Vaccine

Getting harder and harder to cover for Lord Fauci

vanity fair here

Damn, this doesn't paint a pretty picture.

---

Instead of helping to lead a search for COVID-19’s origins, with the pandemic now firmly in its 19th month, the NIH has circled the wagons, defending its grant system and scientific judgment against a rising tide of questions. “It’s just another chapter in a sad tale of inadequate oversight, disregard for risk, and insensitivity to the importance of transparency,” said Stanford microbiologist Dr. David Relman. “Given all of the sensitivity about this work, it’s difficult to understand why NIH and EcoHealth have still not explained a number of irregularities with the reporting on this grant.”

---

As scientists remain in a stalemate over the pandemic’s origins, another disclosure last month made clear that EcoHealth Alliance, in partnership with the Wuhan Institute of Virology, was aiming to do the kind of research that could accidentally have led to the pandemic. On September 20, a group of internet sleuths calling themselves DRASTIC (short for Decentralized Radical Autonomous Search Team Investigating COVID-19) released a leaked $14 million grant proposal that EcoHealth Alliance had submitted in 2018 to the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA).

It proposed partnering with the Wuhan Institute of Virology and constructing SARS-related bat coronaviruses into which they would insert “human-specific cleavage sites” as a way to “evaluate growth potential” of the pathogens. Perhaps not surprisingly, DARPA rejected the proposal, assessing that it failed to fully address the risks of gain-of-function research.

The leaked grant proposal struck a number of scientists and researchers as significant for one reason. One distinctive segment of SARS-CoV-2’s genetic code is a furin cleavage site that makes the virus more infectious by allowing it to efficiently enter human cells. That is just the feature that EcoHealth Alliance and the Wuhan Institute of Virology had proposed to engineer in the 2018 grant proposal. “If I applied for funding to paint Central Park purple and was denied, but then a year later we woke up to find Central Park painted purple, I’d be a prime suspect,” said Jamie Metzl, a former executive vice president of the Asia Society, who sits on the World Health Organization’s advisory committee on human genome editing and has been calling for a transparent investigation into COVID-19’s origins.

---

Meanwhile, members of the DRASTIC coalition have continued their research. As one member, Gilles Demaneuf, a data scientist in New Zealand, told Vanity Fair, “I cannot be sure that [COVID-19 originated from] a research-related accident or infection from a sampling trip. But I am 100% sure there was a massive cover-up.”
 
What's wrong with passionate people at the lectern? Potato, Potato, depends right?
Foaming at the mouth, babbling gibberish, drunk at the end of the bar going on about some fantasy in their heads kinda thing (or fantasy some opportunist put there), be my guest, hear’em out . . . meanwhile back in reality there is business to do and all the silly fools insisting they get their 15 minutes just slows down progress.
 
Foaming at the mouth, babbling gibberish, drunk at the end of the bar going on about some fantasy in their heads kinda thing (or fantasy some opportunist put there), be my guest, hear’em out . . . meanwhile back in reality there is business to do and all the silly fools insisting they get their 15 minutes just slows down progress.
3:15am Husker? I think we all know who has drinking problem. Go get some sleep dude and try and be honest for once in your life. Lying and cheating is not good for one's soul, just saying.
 
Foaming at the mouth, babbling gibberish, drunk at the end of the bar going on about some fantasy in their heads kinda thing (or fantasy some opportunist put there), be my guest, hear’em out . . . meanwhile back in reality there is business to do and all the silly fools insisting they get their 15 minutes just slows down progress.
1634994599732.png
 
Espola, Husker, Golden Gate, Dad, EOTL, Messy and all the others, "Blah blah blah" to all of you!!!! It's all about the "Blah." Thanks for dividing our country with, "Blah Blah and more Blah" you losers, cheaters and liars......Blah!!!!!

 
The problem with that is the assumption of "both" parties. Why only 2? Within a year we could enact laws and Constitutional Amendments that weaken the big parties (and their donors) hold on our politics. It's not going to happen as long as we have the Dumb and Dumber political system.
Blah & Blah
 
Your "competent professionals" are volunteers looking at the marks and trying to decide whether an indentation was decided one way or another with two lawyers screaming in their ears. If you actually made them "professionals" they'd be captured just like any other groups pulling a salary.

I actually agree with most of your recommendations but note that with the extreme polarization these days, even supposedly "independent" boards like the Fed, the NLRB, or even the SEC are not really "independent" but are captured by interest groups and parties. Even supposedly non-partisan school boards are captured by either pro-union or anti-union candidates these days.

I also don't agree the US is "fine" given the margins several recent races have fallen in...a little fraud is enough to tilt the system....and given now what's going on with the school boards its become even more vital since the margins in those contested elections can be tight (again, my friend lost by less than 40 votes to the union candidate).

These wouldn't be an issue but for the extreme polarization of the country which is pulling the politicians in the two directions...otherwise you wouldn't see the impact that you do in the Senate which has no gerrymandering. Yet we only have maybe 7 true centrist senators, and of those 7 most of them are captured by special interests (Manchin/Murkowski) and/or are among the worst of the worst when it comes to politicians (Romney).
Fair enough on the competent profs, but I'll take people who know what they are doing versus the crap in AZ recently, as I mentioned.

I don't have a problem with close races. In fact, I'd prefer if every race in every state was close. That would be a far better solution and would drive politicians to the center rather than the extremes, as now.

I'd suggest that the Senate is implicitly undemocratic. It was fine when there were 13 colonies and a relatively small number of people, but when a voter in WY has 60 times the power as a voter in CA, that's problematic to me. The counter balance intent of the Senate, as originally setup, has pivoted the other way.
 
Fair enough on the competent profs, but I'll take people who know what they are doing versus the crap in AZ recently, as I mentioned.

I don't have a problem with close races. In fact, I'd prefer if every race in every state was close. That would be a far better solution and would drive politicians to the center rather than the extremes, as now.

I'd suggest that the Senate is implicitly undemocratic. It was fine when there were 13 colonies and a relatively small number of people, but when a voter in WY has 60 times the power as a voter in CA, that's problematic to me. The counter balance intent of the Senate, as originally setup, has pivoted the other way.

The Senate was originally appointed by the states. It's job in the original Constitution was to act as a representative of the states. It was supposed to be undemocratic. It's job was to check the democratic house since democracy does not necessarily equal liberty (see article below).

The 17th amendment, which grew out of the populist movement of the early 20th century and was passed in 1913, made it directly elected. That had some consequences, both good and bad. The good is during the Gilded Age the Senate had become corrupt with mediocre men (no longer of the intellect of men like Webster) who bought their way to the Senate relying heavily on the machine politics which had arisen. The bad is that the states were supposed to be cosovereign with the federal government under the Constitution and now had no direct representation in that system....that was fine and dandy during WWII when the federal government assumed preeminence for the war and during the emergency of the Great Depression, but the concept of an absolutist federal government hasn't sat well over the years (again, see the current tensions between the Biden admin and Florida over COVID policy, or imagine if Trump had the power to order California and NY to open up during the worst of the pandemic).

I think, if the Great Sorting really is happening and it's not limited to a handful of idealogues like Ben Shapiro, federalism is probably the only thing which saves the Union at this point (if you disagree think of the freak that would happen if Trump actually won reelection in 2024...I didn't think that would happen but I think it's moved to a more than zero probability proposition now). If so, in order to preserve liberty and the Union, it might be useful to have less democracy in the Senate, not more of it.
 
I'd suggest that the Senate is implicitly undemocratic. It was fine when there were 13 colonies and a relatively small number of people, but when a voter in WY has 60 times the power as a voter in CA, that's problematic to me. The counter balance intent of the Senate, as originally setup, has pivoted the other way.

The Senate was originally appointed by the states. It's job in the original Constitution was to act as a representative of the states. It was supposed to be undemocratic. It's job was to check the democratic house since democracy does not necessarily equal liberty (see article below).

I think, if the Great Sorting really is happening and it's not limited to a handful of idealogues like Ben Shapiro, federalism is probably the only thing which saves the Union at this point (if you disagree think of the freak that would happen if Trump actually won reelection in 2024...I didn't think that would happen but I think it's moved to a more than zero probability proposition now). If so, in order to preserve liberty and the Union, it might be useful to have less democracy in the Senate, not more of it.
Better than I could have said it, Grace.

If the concern is the "undemocratic" Senate, move power from the federal level to the state level and it becomes less "problematic" and more democratic as power moves closer to the individual.
 
Wow

NSBA in a letter tonight apologizes for labeling concerned parents as potentially domestic terrorist, which Garland admitted was the reason he had his DOJ start looking into them

we found some resistance !
Wow, indeed. See the part below where they consulted with the Biden White House officials on the language to be used? Power is a hell of a drug.


“As you all know, there has been extensive media and other attention recently around our letter to President Biden regarding threats and acts of violence against school board members,” the memorandum states. “On behalf of NSBA, we regret and apologize for this letter. . . . There was no justification for some of the language included in this letter.”

The apology comes after emails obtained by the nonprofit Parents Defending Education, first reported by the Free Beacon, showed that the NSBA consulted with White House officials on language to be used in the September 29 letter.
 
Wow, indeed. See the part below where they consulted with the Biden White House officials on the language to be used? Power is a hell of a drug.


“As you all know, there has been extensive media and other attention recently around our letter to President Biden regarding threats and acts of violence against school board members,” the memorandum states. “On behalf of NSBA, we regret and apologize for this letter. . . . There was no justification for some of the language included in this letter.”

The apology comes after emails obtained by the nonprofit Parents Defending Education, first reported by the Free Beacon, showed that the NSBA consulted with White House officials on language to be used in the September 29 letter.
1635005120409.png
 
Fair enough on the competent profs, but I'll take people who know what they are doing versus the crap in AZ recently, as I mentioned.

I don't have a problem with close races. In fact, I'd prefer if every race in every state was close. That would be a far better solution and would drive politicians to the center rather than the extremes, as now.

I'd suggest that the Senate is implicitly undemocratic. It was fine when there were 13 colonies and a relatively small number of people, but when a voter in WY has 60 times the power as a voter in CA, that's problematic to me. The counter balance intent of the Senate, as originally setup, has pivoted the other way.
If we didn't have a senate, the larger states would run rough shod over the smaller states.

The reason why we have a senate today is maybe even more important than before.

The 17th amendment did more harm than good.

Now the senate is less responsive to their state which has in turn helped the fed gov grow.
 
Wow, indeed. See the part below where they consulted with the Biden White House officials on the language to be used? Power is a hell of a drug.


“As you all know, there has been extensive media and other attention recently around our letter to President Biden regarding threats and acts of violence against school board members,” the memorandum states. “On behalf of NSBA, we regret and apologize for this letter. . . . There was no justification for some of the language included in this letter.”

The apology comes after emails obtained by the nonprofit Parents Defending Education, first reported by the Free Beacon, showed that the NSBA consulted with White House officials on language to be used in the September 29 letter.
...replace Biden with Trump and image the responses/coverage.
 
I wonder what happens when they pass a higher min wage? Bulluer?

THE AUTOMATION OF McJOBS: I just saw these statistics on Wikipedia: In 2013, McDonald’s had 35,429 locations, a net income of $5,586 million and 440,000 employees. In 2019, it had 38,695 locations (more locations!), a net income of $6025 million (more profit!), and 205,000 employees (less than half as many employees!).
 
Back
Top