sense, it is simply a way to define what we believe, and the ideals we hold as important.

"You don't have a natural experiments unless you keep everything constant and change just one variable. See my blog post for a better natural experiment that looked at counties in Kansas during the *same* time period. I'll spare linking it yet again, as I've already done so twice."

We have entire countries, the State of Florida, and others, that serve as "natural experiments" that show us the opposite of what you would like to maintain.

So when it comes to interpreting data, we already know that 10 people would come to 10 different conclusions. Which conclusions, however, result in more tyranny and less freedom, and which run counter to this? I am going with the latter, which makes me more of a Libertarian than you, I'm afraid.

pgi: "One's politics should not affect how one interprets evidence."

DTuck: "And yet, they most certainly do affect how people interpret the evidence, just as it is clearly affecting you."

Based on how often I have cited evidence in this thread (some of which you chose not to look at) and how often you have made assertions like this one (as well as ad hominem attacks), I'll rest my case there and stop wasting our time.

My blog post was written for the Libertarian Party of Orange County, by the way:

https://www.lpoc.org/single-post/against-mask-mandates-in-favor-of-personal-responsibility

What have you done for the Libertarian Party?

What have I done for the libertarian party? I voted for Trump over Biden, what did you do? Throw your vote away on someone that had zero chance of winning?

I'm not in a swing state anyways, so any vote I cast would only be a statement vote.

Leaving aside that Trump is just as statist as Biden (e.g., tariffs, socialist industrial policy), that we have a winner-take-all system means that my vote for Jorgensen affects actual policy making just as much as your vote, namely zilch. Biden doesn't govern any less statist if 2nd place had 49.9% of the vote or 0% of the vote. Everybody governs as if they had a mandate, regardless of whether they won one.

Want to fix that? Work towards Ranked Choice Voting and Proportional Representation.

"Based on how often I have cited evidence in this thread"

btw- it is the height of arrogance to place that much confidence on what you hold so firmly to, without opening yourself up to opposing viewpoints. It is also entirely foolish to be immediately engaged in a conversation, and then act surprised when the other party doesn't take off to follow your rabbit trails. I will peruse them later, but I can assure you, they are based in assumptions, and presumptions.

Yes, I know that in some cases those assumptions and presumptions are made by EXPERTS, who are vastly more intelligent than either you or I, and so they should be followed blindly, but I have never been convinced by "the experts".

"Science is the belief in the IGNORANCE of experts."
Richard Feynman

I meant to mention this in my previous message, but science is NOT about following experts blindly. Science is all about the scientific method being the best way to acquire new knowledge: observe the universe, create a theory about it, devise an experiment to test the theory, see if the evidence supports the theory or not. Then publish the results (regardless of which way the evidence went), and then see what your peers say about it.

Indeed, students have found issues in the work of much more well-renowned scholars (Thomas Herndon exposing the Excel error in Reinhart & Rogoff, Matthew Rognlie's takedown of Thomas Piketty), and this is exactly how the process is supposed to work.

This highlights the importance of keeping an open mind to all evidence despite your prior beliefs rather than dismissing uncomfortable facts as "rabbit trails" to be read "later."

Let me give you an example. Libertarians generally oppose war as a violation of the Non Aggression Principle. If a Libertarian were to ignore all news stories that reported an invading army that has crossed into U.S. territory (because this fact would be inconvenient for her anti-war belief), would this person be:

A) A "Good Libertarian."

or

B) A Libertarian who foolishly allowed her political beliefs to get in the way of being well informed.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zyY7NmbBz0A

p.s. No actual attempt at using ad hominem was my intent, though I can guess at where you might have concluded some of that. I suggest, however, that perhaps where the real sting is coming from is in the exposure of your lack of a use of logic.

Some things simply do not comport themselves well with basic logic.

"What have you done for the Libertarian Party?"

Is your idea of supporting the Lib Party is what I have seen here, you would be better off not doing anything. Just sayin' . . .

I am going to leave you with this, for now. From the last link you posted, please tell me what is wrong with it:

"-long-term-effects/art-20490351"

There is something clearly wrong with what is certain to follow at that link, and it is seen in the actual link.

What is it?

I see we've moved on to the "Let's just deny reality" stage of Covid derangement.

https://www.reddit.com/r/COVIDAteMyFace/

https://www.reddit.com/r/HermanCainAward/

https://www.sorryantivaxxer.com/

Any tool can make a scatter chart like that and post it. Particularly with what seems like superimposed text. Please provide a source. Thanks.

:)

Idiocy.

Indeed.

This isn't liberals. This is the far left. I am a liberal (not fully a conservative) but I'm definitely no leftist. I'm mostly right wing as a matter of fact. Like trans rights, that's fine with me. Abortion not so much. BUT I value law enforcement, freedom of speech and of self-defense, and people with America's best interests at heart. I'm not your enemy. An enemy would be a far-leftist with a mental state beyond repair. I oppose CRT and vaccine/mask mandates. I trust Fox more than CNN. Does that make me not liberal? No. I think there's room for a bit of progress in society. But the "progressives" have the wrong kind in mind.

yep, and they are marking people that died from cancer to covid.

Upvote

And the shot mess with your body so...

yeah i had covid, and that shit is just like the flu. it isnt to bad