4 New Hospitalizations, 241 New Cases
Stock image from CanStockPhoto
Press release from Humboldt County Public Health:
Humboldt County Public Health reported today four new hospitalizations due to COVID-19, one resident in their 60s and three in their 70s. An additional 241 new cases were also reported, bringing to 16,453 the total number of residents who have tested positive for the virus.
As of Tuesday, Public Health and other local vaccinators have administered a total of 173,199 doses of COVID-19 vaccine. Local vaccination data has been updated on the Humboldt County Data Dashboard. Highlights include:
- Since the last weekly report on Jan. 19, a total of 1,075 vaccine doses were administered, and 508 additional residents completed their vaccine series.
- Approximately 64% of the county’s total population was fully vaccinated as of Tuesday.
- A total of 86,389 residents, or nearly 73% of the county’s vaccine-eligible population aged 5 and older, were fully vaccinated. More than 7% of the population aged 5 and older have been partially vaccinated as of this reporting period.
The COVID-19 Omicron variant is circulating widely in the community and pushing record-high cases locally. While vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals are both at high risk to get Omicron, officials say the risk of hospitalization and death for those who are unvaccinated remains significantly higher. Local data shows that unvaccinated adults in Humboldt County are 13 times more likely to be hospitalized than those adults who are fully vaccinated.
Public Health officials are reminding residents, particularly those who are not vaccinated, to reduce their risk of catching and spreading the highly transmissible virus. Residents are encouraged to wear a well-fitted mask approved by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in all indoor public spaces, distance six feet from others when possible and avoid crowds and poorly ventilated spaces.
Everyone aged 5 and older is urged to get vaccinated and all eligible individuals aged 12 and older are recommended to get a booster. Fully vaccinated or boosted individuals typically develop milder symptoms, experience shorter illness duration and have fewer hospitalizations and less severe outcomes. Boosters for those who are eligible reduce the risk of hospitalization even more than being fully vaccinated.
As always, Humboldt County’s vaccination and testing services are available free of charge. Although walk-ins are allowed at most regular Public Health clinics and many pharmacy vaccination sites, an increase in demand for boosters has caused delays at some locations. As a result, appointments are required for pediatric clinics and for clinics at Public Health’s main office. Appointments are strongly recommended for all other clinics and are the best way to ensure a shot is available during your visit. Appointments can be made at MyTurn.ca.gov.
Vaccines, including boosters, are available at local pharmacies. To check the availability of a specific vaccine, visit the vaccines.gov page, or text your ZIP code to 438829 to locate a nearby pharmacy offering vaccines.
See the schedule below for specific Public Health vaccination and testing clinic dates, times, locations and available services. Questions about clinic services can be directed to the Joint Information Center at 1-707-441-5000.
Eureka — Wednesday, Jan. 26, 11 a.m. to 6 p.m.
Marshall Resource Center (2100 J St.)
Ages 12 and older
Pfizer/Johnson & Johnson/Moderna
PCR and rapid testing available on a first-come first-served basis
Appointments for vaccinations strongly recommended.Trinidad — Thursday, Jan. 27, 2 to 7 p.m.
Trinidad Town Hall (409 Trinity St.)
Ages 5 and older
Pfizer/Johnson & Johnson/Moderna
PCR and rapid testing available on a first-come first-served basis
Appointments for vaccinations strongly recommended.Eureka — Friday, Jan. 28, 1 to 8 p.m.
Wharfinger Building (1 Marina Way)
Ages 12 and older
Pfizer/Johnson & Johnson/Moderna
No rapid testing available at this clinic. PCR testing offered through OptumServe by appointment on the lower floor of the Wharfinger Building.
Appointments for vaccinations strongly recommended.McKinleyville Family Clinic— Saturday, Jan. 29, 10 a.m. to 3 p.m.
McKinleyville High School (1300 Murray Road)
Ages 5 and older
Pfizer/Johnson & Johnson/Moderna
PCR and rapid testing available on a first-come first-served basis
Appointments for vaccinations strongly recommended.Eureka — Monday, Jan. 31, 9 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. Closed from noon to 1 p.m.
Public Health Main Office (529 I St.)
Ages 12 and older
Pfizer/Johnson & Johnson/Moderna
No testing available
$25 gift card for adults receiving a first or second dose
Appointments required.Eureka — Tuesday, Feb. 1, 9 to 11:30 a.m.
Public Health Main Office (529 I St.)
Ages 12 and older
Pfizer/Johnson & Johnson/Moderna
No testing available
$25 gift card for adults receiving a first or second dose
Appointments required.Eureka Pediatric Clinic — Tuesday, Feb. 1, 1:15 to 4 p.m.
Public Health Main Office (529 I St.)
Ages 5 to 11
Pfizer only
No testing available
Appointments required.Willow Creek — Tuesday, Feb. 1, 10 a.m. to 3 p.m. Closed from noon to 1 p.m.
Public Health Office (77 Walnut Way)
Ages 12 and older
Pfizer/Johnson & Johnson/Moderna
PCR and rapid testing available on a first-come first-served basis
$25 gift card for adults receiving a first or second dose
Appointments for vaccinations strongly recommended.Eureka — Wednesday, Feb. 2, 8 a.m. to 6 p.m.
Humboldt County Agricultural Building (5630 S. Broadway St.)
Ages 12 and older
Pfizer/Johnson & Johnson/Moderna
PCR and rapid testing available on a first-come first-served basis
Appointments for vaccinations strongly recommended.View the Data Dashboard online at humboldtgov.org/dashboard, or go to humboldtgov.org/DashboardArchives to download data from a previous time. For the most recent COVID-19 information, visit cdc.gov or cdph.ca.gov. Local information is available at humboldtgov.org or by contacting [email protected] or calling 1-707-441-5000.
Sign up for COVID-19 vaccination: MyTurn.ca.gov
Check for vaccine availability at a local pharmacy: Vaccines.gov
Local COVID-19 vaccine information: humboldtgov.org/VaccineInfo
Humboldt County COVID-19 Data Dashboard: humboldtgov.org/Dashboard
Follow us on Facebook: @HumCoCOVID19
Instagram: @HumCoCOVID19
Twitter: @HumCoCOVID19
Humboldt Health Alert: humboldtgov.org/HumboldtHealthAlert
PLEASE NOTE: Some of the numbers related to how many have been fully vaccinated as stated in this article is incorrect. We’re working to get the correct numbers from Public Health. These will be posted at a later date.
UPDATE: RHBB Reader Discovers DHHS Vaccination Calculation Erro
Join the discussion! For rules visit: https://kymkemp.com/commenting-rules
Comments system how-to: https://wpdiscuz.com/community/postid/10599/
Anyone else noticing things?
I’m noticing the hospitalizations are going up. So that’s 17 since the 18th.
🕯🌳A futher burden on the medical staff. 🖖🖖
Would like to hear from Dr Hoffman on what effect this will start having on the hospital system. For the past week the positivity rate as stated in the Dashboard is 40.13%
“You rang”?
“What effect will this start having on the hospital system”?
“Hmm…”
“Twhooooot”, “twhooooot”,
“They’ll probably have a problem admitting, exactly when, they’ll probably have a problem admitting”…
“Aaaaahhhhh”!
Burden? They chose to work in the medical field, find a different job if you feel over worked. Otherwise bust your butt and take alittle pride in a hard day’s work.
Apparently you’re clueless. Stop watching TV dramas on what goes on in hospitals. Perhaps you should go propose to that Washington politician who said all nurses do is play cards cause their not that busy or better yet Joy Behar aka Ms. Doctor’s stethoscope.
Someone apparently watches TV drama.
Maybe our country leaders should recognize we are going to live with this virus, and there will always be more illnesses. Maybe our country leaders should be pushing for more people in the medical field and more hospitals. If we are gonna live with this shit, then start making preparations.
Instead of paying off student loans accrued on learning history, which is being “covered” up, they should give educational incentives to join the medical field
🕯🌳Who says there not trying. 🖖🖖
Oh Joe, say it ain’t so!
COVID CASES USA
686,136 JAN 26 2022
150,638 JAN 26 2021
DEATHS
3,895 JAN 26 2022
4,098 JAN 26 2021
So that makes 35?
35 what?
Hospitalizations.
You know, like you said…
“So, that’s 17 since the 18th.”
17 since the 18th…
That makes 35, right?
How many since January 21st?
Doesn’t the count go from Friday to Friday?
Not sure what you are talking about..If hospitalizations, we have had 10 since the 21st, if you include the 21st numbers. All that information is on the health alert page. The link is in the above article.
“I am just the messenger”
Just not sure why you were counting, “17 since the 18th”, as those hospitalizations would have already been counted on the report from Jan. 21st.
Last week we had 9, this week, if it’s 10 since Jan. 21st, maybe we will have 17 by the end of the week, but not already.
And you said, “17, since the 18th”.
That would make 35, wouldn’t it?
Just messing with you.
Sighs…Go to the link.
humboldtgov.org/HumboldtHealthAlert
Must be his nap time…
🤔🧐Your using my material.
Maybe you should have said,
“…17, since ‘January’ 18th”?
Less confusing.
Less than 0.5% hospitalizations is a little more than the flu. Let’s get on with normal life.
On another topic, how does lame duck Biden, without American voter support, send a radical socialist Supreme Court nominee up to the Senate if he knows he needs 60 votes?
If all 11 Republican members of the Judiciary Committee oppose Biden’s pick and all 11 Democrats back her, the nomination goes inert. The nomination doesn’t die, but it does get parked until a lawmaker—historically, the Leader of the party—brings it to the floor for four hours of debate.
A majority of the Senate—51 votes, typically—can then put debate about the issue on the calendar for the next day. But that’s the last easy part. When the potential pick comes to the floor again, it’s not as a nomination. At that point, it’s a motion to discharge, a cloture motion that requires 60 votes. In other words, 10 Republicans would have to resurrect the nomination of someone already blocked in the Judiciary Committee.
The Republicans would probably vote for Kamala to the Supreme Court – just so she was no longer a heartbeat away from the presidency
🕯🌳Why are you so scared?👁👁
Sounds like Biden already decided on the race and gender of his nominee without regard to who would be most qualified and competent. Is that even legal?
🕯🌳You guys didn’t say anything when Dump appointed three judges but when President Biden gets to appoint one you get your panties in a bunch. 🖖🖖
Why would we say anything about President Trump’s nominees? The left did enough whining for a generation!
However, the clock is ticking for a barely Democrat controlled Senate to confirm a Brandon nominee?. And with distinguished centrists as Manchin and Sinema in the Senate, it shall be interesting to see how this plays out. Not to mention there are several steps that have to play out in a nominee’s favor to even get a vote in the Senate.
My money is on Kamala Harris being nominated. Easy way to get her unfavorable ass out of the administration and get someone who they think can boost Brandon’s numbers.
I better stock up on popcorn. This shall be entertaining!
Or…
The sad part of that is the implication that you think qualified black woman judges are a rare subset that are almost impossible to find.
I wasn’t implying that at all. The point I was trying to make is that the nominee has to check certain boxes, instead of being nominated based on job performance, as you stated. Why does it have to be a black woman? God forbid a white person gets nominated, even if the white is the most qualified, right?
Apply that in the opposite direction..How many people of color have been denied positions based on color of skin? And are you saying during the Trump era that no judge of color was qualified, to even be considered?
I see your guys’ point. But to now base the nominee on race and gender, rather than most qualified is imo reverse racism. Race and gender should not be a consideration when selecting “most qualified “.
This is a list of African Americans who have served as United States federal judges. As of October 28, 2021, there have been 237 African-Americans to have served on the federal bench. How many do we have on the Supreme Court?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_African-American_federal_judges
Across all state high courts, just 17 percent of justices are Black, Latino, Asian American, or Native American. By contrast, people of color make up almost 40 percent of the U.S. population.
https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/state-supreme-court-diversity-april-2021-update
Your right, Race and gender should not be a consideration when selecting “most qualified “.
Thanks Grey Fox. 🍻
Those are great demographics gf. Except of the 40% “minority”population, actually need to a viable candidate of education. You know, they are not gonna put clerk on the scotus.
People of different backgrounds bring their perspective to the table. Haven’t you ever been part of a meeting where someone who has a different perspective can open up the group’s collective eyes to something they are missing? A person who is very qualified legally and also bringing a perspective that is missing to the Supreme Court is bringing more to the table than someone who may be as qualified as she is elsewhere but doesn’t have the added bonus of bringing another perspective to the highest court in the land.
Judge Sotomayor brought that up and was accused of being racist.
Unfortunately there is no representing everyone who self identifies as a category in a body of 9 people. Supreme Court justices do not represent anyway. Ideally they, no matter who they are, should be able to look at the facts of a case and apply the law without having have it work for them personally. The branch of the government that does the representing is the Congress. The courts have trials to bring perspective. Long, complicated ones with plenty of input. Does the history of the judge’s background influence their decisions? Of course. Should it? No.
Already there is too much politicizing in courts. And doubling down on it by specifying the gender and race (heaven forbid sexual orientation, age, religion, culture, etc) that must be nominated is embarrassing. A president may think this way but he should keep his thoughts to himself.
Are you saying that we’d all be better off if we never allowed women a seat on the Supreme Court or even on a jury? Isn’t that saying that qualified men would be able to give the same even handed understanding in every position?
I guess I just have to disagree with you. Law should be a pure and impartial view of what is best for society as a whole but anyone should be able to see that instead it is a tangled mess that needs people standing from a variety of perspectives to get a clear view of how to sort out the problems.
I want the best person for the job, no matter what race or gender they are.
Just not another Biden chosen radical.
Every Dept. he’s touched has turned to crap.
Energy, transportation, education, HHS, you name it.
No. You’re saying that I am saying that. I of course never said anything like that. What I did say is that a truly “representative” supreme court is political fantasy and the President should not be using the nomination to use it for political pandering. All that can do is create the further appearance of identity politics with its inevitable division when people are excluded or marginalized because- tah dah- unless he can find a qualified non binary, very mixed race transgender person who was a naturalized illegal immigrant who went to law school on a military scholarship and is also a practicing Universalist agnostic who can be everyone’s accepted representative, it is simply impossible. He should make his nomination based on his own best choice and not use it to sow more division just to promote his Democrat bona fides.
And if he believes one of the major attributes he’s looking for is someone who is both black and female…Why not?
Trump looked for the most qualified conservative that would support his positions. He chose Amy Coney Barrett because he believed she would rule in his favor. He had previously chosen Kavanaugh and was unhappy with the result.
I’d love it if there was a true neutral search for the most knowledgeable person in law and the most equitable at parsing out fairness. But I’m not sure that the ability to judge that exists.
So you’d be cool with, say, Candace Owens as a nominee. Not that she’d take the pay cut.
I’m sure her internship for Vogue was close to law school but I don’t really think she has the law background that would qualify her for the position.
It bothers me how some of you miss the word “qualified” over and over. It’s like you want to be outraged so you’ll cover your ears and sing “la, la, la” over the parts that don’t fit your agenda.
You don’t have to be a judge, or a lawyer, or a college graduate, to be a Justice of the Supreme Court. There’s not even an age requirement. All you have to be this go-round is a black woman. Your diminution of Ms. Owens’ achievements makes my point.
If the stated goal of a Supreme Court that ‘looks like America’ was ingenuous, why is Biden* not considering a public-school educated single mom from Baltimore, or a grandmother from South Philly, or even a wise elder from Humboldt?
The same reason I don’t hire some of my commenters to perform surgery on me. We want an expert to handle tough situations. And to be a Supreme Court Justice, a candidate has to have a deep understanding of the law.
I don’t know why this is so difficult for folks, employers do this all the time. If I had enough money for instance, I might want to hire a reporter but I might want one that understands the perspective of our local Native America tribes so I could attract readers from the tribes and possibly money from Native American advertisers. So I would be on the lookout for a reporter with that background. But I wouldn’t just hire anyone with a Native American background. I’d start first looking among the people who have the qualifications to be a reporter and then among those, I’m narrowing my focus to those with a local Native American background. First, qualified in the general overall qualities and then they have the additional quality of understanding a perspective.
Good luck on finding the “best” reporter if you announce that only a Native Americans will be chosen. You are relying on the best being in that group and you will know it without examining other sources. HA. And what bigotry you would complain about the criteria was a Caucasian will be nominated. You can’t have it both ways. You can’t rationalize the utter stupidity of Biden announcing that is his intention.
Nooo,
This might come as a complete surprise, but other than a bit of semantics, I agree with you 100%.
Biden is clearly pandering to the part of his perceived audience, that he “judges”, will have the greatest benefit to HIM, politically, by his announcement that his intention is to nominate a “woman of African descent”, (PC?), on that basis alone, without first determining the most qualified candidate.
It is a decision for a member SCOTUS Justice!, it’s not simply a decision for a member of his damn cabinet.
Is nothing sacred anymore?
All candidates must be considered equally, first and foremost!
The absolute best qualified candidate should be chosen, no ifs, ands, or buts, about it, with no preconceived notions about what color or gender that person might be.
If that candidate turns out to be a woman of African descent, as it very well could be, then so be it.
Let the best candidate win.
If it’s by pandering that Biden thinks will get him reelected, this voter thinks he is sorely mistaken.
He is being an idiot.
What is required of a Justice of the Supreme Court is… literacy, and a smattering of common sense. Even California’s public schools can manage to turn out literates, mostly. Consider for a moment that when the laws were new, nobody had a “deep understanding” of them. The Supreme Court, one hopes, reads the Constitution and determines whether the outcome of a given case aligns with the ideas expressed therein. That’s really all they do. Anyone can do it. That was the idea all along. Not everyone can wield the law to alter society without consent of those governed. This is what you refer to as being ‘qualified.’ Along with, of course, the correct gender and skin color.
It bothers me that you include race and sex as qualifications. Because, having said that he will nominate a black woman, that has now become what they are. He did not say he will, if all things are equal, choose an underrepresented demographic. First he chooses race and gender then he looks for qualified in that group. And your singing “la la la” over the parts that don’t fit your agenda either.
If he believes that race and gender are “major attributes ” he’s looking as a criteria, he is saying that such considerations are acceptable. Since you feel they have been used to exclude people, you also feel they clearly are not. You keep trying to argue that it is okay “as long as you do it right.” And guess what? No one does bigotry “right”. Period.
If you’d really love to have it be a search for “most knowledgeable ” and “most fair” THAT would be the attributes you endorse. What you are actually endorsing is compensation. An eye for an eye. A feud that never ends.
Even that is not what I was saying previously. I was just saying that Biden needs to avoid the appearance of evil if he really wants to be good for the country. His political pandering, even if an honest held value, needs to be kept to himself. Otherwise he just perpetuates a bad situation. He may think a black woman justice is good for the country but he shouldn`t make it a public criteria over everything else. That is stupid for a man who expects political support for his policies.
As for Trump. IDK why you obsess over him and think I do too. All I’ve ever said about him is that he tended to take a balanced efficacy over even his own unbalanced rhetoric. He certainly did not deserved the unhinged attacks of the left. Although now he certainly is so damaged by them that he has become dangerous. But then the left has become as dangerous to the country as he is. And they apparently share much the same set of principles of vengence and overreaction that were liabilities with him.
You just don’t get it. He already chose a black female before looking at applications. That is just crazy. If you don’t see that. I don’t know what to say. We are doomed. Not because of a black lady Mabey she is the best and I hope she is. But picking someone because of race and gender and not qualifications is crazy. That’s like the 49ers drafting a transgender for a quarterback because they want one on the team instead of picking the most qualified. And agin. Mabey the transgender is the most qualified. And soo be it. We are soo done. Biden is a goof
👍
He is being a complete meatstick.
Supreme Court is about law. We need members who are familiar with law and history, and not the “right thing to do”. “The right thing” should be exhausted at the beginning of lawsuits. By the time it hits Supreme Court, it is all about the law, not how an individual can bring different perspectives
I said “qualified”. No one wants someone who isn’t qualified.
However, let’s say all the elementary school teachers in a school are female. A hiring committee may very well decide to search first among the qualified male possibilities before searching elsewhere for a good fit in order to bring some much needed male perspective into the school. That’s a good thing.
Same with the Supreme Court. And, unless you are saying there are no black women qualified to be on the Court, then what’s the harm with looking? And if you are saying that, you’re wrong.
Really? Have you ever worked in a place where, not matter how good, diligent, enthusiastic and successful you were, some one with power decided that you were never going to be the right kind to get a promotion because they were counting categories of people like a bean counter? How did you feel about that if you were? Even if you were willing to be sacrificed in the name of reparations for things you never did, you would be furthering systematic crap without ever seeing the light at the end of the tunnel. A second wrong never repairs the first wrong. The only repair is no doing wrong. Not that
As if that was not the whole argument against the history of doing just that? No. If Biden thinks that is needed, he should just act without all noisy parsing of people that lead to using unacceptable vetting criteria in the first place. Congratulations on rendering the USA even more disfunctional.
I’ve worked at a place that no matter how good, diligent, enthusiastic and successful I was, I wasn’t getting paid as much as men. I sure would have liked someone to look at that and fix it.
But are you really positing that no white man will ever again become a Supreme Court Judge because this time someone is power is looking at an imbalance and trying to correct it?
“I’ve worked at a place that no matter how good, diligent, enthusiastic and successful I was, I wasn’t getting paid as much as men.”
It is possible, you realize, that your opinion of what you were worth may not have been shared by the owner of the business. It’s even possible that your work attitude reflected this perceived injustice. You’re busy blaming it on being a female while the boss isn’t too impressed with your performance.
Well it looks like she is doing just fine on her own, that employer lost a valuable asset. I for one am glad she left. We are all the richer for it.
“Well it looks like she is doing just fine on her own,…”
So is Joe Rogan.
There you go putting words in my mouth so you can agrue successfully against them. Never said that.. I just said that using race and gender does not ensure anything but race and gender. Having female boss never ensured equal pay..
Having a boss that believes in equal pay does that.
Why are you automatically assuming that the black women being considered aren’t the best qualified?
Just because you want to diversify the life experiences being brought to consider and interpret the law doesn’t mean you aren’t getting the most qualified at the same time.
Why are you assuming that a black woman is the best? Maybe just acknowledging that it is a pretty useless criteria is best. If the best turns out to be a black woman, there you are. But hobbling her authority with the built in idea that better qualified candidates were pushed aside to get her in would be a burden that she would likely find unable to shake.
No comment from Biden would have been essentially the reasonable choice even if that had been a personal goal. He was stupid to take a weapon that the power of the Presidency gVe him and use it to shoot himself in the foot and have it ricochet of his selection.
👍
Good lord! You just can’t let it go. There is no basis for assuming anyone is missing anything because of their race because no judicial system even tolerates personal evidence in jurors much less judges, much less approves of it. Personal experience is not a judicial positive. Personal feels, experiences or knowledge is NOT evidence. That’s why there are court rooms, trials and advocates with rules of evidence.
What? you reply to a comment of mine from two days ago and say I can’t let it go?
🤔🧐🤷♂️
Just throwing numbers out there: if 100 red applicants vs 10 yellow applicants applied for 1 position. Statistics say one of the red applicants will be more qualified and a more professional fit. Point is, ruling out the majority of more qualified individuals due to skin color is racist
“more professional fit“
See this is a classic example of systemic discrimination. If your image of a well-qualified professional is a white guy, then anything different is going to look less qualified in your view.
That is not what he said.. it may be what he thinks but it’s only bigotry read that into it from what he said. In fact you are the one creating systemic discrimination but are seemingly okay as long as its your discrimination too. This is not good for anyone.
So you think the race of the applicant is a valid criteria, even if it lead to what you find objectionable for centuries? Strange thinking if the same action keeps being repeated that diffent results will happen. Maybe have an examination of what thinking makes a qualified candidate would include equality and fairness rather than assuming it would occur because of race and gender might be more effective.
Or an Indian, or an Asian that’s qualified..
If your going to appoint a black white gay or transgender. Just do it. Don’t talk about it. Put the most qualified person there is. I don’t care if they are green. To say I’m going to appoint a black woman is crazy if there is a more qualified Mexican or green lady Too much bullshit politics. There’s no hope anymore. Biden is such a moron It’s really terrible. He can’t even speak a legit sentence. We’re so screwed
No, the sad part is the Justice will never be allowed to forget she was not selected for her qualifications. See, she’s a person with feelings and, one presumes, some pride in her acheivements. To be reduced to the sum of her parts and handed a job on that basis is dehumanizing as well as demoralizing. And as a woman she will be savaged in the media on the occasion of her first incorrect ruling. In short, she’s being set up to fail on the basis of her gender and her skin color. That’s the sad part.
Again the word you are missing is “qualified.”
It is becoming increasingly obvious that in some conservative’s world view there isn’t the possibility that there is even one qualified black woman let alone a number to choose from.
No, actually, I addressed that in the first sentence. You’re just dismissing my opinion out of hand because I’m a woman.
Catfishing is a thing…
🤔🧐
I’m still trying to figure out if her statement should be considered only, “if it is true or has merit”, or whether it should be considered,
” ‘as’ if it is true or has merit”.🤷🏿♀️🤷♂️😉
So are non sequiturs.
Like when you guys were claiming kavanaugh was a gang rapist ?
Remember when they stormed the Capitol to beat on the doors of the Senate chamber, demanding to be let in so they could stop the proceedings?
Too bad. It happened.
Getting the nominee passed is what counts. Manchin may be swayed to vote correctly (doubtful), but Sinema’s been hassled in the ladies’ room and at a wedding she attended. I’d be unlikely to forget that happened to me.
If you aren’t a little bit thick-skinned, you’d never get involved in politics in the first place.
“So what happens when a female liberal Democrat calls another woman the c-word on a podcast? Well the hosts, all male and former Obama staffers themselves, all channel the 15-year old boy inside them and laugh and giggle, and make jokes about bleeping out the offensive word. “
I’ve been aggressively “lobbied”at the stall door of a public toilet. Being thick skinned, didn’t let it stop me from proceeding but it did leave an impression. Not a good one. From then on, I was reluctant to allow access to such people. Not what they wanted but then thick skin is impervious in both directions.
After Clarence Thomas, how can you even ASK that question? Daddy Bush said he was the most qualified person in the US to be nominated. Oh, maybe you are too young to even know this?
The Honorable Clarence Thomas is a fine and distinguished gentleman and has been a cornerstone of Constitutional protection for decades.
A toast to the man! 🥃
Bush knew Thomas’ white wife was the one running the show. It’s the only logical explanation.
Abortion isn’t mentioned in the Constitution, therefore Roe vs Wade has been a travesty for close to 50 years. That’s a matter for the states to decide. So, Amy Barrett is no threat to the Constitution, regardless of how she feels about abortion.
What’s there to say about Brett Kavanaugh? Accusations are hardly convictions. And I’m typing this with a cocktail on the table. Drinking is legal and has been for sometime.
Both, fine judges and legally confirmed by the Senate to sit on the SCOTUS.
Why are facts so hard for some individuals to accept?
A toast to them both and may their unwavering protection of the Constitution of our beloved Republic never waver! 🥃
Hmmm, or…..
1. Get Supreme Court Justice Breyer to step down.
2. Use the Supreme Court as a trash bin to throw Kamala into
3. Appoint Hillary vice president.
4. Remove Biden for medical reasons.
That’s the next RWNJ story?
How many ways lead to Biden stepping down before his 4 year term is up can the internet invent. I think I lost track at story number 5.
The Feb. 25 U.S. bombing of Syria immediately puts the policies of the newly-formed Biden administration into sharp relief. Why is this administration bombing the sovereign nation of Syria? Why is it bombing “Iranian-backed militias” who pose absolutely no threat to the United States and are actually involved in fighting ISIS? If this is about getting more leverage vis-à-vis Iran, why hasn’t the Biden administration just done what it said it would do: rejoin the Iran nuclear deal and de-escalate the Middle East conflicts?
According to the Pentagon, the U.S. strike was in response to the Feb. 15 rocket attack in northern Iraq that killed a contractor working with the U.S. military and injured a U.S. service member. Accounts of the number killed in the U.S. attack vary from one to 22.
The Pentagon made the incredible claim that this action “aims to de-escalate the overall situation in both Eastern Syria and Iraq.” This was countered by the Syrian government, which condemned the illegal attack on its territory and said the strikes “will lead to consequences that will escalate the situation in the region.” The strike was also condemned by the governments of China and Russia. A member of Russia’s Federation Council warned that such escalations in the area could lead to “a massive conflict.”
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/bidens-reckless-syria-bombing-this-is-not-the-diplomacy-he-promised/ar-BB1e4rpr
You’d work him into the grave if you could, wouldn’t you, Doctor?
boston herald agrees with you
https://www.bostonherald.com/2022/01/27/kamala-harris-to-supreme-court-would-open-the-vp-door-for-hillary-clinton/
Hillary would be the worst.
Monica would be better.
It is if the President* does it, I’m told.
Biden, concern himself with what’s legal, LOL LOL HaHa LOL.
Here’s an interesting article on COVID,
https://www.sfgate.com/coronavirus/article/Why-do-some-people-get-COVID-others-not-16800975.php
You’d probably really enjoy the huffpost comments section, it’s simply filled to the brim with posts like yours pertaining to politics, so many people are there, owning the bejeezus out of the libs. A wonderful time is had by all. Some articles have comments into the thousands! Check it out sometime.
He needs the simpler version. The one with pictures
“On another topic …”
good Bye-Don and hello “radical socialist Supreme Court nominee”.
On another topic …
I have a cartoon too. Police are two fisted warriors fighting for their LIVES.
oops
Ya. On The steps of the Capitol building trying to stop the coup
Lol! Jill will have to wake Brandon up, get him out of his Depends and then scrub his old ass and get him in a suit to announce a nominee.
Meanwhile, time marches on! Much quicker than the wheels of “democracy” turn…
A lot needs to happen before a vote in the Senate can happen.
US Risked Killing Thousands by Bombing Syria Dam on ‘No-Strike List’”The number of casualties would have exceeded the number of Syrians who have died throughout the war,” said a former director of the Tabqa Dam.
Syria’s largest dam was supposed to be off-limits during the U.S.-led war against the Islamic State, but nearly five years ago, the Pentagon bombed it anyway, jeopardizing tens of thousands of civilians’ lives, the New York Times reported Thursday.
“The number of casualties would have exceeded the number of Syrians who have died throughout the war.”
The Tabqa Dam is a massive, 18-story structure on the Euphrates River that holds back a 25-mile-long reservoir above a valley home to hundreds of thousands of people. It was also “a strategic linchpin” controlled by the Islamic State, the newspaper noted.
On March 26, 2017, a series of explosions battered the dam, knocking workers to the ground and sparking a power outage, fire, and equipment failures. As the reservoir began to rise, local authorities urged people living downstream to flee. The entire dam could have failed, experts say, had one of the bombs not been a dud.
Quality journalism. Progressive values. Direct to your inbox.
https://www.commondreams.org/news/2022/01/21/us-risked-killing-thousands-bombing-syria-dam-no-strike-list
Or, they can just pull what ‘Turtle Boy’ did, carve out the filibuster, and vote on a strict party line. How you think they got that last three idiots in there?
Just galls some folks that Mitch McConnell can so skillfully outmaneuver the legions of leftist lunacy, doesn’t it?
What, like they are still making the same mistake?
Covid is still killing people with 3 feet in the grave?
This score keeping is becoming so strange. Kinda like the daily readout for pro sport statistics, both of which are really boring but informative for some I guess.. Might explain the infatuation with daily numbers, maybe everyone enthralled is winning big in Vegas. There is now cheap flights from the Redwood whatever Arcata airport direct. Seems like it could be fun once in a lifetime to fly out on friday, party until Sunday, then leave quickly and be home for work on Monday. On second thought, nah, unless it’s your best friends bachelor party.
”Everytime you comply, you become weaker.” Robert F Kennedy Jr. at the protest against Vax Mandates, Washington D.C. 2022. Keep going RFK, freedom transcends politics.
Also, Robert F. Kennedy, My wife is making anyone coming to my party be vaccinated. “I guess I’m not always the boss at my own house.” https://sports.yahoo.com/vaccine-opponent-robert-kennedy-jr-011827754.html
Isn’t life funny….?
It’s called life. Do you and your husband agree on everything? If so, why did you marry your clone?
The irony of “every time you comply, you become weaker” and Kennedy having only vaccinated people to his home when he’s telling you to not get vaccinated apparently does not bother you but if I were to say French Laundry and Newsom in the same sentence, you would see the hypocrisy instantly (as I do) says a lot about looking at things through partisan glasses.
Deflecting away from this with an attempt to make this personal is not helping your case.
Why do you insist on portraying anyone who opposes mandates as inherently opposed to anyone taking a vaccine? Why is it anti vaccine to insist that oversight actually…oversee?
The irony is escaping you?
I was not arguing in that comment post whether Kennedy was right or wrong in his vaccine stance, I was laughing at his hypocrisy (and also a little bit about the complexities of marriage that require compromise.)
Changing the subject to whether we need to have more oversight of vaccine manufacture does not in any way negate the fact that Kennedy denigrates the COVID vaccines, says they are more deadly than any other vaccine and…yet in order to attend a party at his home, you have to be COVID vaccinated.
And the fact that simultaneous he states ”Everytime you comply, you become weaker” and then when confronted with the fact an invite to his home has a vaccine requirement stated, “I guess I’m not always the boss at my own house.”
If you can’t laugh at that…
Sure I can appreciate the irony. As you alluded to, marriages are creatures of compromise. I’m sure there are a number of things that he and his wife disagree on. And it seems that they found a compromise here by asking that guests either get vaccinated or present a negative test.
It’s almost as if…and I know this is gonna sound crazy to you but stick with me…a person could believe that the mrna vaccines are not the best health choice for themselves, believe that the safety oversight on these products is severely lacking, believe that they pose a greater risk to many people than the benefit they offer, believe that it is immoral to force people to accept these medical products for access to basic services, and still respect the opinion of other people in their life that feel differently.
Almost like he’s not the radical antivaccine fanatic that you appear to believe he is.
I know this is hard for people who tend to look at things in black or white terms to comprehend but I like and admire Robert Kennedy as a whole (he has done stellar work as an environmentalist–think the cleanup of the Hudson River). I just think he is very very wrong on the COVID vaccine.
Again, at no point that I remember did I say that I think Kennedy is “radical antivaccine fanatic.” I believe I was poking mild fun at the juxtaposition of Kennedy’s uncompromising statement,””Everytime you comply, you become weaker” and “I guess I’m not always the boss at my own house.”
Maybe I’m wrong, but it seems you have a personal problem with me and are ascribing opinions to me that you believe are negative to justify your feelings? As you’ve seemed to have gotten a little person lately.
I’m sorry if my political beliefs about the good reasons to get a vaccine have made you feel attacked. I don’t know you. My understanding of the personal and societal benefits of the COVID vaccines and masking are about the vaccines and masking. I don’t generally write off people because they disagree with me on an issue or two.
I am sorry that you feel I have been to personal toward you. I do disagree with your opinions about these vaccines and I disagree with the way you have chosen to portray the position of people who do not want them personally and feel strongly that they should not be forced upon people in order for them to access basic goods and services.
You’ve chosen to put yourself out there as a public personality providing information for our community and have rightly earned a good reputation for it. With that, to me, comes a higher standard of conduct in the opinions you express.
Personally, I believe that the most dangerous cultural meme going around right now is the othering of those who have chosen not to accept any of these vaccines and the demonizing of those who have expressed grave concerns about the unintended consequences of these vaccines. As I’ve seen you participate in the latter, I find that to be a dangerous trend given your influence.
I also believe that no one should be forced to get a vaccine to get food etc.
I think one of the most dangerous things I see happening here is people lumping the “other” into one homogenous group so that if someone is pro COVID vaccine then everything they say is something everyone else who is pro COVID vaccine agrees with. It’s difficult to keep dozens of opinions straight I realize especially without faces but…I have explicitly stated more than once I do not agree with forcing someone on the threat of jail or withholding of basic services to get the vaccine.
If I’ve demonized you and those who are against using the COVID vaccine, I’m sorry. And if you point out specific instances, I’ll try to do better. But honestly, I don’t feel like you are demons, just very much misguided, so I’m not sure how I gave that impression.
You overtly “question the mental health” of vaccine hesitant, and then defend it, out of real “concern for their sanity.” Ugh. Which is worse? Receiving unsolicited assessment of your mental health from someone unqualified to do so, or being called a monster. Rhetorical question. Both scenarios are low effort, divisive, and dismissive insults.
If you really knew how the elite felt about you.
You might ask a few more questions.
Higher standard of proof that there are some people in positions of power actively subverting the economic engine of dem righteous believers.
Jr.?
yes
Yeah, I saw that…
And yeah, I clicked on it…
For, “The rest of the story”.
And, also something about a negative test result as an alternative, as well, that, for some reason, isn’t being mentioned, either?
Where did that part go?
And that it was his wife’s doing, not his…
Or is that part of, the funny part?
Funny, too, how there apparently wasn’t a bouncer at the door to the party, checking vaccine passports, or for negative test results, or turning people away that didn’t have one or the other.🤔🤷♂️
And, It’s just that RFK is dead, one of my early childhood memories.
Life isn’t always that funny.
Lol. She won’t respond to that one for sure. It’s too true. 🤣🤣🙏🙏
Or possibly at some point you realize that you have explained to the best of your ability and the other person isn’t able to grok what you are saying…so time to move on.
Oh, I definitely “grok” what you mean, Kym. (Nice try, you almost got me)😉
It’s just that I also definitely “grok” that you left out the relevant parts that contradicted your narrative.
How come you don’t talk about,
“The Shield”, anymore?
(If you “grok” what I mean).
And it’s not that bring up additional pertinent facts because, I don’t grok what you are saying, I bring them up because I do grok what you are saying.
Maybe it’s you, that isn’t able to “grok”, what I am saying.
The vaccine works like a shield providing a level of protection that is not perfect but very helpful.
Oh boy, now if I can just get all the viral “arrowheads” out of me “the shield” didn’t stop, that just penetrated the surface, but didn’t hospitalize me or kill me.
The trouble is, that when they come out of me, there is a very good chance, that they end up in someone else, figuratively speaking.
That is, the infection will pass right through the shield, into me, and then pass through me, right into someone else, maybe deeper, and maybe deadlier.
If I talked someone into using a shield that didn’t protect them like I said it would, I’d end up having a lot of people that took my advice that weren’t too happy with me.
So no one that wears armor or carries a shield ever gets injured in your world??? That’s just not real.
We see how many go in the hospital but not how many come out.
Hotel California?
Makes you wonder doesn’t it?
Wait. Really? I’m being forced to boost for work. They made the booster before the ‘Rona?
They produced the vaccines before the current strains existed. The “booster” is just another shot of the same vaccine
Hmm… many vaccines come in a series. The same vaccine upping the immunity each time.
Name one that you get 4,5,6, in two years, especially a new experimental jab.
Or that they want to give in spite of parental lack of consent.
Or where they conspire to shut down all alternative treatments.
A thousand points of darkness. The specialty of the anti vaxxer propaganda machine. The only people getting 4 doses are immune compromised who want them. The same standards for vaccination is in place for other childhood diseases in school age children. Because of course anti vaxxers are misusing the exemptions in place but now the movement has expanded beyond the few paranoid that had existed prior to now. And shutting down ineffective, dangerous and misleading purported treatments that catch the uniformed was how the FDA got into existence in the first place.
5th dose being offered in Turkey.
And this year isn’t over yet, WHO knows how many more jabs Will be pushed.
And the little kids will be getting 3 right off the bat. And Israel says 4 isn’t working against Omicron.
Yep, the current recommendation is 3 doses in 7 months I believe. 1st dose, wait a month, second dose, wait 6 months, booster. Apparently we are all sitting in the observational study where it is determined exactly how many doses this vaccine truly comprises.
They are attempting to stop all exemptions, and all alternative treatments, who do you think you’re fooling.
It has never been done before.
It’s sinister.
Can you name any other ones where the currently recommended series was never subjected to clinical trials?
Not even one can be named as there was a clinical trial. Small because of the small universe at the time of people who were 6 mos out from the first two shots but presented to the committee recommending approval. “In addition, consideration was given to real-world data on the vaccine’s efficacy over a sustained period of time provided by both U.S. and international sources, including the CDC, the UK and Israel. The immune responses of approximately 200 participants 18 through 55 years of age who received a single booster dose approximately six months after their second dose were assessed. The antibody response against SARS-CoV-2 virus one month after a booster dose of the vaccine compared to the response one month after the two-dose primary series in the same individuals demonstrated a booster response. ”
https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-authorizes-booster-dose-pfizer-biontech-covid-19-vaccine-certain-populations
That was too assess efficacy as compared to just 2 doses. There have been no trials assessing safety of 3 vs 0 doses. This is the problem with rushing through steps like they did with the initial trials. There is an unearned assumption of safety that gets passed down the line.
Do you believe there is a toxic dose of these novel injectable products? Would it be safe to receive these injections monthly?
“Public Health officials are reminding residents, particularly those who are not vaccinated, to reduce their risk of catching and spreading the highly transmissible virus. Residents are encouraged to wear a well-fitted mask approved by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in all indoor public spaces, distance six feet from others when possible and avoid crowds and poorly ventilated spaces.”
What the Hell are we doing to our children?
A speech therapist says her clinic has seen a 364% INCREASE in referrals of babies and toddlers. The therapist says masks are “most definitely” a factor.
gab.com/White__Rabbit/posts/107687236748976255
Is there a connection here?
Urgent warning as 300,000 Brits living with stealth disease that could kill within 5 years
https://www.thesun.co.uk/health/17435614/300k-brits-living-stealth-disease-could-kill-five-years/
Or is it just my over active imagination?
My nurse friend at loma Linda hospital called this in 2020… I tried to warn everyone, but was called a conspiracy theorist..so sad that it’s coming true
Read. Just read before engaging in self congratulations.
Yes. It is your over active imagination. It is an attempt to raise amorphous fears about vaccination from a study that started before vaccinations for covid even existed. “According to their calculations, the overall prevalence of severe aortic stenosis among the over 55s in the UK in 2019 could be almost 1.5 per cent – equal to around 300,000 at any one time. ” Not that the self obvious and likely deliberate misunderstanding contradicted by the linked article itself will slow up the creation of a new “fact” that the anti vaxxers will now endlessly repeat.
I’m not sure what you think the OP was trying to express, but I understood their point as our reaction to covid (shutting hospitals and discouraging people from pursuing any but emergency care) has exacerbated a preexisting problem that may well create more damage than covid did.
But you owned that anti vax strawman good this time.
I’m not sure you read the OP’s post. Nor the article. Which has nothing to do with a looming tsunami of pre covid aortic stenosis and the tsunami of unvaccinated covid patients restricting current hospital access. So no, despite your convoluted attempt to make it relevant, the article says that people are not looking for the problem because there are no symptoms. Not that they are being denied care because of covid. Your attempt to spin it around to a personal attack is a failure.
Spotify Takes Down Neil Young’s Music After His Joe Rogan UltimatumFolk-rock star had over six million monthly listeners on the service, which he blames for spreading fake info about vaccines
Alt headline Neil Young Gets His Ass Handed to Him
Actually, he asked that his music be removed from Spotify because they allow Rogan’s podcast. Cost him plenty, but he’s making a stand.
More accurately, he issued a him-or-me ultimatum and they said we’ll stick with Joe Rogan. You can call that taking a stand, I call it trying to throw his weight around.
How would you suggest he ethically protest something that he disagreed with then? Imagine Spotify was refusing to carry Joe Rogan. How could a musical star who liked his work protest?
I am not suggesting he do anything, but it does make me smile when someone like Young tries to trade on his stardom, especially with these him-or-me stances, and comes out on the short end. I have thoroughly enjoyed Neil Young’s music, I mean a lot, but my personal feeling is he does better when he stays in his lane… you know, Rockin’ in the Free World.
Rockin’ in the forced to vax world.
Money talks and Rogan is pullin’ in a hell of a lot more than Young, but he gets a moment of relevance again before fading into the sunset.
Joe Rogan’s net worth one hundred million.
. Neil Young’s net worth two hundred million. Don’t think he is to worried about money. And he didn’t have to prostitute himself to earn it.
Neil Young will sail into the sunset with honor.
It has nothing to do with what they are worth, it’s how much they bring to spotify.
So Spotify is pimping Joe Rogan.
Why are you playing ignorant? Spotify paid Rogan a big chunk of change to license rights to his podcasts. It’s called a business relationship. If they cancelled Rogan he’d just go back to doing it on his own. They don’t own his podcasts.
So he sold himself to Spotify. Sounds like a prostitute to me
I feel trying to take Joe Rogans livelihood from him is a shitty move. It could of cost Rogan millions, why, cause Joe doesn’t agree with Neil. Neil did try using his status to shut another man down. I will never again support Neil young
If you feel that someone is putting out news that is harmful (say KMUD was allowing the KKK to broadcast statements saying that native Americans should be rounded up and killed) wouldn’t you pull your sponsorship from them? I would.
“(say KMUD was allowing the KKK to broadcast statements saying that native Americans should be rounded up and killed)” … Way to bring out the extreme hypotheticals. KKK and killing Indians. You need to resort to that to make a point?
Well, Some folks including Young believe that Rogan’s program on Spotify is “the home of life threatening Covid misinformation.”
You, of course, don’t feel that way. But, Young does. What else is he supposed to do? He could just shut up and continue to get more money. “In his statement on Wednesday, Young said that Spotify represented 60 percent of the streams of his music around the world.” Or, he could ask to be removed from a site that he feels is supporting something that is leading to people’s deaths.
You may not like his conclusion but he’s following through on his ethics.
He issued an ultimatum and they went with the other guy. That’s entertainment, to me. I don’t care about his “conclusion“, i.e. this is not a matter of me liking it or not.
Some people fashion themselves influencers, and that’s because other people (like you?) prop them up. No big deal.
Clearly Neil does what he believes in… just like Joe Rogan.
Either that or it is a publicity stunt to try to regain some long lost relevance and recognition.
Neil Young must not be still so young. I never was a fan.
Who knows, maybe it could lead to some increased sales.
“Following through on his ethic$”, right on over to $iriu$XM.
He couldn’t have both, $o he had to pick one or the other.
$ounds like he cho$e $iriu$XM over $potify.
It took exactly one day…
Ethics? I doubt it.
Business, publicity, and marketing, more like.
Following the money, not the ethics…
He didn’t know that Siriusxm would reup him as far as I can tell. And even if he did, Young was on both last month, why not this month? And Siriusxm for a month is definitely not the same deal as Spotify for years.
It really is okay to like Rogan and still admire Young for sticking to his ethics even if you don’t agree with him.
I don’t “like”, either one of them, but it not that, “I don’t like them”.
And I don’t even know what is more lucrative, $potify, or $iriusXM, but it’s not right to compare a month of one to another for years.
He just cut a new album last month.
Maybe he figures the $iriusXM crowd, can better afford one, than the $potify crowd.
Don’t they put $iriusXM in all the $pendier new cars, you know, for the people with loot, that can easily afford a new album?
And who does $potify ¢ater to, those with a tighter budget that might not be able to so easily afford that new album?
$hit, $iriusxm gave him his own exclusive channel and show for a week of complete audience saturation… And yeah now I see something about another whole month on some app…
I’m calling it a publicity stunt.
Ethical behavior isn’t normally appropriately decided on mass media.
Give me a break.
He just needed a reason.
So he blamed Rogan.
Classic.
The guys probably a pro at getting out of certain gigs, to get into a better one.
Do you know the history behind this video? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSSvzCNBvlQ Essentially a million years ago when MTV was king of the airwaves, they refused to play Young’s song about selling out your music. He wrote a letter saying, ““MTV, you spineless twerps. You refuse to play ‘This Note’s For You’ because you’re afraid to offend your sponsors. What does the ‘M’ in MTV stand for: music or money? Long live rock and roll.” He won that round.
Neil is all about his ethics and has been for years. Again you don’t have to agree with him. But for fairness sake I think you might consider that he’s doing it because he believes it even if it costs him.
Kym, that funny, you’re holding steadfast to the ethical aspect.
That’s cool, your giving him the benefit of the doubt.
Emphasis on the benefit.
But is this about him, or about you? Do you feel that you both have something in common?
I just googled “birds of a feather”, (you know, they “flock together”),
because I figured it would be the title of the main song on his latest album “Barn©”.
Nope, but “Birds©” was on one of his previous recent albums, and if you don’t already know, ( I didn’t), it’s from his album, “Gold Rush©”.
Sounds about right. The angle.
I suppose “Gold Rush”©, is all about ethics, too.
Birds of a feather flock together.
Neil is working the ethics angle for all it’s worth.
Don’t confuse that with real ethics, it’s the opposite.
He is just catering to the self described, “ethical crowd”, and there are lots and lots of them.
I have a healthy suspicion, towards anyone that tries to appeal to me with some staged ethics, or tries to suggest that they are, or are among, those with superior ethics.
Trust becomes an issue, quickly.
I’m off to Google “Pigeons,
by Neil Young.
The album is After the Gold Rush. After the song on that album, called “After the Gold Rush”. From 1970 or ’71.
Good grief, if you are going to lecture Kym about Neil Young…maybe you should just stop.
Look at mother nature on the run in the nineteen seventies
And on that album was Southern Man and let’s not forget Ohio. The man always called out injustice
Yeah, I just caught that, I just had to had to throw in “recent” and I’m seeing your comment as I rush back too late of course, to edit it, so it would just say previous album, like it did originally…
Cut me some slack, like I said, I’ve never been a fan, and don’t give a spit about him.
I ain’t buying any of the Neil Young ethical, Joe Rogan unethical, mumbo jumbo dogma, or selling it.
Why focus on my “recent” booboo.
Did you find no truth?
No offense, but it seems you are Neil Young fan.
I doubt you had to Google him, like I did.
I’m just not going to assume he has superior ethics just because he went with a cushier gig.
How long has Joe Rogan been on Spotify, with his vaccine stance?
I suppose Neil’s ethics just suddenly kicked into high gear after some “recent” epiphany?
See what I did there.
“Barn©” was born in the last 7 weeks, Neil cut ties with Spotify in the last week.
Who is more popular?
Neil Young apparently doesn’t play second fiddle well.
Was this about ethics? More likely about money, and ego.
So you slamming a man you say you really know nothing about as unethical is OK? Read the mans history and songs he has written. He has more ethics than you can imagine.
I don’t imagine he has any ethics, at all.
But I’m also not realistically seeing anything that proves he has any ethics, either.
You certainly don’t know jackshit about him if you can’t even get the name of the album right.
So go ahead and “riff” on what you think he really is after, because you just read, obviously very poorly, in the last few about him.
I’ll take the 50 plus years I’ve been listening to and owning (ATGR, included) his albums and keeping up with him.
That’s right, I don’t know Jack shit about him, it keeps me neutral, and make me the very best kind of juror, an impartial one.
There’s a lot of people sayin’ we’d be better off dead
Don’t feel like Satan, but I am to them
Keep on rockin’ in the free world
He’s a great guy and all. I like his style, and music, but, he now seems to be a tad hypocritical. Not that I’m a fan of Joe Rogan, but if I want to listen to him, if for no other reason than to hear an opposing side, I should be able to.
Costs him? Excuse me?
$200,000,000.00 ???
Yeah, he’s really struggling.
“He’s all about his ethics”, because there are so many people that are all about theirs, that will help with that, smoke a joint and veg to it, too. And buy albums.
It’s how you win a popularity contest, and apparently, how a person like him can make a fortune.
It’s not real ethics. It just a show. To appeal to his audience. And it has clearly, been working.
Birds of a feather, flock together.
But he doesn’t have me fooled, not for even one second.
Does that make me unethical?
Because I’m not like him?
I don’t think so.
Would it make me ethical, if I was like him? If I would just agree with him? I don’t think so.
Ethics to me is not something to be put on display.
Discreet generosity is more ethical than a public display of generosity.
It’s more about what you do in person.
Fat cord vs skinny cord.
Short change or return an overpayment.
Tip, or no tip.
Big tip, or little tip.
Keep promises, or break them.
Neil Young broke his promise with Spotify…
And blamed Joe Rogan…
Neil Young’s ethics are beyond reproach. Joe Rogan is without any ethics at all. Young called him on it. Look up the lyrics to Southern Man. Ohio. Remember Kent State?
No they’re not.
In 2015, he dumped Spotify over “sound quality”, (It was really about money that time, too), so how was that same maneuver in 2015, about ethics?
It’s not about ethics now, either.
That’s not his M.O.
Because he couldn’t have his cake and eat it, too. Half his music rights just sold to ‘Hypgnosis’, for $150 million. He probably needed Spotify’s chunk of his music rights back, to broadcast over his new thing, XStream, a relatively new, subscription based arrangement that he absolutely kills it on.
He snookered you into believing it was an ethical decision having to do with Joe Rogan.
That was just “The Schpiel”.
Do you extend that same consideration to someone like Robert Kennedy or Dr McCullough?
They believe that these novel pharmaceutical products are dangerous to deploy on a mass scale. You may not agree, but what would you do if that was your belief?
Of course, I agree with their right to speak out. Otherwise why would I let you continuously say things I disagree with vehemently on my own platform where with a click I could ban you.
And, I agree with their right to boycott the pharmaceutical product industry.
Though I will laugh at them if they both tell people that the COVID vaccines are dangerous and simultaneously have invitations to parties at their home that require the same vaccination.
And I will guffaw at the idea that Neil Young’s switching channels is ethics instead of economics, or that it was about morality and not about money, recognition, and prestige.
It does however, seem to have worked like a charm…
So many will croon over the crooner… And he will be crooning back…
He will be laughing, with me, all the way to the bank, but he won’t be laughing at me.
Because he didn’t fool me one bit.
Was it a smart move,
stardom-wise?
For Sure.
Was it truly purely ethical?
No way Jose.
He’s a showman.
His latest album?
Barn.
Think P.T. Barnum.
Think about how many more will be tuning and listening to him now, “every minute”.
Siriusly.
His net worth is 200 million. Do you really think it’s about money? He could retire now and never worry about money. He makes music because that’s what he loves to do. He had high ethics when he was poor and he still has them. I remember him from back in the Buffalo Springfield days. Just a touring band doing small gigs. And he has written some classics Southern Man, Ohio. That shows you his ethics
‘Sleeping With Angels’©.
Yeah, you gotta be ethically superior to be flapping about that….
And, ‘Impeaching a President’©, 2006. (G.W.), yeah that takes superior ethics to flap about that, too.
And your a Neil Young fan, too.
Like I said. Birds of a feather…
Superior ethics… Uh huh.
Jab!, Jab!, Jab!, Rah!, Rah!, Rah!
That gives me an idea, I should just start singing your tune…
That would be easy money.
But would it be ethical?
It would be like taking candy from a baby.
You should realize how ethical I am, because I’m not doing that.
It would be lying.
I’m such a terrible liar, I gave that up long ago…. You know, “recently”😁
Really though, about the time of the “Gold Rush” album.
Believe it or not.
And writing a song, doesn’t show me his ethics.
He’s a showman.
You just bought it.
Think hypnotism.
I never listened to it.
It didn’t work on me.
How come I’ve never heard of his philanthropy?
And once again you got it wrong it’s “sleeps with angels”, and the other one is “let’s impeach the President”. Bet you did’nt read the lyrics either. You don’t get the album right, you don’t get the songs right and you definitely are getting it wrong about Neil Young.
Because you are never wrong, right? Or am I wrong about that too?
Have you ever been wrong?
Have you ever admitted it?
I doubt it.
But don’t check at the door for proof👌👌😳😳you did read that part right?? Sheep.
Of course I read that. The point is if I told you that cigarettes are going to kill you, I’m not going to ask you to smoke cigarettes or bring potato chips to my next party. And not asking if you have cigarettes when you come to the door doesn’t negate that. But if you can’t see that’s hypocritical…then I don’t know what to say.
And just to clarify…you didn’t actually call me a Sheep did you? Because I don’t have to tolerate insults.
No. Not you. I love you. Love your site. But when you comment so much on stuff I don’t agree with I feel I have to make a stand. Calling people sheep is a insult? Ok? Won’t do it again boss 👍
Of course, it didn’t really require people to have the same vaccination. But that would ruin the joke I guess.
And you’ll also accuse them of being responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths
If you tell people wearing underwear is dangerous. Then, when invited to come to your house, people are told they need to wear underwear, it doesn’t matter if you don’t check, you’ve sent out a very mixed message. I still like Kennedy but I think that was embarrassing.
Right? Not so funny this time…
Somehow, this time, it’s all about elevated morality, not irony.
I ain’t buying it.
It’s a PUBLICITY STUNT!,
How ethical is that?
Especially since it sounds like he may have reneged on any agreement he may have had with $potify.
He needed an out, and he made the most out of it.
🎵 👍
Guest, you’ve lost me. I’m not sure why you’re ranting so endlessly about Neil. It’s weird.
Neil Young has die hard fans?
They think they know him?
You’re really on a first name basis with “Neil”?
But do they really?
They vouch for his (their) superior ethics.
The same people that try to convince everyone to get the jab, try to convince people that Neil Young is purely ethically motivated.
Like they are all Gods.
That’s what is weird.
Birds of a feather.
Creeps me out.
Speaking of anyone in particular?
Actually, no, Kym.
I am quickly noticing that there seems to be an uncanny number of them.
I would like to see a poll of Pro-Jabbers to see just how many are Neil Young adherent’s.
I’d bet it was a clear majority.
It seems to be the case in the comment section.
Name one pro jabber that doesn’t agree Neil Young is some kind of saint, or even a demigod.
It’s weird.
In fact I challenge one pro jabber to not just assume that Neil Young’s motivations dumping Spotify were purely ethical.
Anybody.
Just a question…
If you knew that Neil Young had polio when he was a child, would you at all feel that his Rogan/Spotify decision was based on ethics?
No, I did not know that.
If it’s true, it shows a likelihood of clear bias.
Does it suggest Young has grit?
Absolutely.
Does it prove his motivations are purely ethical?
No, it doesn’t. Not at all.
What does his previous “purely ethical publicity stunt” spat with MTV have to do with having polio when he was a child?
That’s right, absolutely nothing.
( If it had, I would be more inclined to believe you about his supposed “ethics”).
This is just a rerun.
When it comes to publicity stunts…
Never quit a winner.
In order to properly judge a thing, there can be no attachments or
preconceived notions.
As a juror in deciding a case concerning his ethics, a qualified juror, will preferably, have never heard of him, and being a long ardent fan, would surely justify a disqualification.
Kind of like his family.
Does him having polio make him an expert on vaccines? Nope.
Does it make him ethical?
Nope.
Not any more than me having had chicken pox. Does that make me an expert? Nope.
Ethical? Nope, again.
That is sensationalism.
Detach yourself, then judge.
That’s how it’s most appropriately done.
Wow, making it racist.
Bad example.
The radicals want to control Joe Rogan, and he’s not conrolable, and he’s popular, so he must be crushed.
Now every MSM station has joined in to take him down, so typical.
This time the 1st amendment wins.
Their next target will be Kid Rock.
The First Amendment does not protect Rogan’s right to spread misinformation on a private business. The First Amendment protects Rogan from the government not from the financial repercussions of people (and other businesses) boycotting him (or firing him).
I was saying that Spotify, a private business choose to stand up for the 1st.
Neil chose to go play elsewhere.
I don’t know how that’s standing up for the First Amendment if the First Amendment doesn’t apply. They most likely are standing up for Rogan because they have a $100,000,000 deal with him https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSSvzCNBvlQ
I think Neil had already decided he wanted to play with SiriusXM instead of Spotify.
He just had to make it look good, instead of the sleazy maneuver it really was.
He wasn’t going to appeal to Rogan’s crowd, and he was probably tired of playing second fiddle to him.
So it was simple genius to appeal to his haters, you know all those, pro jab folks, with the, “superior ethics’, by turning on him and Spotify at the same time, and pretending it was about “superior pro jab ethics”.
He’s just working the “birds of a feather” angle.
They are all lapping it right up, flocking together, all the way to the music store, and right on over, from Spotify, to SiriusXM.
The guy obviously knows how to work a crowd.
Before today, and all the hullabaloo, if I would have seen his picture, Young or old, I wouldn’t have had a clue who the guy was. Now, unfortunately, I do.
That’s what I’m talking about.
It’s all a giant publicity stunt!
Ethics my ass.
Neil Young is worth around 200 million bucks. I don’t think he’s worried about needing publicity.
And it is amazing that you wouldn’t know him as you say. where were you in the 60s, 70s, 80s and 90s, etc.
*Angela goes to listen to “Cinnamon Girl”* 🙂
“*Angela goes to listen to
“Cinnamon Girl”*🙂”
That was a totally adorable thing to say, Angela Robinson.🙂.
Really cute.🙂.
Where was I?
Early 60’s, to early 70’s, LA.
Here ever since, Neil Young, was never my bag. I remember the name, but that’s it.
I cut my teeth on
Ray Charles, Sammy Davis,Jr., Louis Armstrong, John Coltrane, Ella Fitzgerald, Billie Holiday, Stevie Wonder, Johnny Cash, Buck Owens and Roy Clark, The Beatles.
But jazz sax was always my favorite.
Love me some GetZ.
https://youtu.be/sVdaFQhS86E
hank Mobley
https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLg7mJ3BwdABJB42JDMr1ueIe8viY5FgC8
https://youtu.be/_zqx6VmNHa8?list=PLzFqEh_mqdQA29DaJ5UVfBaJowjWZDRGs
People from 19-40 are all, “Who’s Neil Young?”
People from 41-60 are all, “Neil Young is still alive?”
People 61 and up are all, “What’s Spotify?”
You show no knowledge of the music business. Neil did not need to be on one or the other-he could be on both, and make more money. If it’s a publicity stunt, it’s one that loses money. If it’s a publicity stunt, he is also evoking hate from tons of Rogan fans.
As Kym said, Young has a long history of standing behind his convictions, and this isn’t the first time it has cost him in $$.
Well said, thetallone
🤔🧐His name is Neil,
He can do no wrong.😉
Is Neil Young shirt sleeve related to Brigham Young? I couldn’t find anything, but, then again, I am not a genealogist.
🤔🧐I kind of think they look a bit alike.🤷♂️😉 Siriusly.
Probably XM of them… (990)😁
What the heck? What would it matter if Young is or isn’t related to Brigham Young? What does a shirt sleeve have to do with anything?
Maybe I’m missing your reference but I don’t get what you are talking about.
There both Young’s aren’t they?
While googling “Young” quotes,
(I posted an image of the one I found, “You’re never too old too be “Young”), 😁, there was an image included of Brigham Young.
I kind of thought that he and Neil looked similar, so I did a quick search. “Shirt sleeve” related, just means “distantly related”.
There were only 4 listed survivors of Brigham Young. But I also see where he had 27 wives and at least 56 kids.
So, only 4 survivors seemed a little low, after what, about 150 years?
I figured as a reference to SiriusXM and the fact that XM is Roman numerals for 990, that would be my estimate. My questionable humor again.
But back to my main point…
If Neil Young dropped Spotify due to “ethics”, how come he did the exact same thing, supposedly over “sound quality”, in 2015?
Was that about Covid19 misinformation? Or about childhood polio? Nope.
Conveniently, he denied it was about the money, but it pretty clearly was…
And this is pretty revealing, pushing products is priority.
” There are records, tapes, CDs.”
And his new XStream scheme seems to be paying off quite nicely with subscriptions.
Way more money than Spotify must have been paying him…
Something about $600,000.00 in January 2020…
The more I research it the more I’m sure it was a money move.
He doesn’t want pennies for his music, he wants dollars.
Sounds like it’s still all about the fidelity not Covid misinformation at all, if you want to associate that kind of “fidelity” with “ethics”.
But I don’t think that kind of “fidelity”, is even, “shirt sleeve”, related to “ethics”.
That’s all about ego.
Your impeccable logic overwhelmed me. I surrender.
In spite of the fact, that Young is likely going to lose money by his letter to Warner Bros, in spite of the fact that he had polio as a child so likely has emotions bound up in the idea of not taking vaccines, in spite of the fact that a number of Joe Rogan fans are now accusing him of squelching free speech because he told Spotify he couldn’t be on the same site as someone spreading misinformation so he’s likely losing fans…because he has the same last name as Brigham Young, because he left Spotify previously over sound quality an issue he still cares about…he’s really all about the money.
That’s passive aggression.
Your not being serious you are being facetious, and insincere.
It’s cool, I just don’t see Neil Young as being as cool as you do.
That’s because I’m not emotionally invested in Neil Young, or his antics or his theatrics.
And I’m thankful for that.
That kind of stuff can be very misleading.
If he wanted his music to part ways with Spotify, (it isn’t even “his” music any more, or for him to decide), he didn’t have to make it about Joe Rogan, did he?
Maybe he did. There was a contractual arrangement that had to be terminated. He needed a justification that he could plausibly present to Warner ®, in order to convince them to terminate any contractual arrangements.
I don’t find that to be ethical, at all. It was just his excuse to bust the move he had made up his mind to bust.
One more if it’s allowable as informational. It shows him making out like a bandit, and coming out smelling like a rose…
🤔🧐You don’t see a resemblance?
Check out those sideburns!
The forehead, the nose, the ears.
I kind of do….🤷♂️
As they say, no publicity is bad publicity.
“$200,000,000.00” and, “it cost him$$” in the same paragraph?
And how do you figure?
Have you seen his new exclusive contract?
Might lose some money on the one hand, but might be selling a lot of albums, etc., on the other.
SMH.
It seems that there are quite a few ethically superior, birds of a feather, type, Neil Young fans out there.
Publicity stunt this time, publicity stunt last time, when he clashed with MTV.
Second verse, same as the first.
I have the advantage of being on the outside looking in, rather than being on the inside looking out. And not being a fan, or being hypnotized by his lyrics, I can remain unbiased, and see things from a perspective that’s not possible for you to view the situation from. Your biased.
I couldn’t care less about this guy.
Keeps me open minded.
I wouldn’t be jazzed, or offended, no matter what anyone said about him, and I damn sure am not going to defend him, just because he dirts Joe Rogan, or have any sympathy for him, and definitely no respect, just because he lost some power play, drama queen, manipulative, faux-ultimatum spectacle.
Guy probably is getting paid by Fauci, or he’s just another big pharma shill, butt hurt about his Moderna stock tanking, so he’s lashing out.
He’s no god of mine.
He’s the god of the godless, maybe.
Never said I had any knowledge of it.
And now maybe he can’t be on both.
I think his arrangement with SiriusXM is an exclusive one.
And don’t tell me he could have penned that new arrangement with SiriusXM overnight, as if he didn’t have it all planned out. The very next day he was broadcasting with SiriusXM.
If you think that it wasn’t a grand scheme, it shows you have no knowledge of the music business,
or of Neil Young.
And as far as it “costing him”, he never hardly skipped a beat, so to speak.
He didn’t want to even lose one days earnings, and even if he did, what makes you think that he didn’t just get a significant raise?
He had the switch totally pre-arranged.
The only challenge? Making backing out on Spotify look ethical.
Enter, Neil Young “The Showman”.
Done deal.
Siriusly
Since going public, Higpgnosis has undertaken a series of acquisitions. These include a 50 percent stake in the songbook of Neil Young for an estimated $150 million and rights to the Red Hot Chili Peppers in a transaction estimated by Billboard at between $140 and $150 million.
The streaming business has reinvigorated the music industry, which had struggled in the early 2000s to find a business model that rewarded artists for their creativity.
That revival has led to bidding contests between leading firms — some backed by Wall Street investment houses — as well as the spin-off last month from Vivendi of Universal Music, which is currently worth some $45 billion.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/blackstone-to-spend-1-bn-on-song-rights-in-new-venture/ar-AAPqRcG
Yep, with half his rights sold, it sounds like he needed to get back whatever stake that Spotify had cornered, to capitalize
on it in a much more lucrative way… But first there was that pesky agreement he had to get terminated… So he had something he could sell for more.
But he had to make it look cool, instead of sleazy…
That’s it! Scapegoat Joe Rogan!
Problem solved!
Wow, you’re reaching very far, Rogan’s crowd is something so completely different than Young’s crowd. Music versus podcast being the most glaring difference.
I enjoy Joe’s podcasts. He’s a good interviewer, and he knows when to just let a guest talk. He’s a very curious guy, and that’s not a bad trait. Yes, sometimes I don’t like some of his guests, sometimes I don’t agree with things that are said. But his show is actually very good, and I’m a lib. Joe isn’t a rabid RWNJ.
I’m not a fan of either.
And I dislike neither.
Means my perspective is balanced. I don’t lean either way.
Same with Spotify or SiriusXM.
They mean nothing to me.
Nothing, any of them.
Why do you keep repeating the bullshit lie that rogan spread misinformation about covid. He didn’t. If you disagree, show an example.
I’m not sure we’re going to agree what is misinformation because many of your statements on this website I would characterize as misinformation. However, if we agree that misinformation is that which the majority of scientists agree is misinformation, here are some:
Ivermectin has been proven effective against COVID
Young people shouldn’t get the vaccine
microchips in the vaccine
Kym, respectfully, I don’t think Joe said there are microchips in the vaccine. I certainly hope he didn’t.
May 14, 2021: Joe Rogan says,
Misinformation isn’t that uncommon. The county posts it all the time. For about 12 weeks straight in fact, confirmed by CDC data. That doesn’t seem to concern you too much.
It’s just 5%, right?
She has a Black belt in cherry picking don’t ya know!? 😂
Except that the problem is not “misinformation”. It is declaring something is “misinformation” because you don’t like the way it’s stated or the limits others have on time and resources or the fact that there is no absolute uniformity between agencies.
That doesn’t say anything about microchips in vaccines. At all.
Except for the part about microchips in vaccines? As usual, it is not so much getting all excited about facts as much as grabbing a stray fact and running the wrong way with it. Then declaring that the fact exists is proof of something unrelated.
I’m not sure what you’re reading, but the only mention of microchips is
“Especially now when people were talking about actual microchips being injected into your arm to see if you have COVID-19.”
Which is a reference to the story about injectable sensors that could diagnose infection. A vaccine (even these brand new miracle versions!) don’t “see if you have covid 19”
///Ivermectin has been proven effective against COVID///
Maybe “proven” is strong, but it’s certainly showing a lot of promise. You can look over dozens of studies here; https://ivmmeta.com/
And the NIH is sponsoring ongoing studies into ivermectin use as we speak, so it certainly hasn’t been deemed not to work.
///Young people shouldn’t get the vaccine///
There should certainly be a much different risk calculus when talking about young people, right? They face dramatically less risk from infection without a reduction in risk of adverse reactions to the vaccine. And the unknown long term effects, especially of the 3rd, 4th, etc… doses which have never been subjected to any clinical safety trials are a bit of a bigger variable for someone who is st the beginning of their life vs someone who is near the end, no?
///microchips in the vaccine///
The only link anyone has shared purporting that Joe Rogan, or any of his guests, claimed there were microchips in the vaccine actually quoted him as talking about an article referring to microsensor technology that claims to be able to detect infection after its injected into the patient and commenting that “Alex Jones was right!”. Is there actually any evidence that Rogan or any of his guests actually made the claim that there are microchips in the vaccines?
It’s so weird watching this reaction to this man’s interviews. Endless cries of dangerous misinformation backed by the very flimsiest of evidence.
“A lot of promise?” CDC link to studies so far-
https://www.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov/tables/ivermectin-data/
So much of it is so questionable as to be unreliable. For example, the double blind study sounded reasonable as proof of ivermectin being helpful but those with expertise pointed out that basically patient were assigned in ways that biased the results. “Another study from Iran seemed to show that ivermectin prevented people dying from Covid.
But the scientists who investigated it found issues. The records of how much iron was in patients’ blood contained numbers in a sequence that was unlikely to come up naturally.
And the patients given the placebo turned out to have had much lower levels of oxygen in their blood before the trial started than those given ivermectin. So they were already sicker and statistically more likely to die.
But this pattern was repeated across a wide range of different measurements. The people with “bad” measurements ended up in the placebo group, the ones with “good” measurements in the ivermectin group.
The likelihood of this happening randomly across all these different measurements was vanishingly small, Dr Sheldrick said.”
https://www.bbc.com/news/health-58170809
I keep checking back for more definitive studies but nothing so far. But if ivermectin really was as good as its proponents say, it would be obvious by now.
Again, I am not and have never claimed that ivermectin is a miracle cure. From my reading it appears to be an open question, but one that shows promise as a helpful early outpatient intervention. And the evidence of its potential is sufficient enough that there are federal government sponsored studies into its use currently ongoing.
Ivermectin isn’t an issue that I have strong feelings about, but to call the opinion that ivermectin is a helpful medication for covid 19 “dangerous misinformation ” or “a proven falsehood” or something along those lines is laughable.
I was told by someone that I trust more than anyone else, who had Covid19 bad, that as soon as they took Ivermectin, it provided a significant degree of instant relief. Dog it all you want, but maybe don’t knock it until you try it because you got bad Covid19.
And as far as the Vaccines for little kids and even maybe teenagers, that is a dubious idea at best and for the healthy little kids it’s insanity as far as I am concerned, against Omicron.
So you say that varied perspective on the supreme Court is paramount, but you don’t seem to value varied perspective from anywhere else.
Where is the balance there?
The microchip Covid19 tester?
Yeah I’m not buying that, but I heard of the radio controlled long term birth control implant for women in Africa, that was planned, but I don’t think it was implemented.
Bill Gates comes to mind.
Remdesivir is bullshit as far as I’m concerned, and the vaccines are getting more worthless every day.
They should be a choice without coercion.
The new Covid pills, the mutagens, disgust me too.
There’s some perspective.
You call it misinformation.
Somehow your perspective is not.
What he does is allow others to spread. Information without correcting them. He is the pimp and let’s the others do the dirty work for him.
There is a guy there during the pod cast who is constantly looking things up to fact check them. I do wish some of the folks here who think Joe is this right wing nut, would watch at least one podcast. He’s got so many, you can avoid the Covid episodes, the Elon Musk interview (first one) was incredible.
Long form interviews are a thing to behold.
It’s really okay to enjoy his stuff (I hate all talk shows so I’d probably hate his). But you can’t expect folks to take something from Rogan seriously because he doesn’t vet it or think about its effect. He just rolls.
It’s important to take whatever anyone days seriously if it is true or has merit.
It shouldn’t matter If you are even repulsed by them, or find the repugnant. Yes that is the word I was looking for. Repugnant.
I read that on a list of journalistic standards.
“It shouldn’t matter that one finds someone repugnant”. That should not matter. See past it. Get to the truth. Confirm it. Neutrality. Etc.
“if it is true or has merit”
12 jurors in a courtroom can hear the same testimony and not agree on what’s “true or has merit”.
But we’re talking about a situation in which nearly all the experts are in agreement. The vote on the evidence has been made and barring more evidence is pretty conclusive.
You’re focusing on Rogan only.
That is an isolated case.
He’s not the only one who is getting disregarded.
I’m pretty sure there have been trials where nearly all the experts were bought off and absolutely wrong.
It’s a common practice for attorneys to purchase the services of the agreeable.
Especially the attorney with the biggest pockets.
And we all know Pharma has huge pockets.
Literally thousands of scientists and doctors, if not millions of them were bought off and not one person said to the media it happened?
Hoofbeats are most often horses not ostriches wearing horseshoes…
I guess I should have said, ” “as” if it is true or has merit”.
You have discounted many of the things I have said, out of hand, that proved true or had merit, without really even considering them, just because others that you held in high esteem, said differently. Just because of who I am, or who I am not, you felt the information was unworthy, or must have been untrue.
Many of those times, I have been seeing to correct misinformation from one County or another.
Why is misinformation acceptable to be spread, as long as it comes from a county government?
If you don’t find them repugnant, it’s ok if their information is not true or it is without merit?
“It’s really okay to enjoy his stuff “…
Whew! And here I was afraid that you might say it was not okay to like his stuff. Do you realize how you sound? Giving you the benefit of the doubt, I’ll say you don’t.
Well, to be fair, I was thinking of my addiction to true crime when I wrote this. It really is okay to like stuff you know hasn’t much redeeming value. But you/I need to be aware of its limitations.
Sighs, my addiction is with RHBB.
No, he gets the most qualified and brightest minds to come on his show and he lets them talk. He’s not a pimp. He’s a straight up guy and has proven to be way more honest than Fauci and your heroes down at CNN. You guys are being tools of MSM and the establishment who are terrified that Rogan is undermining their bullshit with solid facts.
Neil Young is a tool, sad, he’s probably burning one and watching Rachel Madcow right now.
““Joe Rogan is getting this completely wrong,” says Andrew Read, professor of biology and entomology at Pennsylvania State. “He’s taking very careful work about evolutionary scenarios of the future, and from that, erroneously concluding that people should not be vaccinated now.”
You can watch the video below. But before you do, the lead scientist and author of the study who spent 10 years conducting this research has something to say. Because he’s horrified. “”
https://www.forbes.com/sites/andreamorris/2021/08/08/joe-rogan-is-getting-this-completely-wrong-says-the-scientist-who-conducted-the-vaccine-study/?sh=35456d2a7bd1
Like the The New York Slimes and so many other MSM outlets?
Spreading misinformation shouldn’t be the basis for anyone’s livelihood.
No one is infallible.
Spotify would never cancel joe rogan. He tells the truth. He doesn’t care about the mainstream bullshit. And he’s a lot smarter than anyone on this thread that’s for sure. And I promise more people listen to him than Niel young. It was a easy choice for Spotify. $$$
Denmark becomes first EU country to scrap all COVID-19 restrictions
Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen says country can find its ‘smile’ again.
https://www.politico.eu/article/denmark-becomes-first-eu-country-to-scrap-all-covid-19-restrictions/
Sweden has decided against recommending COVID vaccines for kids aged 5-11, the Health Agency said on Thursday, arguing that the benefits did not outweigh the risks. “With the knowledge we have today, with a low risk for serious disease for kids, we don’t see any clear benefit with vaccinating them,” Health Agency official Britta Bjorkholm told a news conference.
Exactly,☕,
And Fauci wants to start vaccinating 2-4 year olds?
The guy is a monster.
In summary
Lawmakers want to create stricter vaccine mandates, especially for children. They anticipate an especially fierce fight in the coming months.
California legislators are reigniting an ugly fight over child vaccination requirements with bills that would mandate COVID-19 vaccinations, eliminate the personal belief exemption for COVID-19 vaccines and allow some minors to get vaccinated without parental consent.
These bills together constitute one of the most aggressive campaigns in the country to vaccinate more children.
more
https://calmatters.org/education/2022/01/california-child-vaccine-mandates/
It’s insanity.
What he really said- “Parents hoping to vaccinate their young children against COVID-19 will need to be patient, Dr. Anthony Fauci cautioned Wednesday.”
https://www.penncapital-star.com/blog/fauci-declines-to-predict-covid-vaccine-timetable-for-kids-under-5/
What he really said when asked if he would recommend vaccination of 4yr and 6 yr olds, clear back on May 20, 2021…
Fauci is wack.
Put a link to this- a cherry picked screen shots do not cut it. It wastes huge amounts of time looking up the context of anti vaxxer distortions. I know you allege you can’t copy and paste links but since no one else has that problem, it is most likely a result of what you choose to do. This is apparently a screen shot from May of 2021. If you read the link, you will see he mentions the real caution involved in testing vaccines for children.
Say please.
Here’s Fauci recommending Covid19 vaccination for 4yr, and 6yr old children clear back on May 20, 2021, at least 8 months before they are even approved in any way, for the 4 year olds, and at least 5 months before they had any kind of approval for 6 year olds.
That seems like a bit of a violation of some kind, doesn’t it?
It does to me.
Malpractice?
You be the judge.
So much for the, “real caution”, of which you speak.
He’s thrown caution to the wind.
Click the link, when it opens to the article, click on the blue lettered,
” Axios virtual event”,
Advance the video to 8:50, and you can hear it,”straight from the horse’s mouth”, straight from, “the horse’s ass”, himself.
https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2021/05/20/998533237/fauci-says-he-expects-vaccines-for-younger-children-by-end-of-year-or-early-2022
Does that “cut it”?
Your welcome.
Nooo disappears again, after being shown the evidence..
Why should anyone keep come back to tell you again that the linked article shows that as of 1/22 Fauci says ““I don’t think we can predict when we will see an [emergency use authorization] with that because the company is still putting the data before the FDA”… referring to the Food and Drug Administration” because the data did not support his early overly optimistic estimate? When all you do is repeat in a sneering way that in 5/21 he thought differently and that overrides the fact that it never happened? And even that much took up too much of my time to find what you were not bothering to post. Then you turn around and make it a personal non sequitur attack that I’m not paying enough attention to your poor information because that’s all you have. Well guess what? Not going to waste any more of my time on this non issue.
You asked for the proof, I provided it.
My poor information?
A screenshot, a link, a video, and I even gave you the time stamp, do you could quickly find the exact spot in the video that Fauci is pushing the vaccines for 4 and 6 year olds.
So, ya, of course you will move on.
That’s what always happens.
Sneering?
You are the one that couldn’t say please, (or thank you), after your demand for a link.
Like I said…
You’re welcome.
👎
“Health Minister Magnus Heunicke added: “The situation in Denmark is that we have this decoupling between infections and intensive care patients, and it is mainly due to the large attachment among Danes to revaccination. That is the reason why it is safe and the right thing to do now.””
https://www.politico.eu/article/denmark-becomes-first-eu-country-to-scrap-all-covid-19-restrictions/
I’m sure this had nothing to do with the abrupt change of heart.
10 January 2021
Nine people were arrested in Denmark on Saturday after demonstrations against the country’s coronavirus restrictions turned violent in two cities including capital Copenhagen, police and local media said.
Between 200 and 250 people had gathered in Copenhagen and dozens in the city of Aalborg in Denmark’s north, according to media reports citing police accounts.
Organised by a group calling itself “Men in Black”, the demonstrations targeted restrictions imposed to curb the spread of the coronavirus.
Protesters shouted: “Freedom for Denmark, we have had enough,” according to media reports.
In TV broadcasts and video posted to social media, police in riot gear could be seen clashing with protesters in Copenhagen, who lit fireworks and threw bottles.
Four people were arrested in the capital, two for violence against a police officer, one for violating the fireworks code and one for not following directions from a police officer.
Rasmus Schultz, coordinating officer with the Copenhagen police, told public broadcaster DR that some of the protesters were people that they recognised from the “hooligan environment”.
In Aalborg, five people were arrested, all for violating the fireworks code.
Responding to a surge in virus cases and the threat of recently discovered variant strains believed to spread faster, Denmark on Tuesday announced even tighter measures on top of a partial lockdown in place since mid-December.
In addition to existing measures like working from home and the closure of schools, bars, restaurants and most shops, gatherings of more than five people were banned — down from 10 — and people were asked to keep two metres (six feet) apart, rather than one metre.
On Friday, the country banned entry for foreigners without a negative virus test from the previous 24 hours.
https://www.thelocal.dk/20210110/nine-arrested-in-denmark-after-anti-lockdown-violence/
Well, anti vaxxers are the experts at seeing consequences in every coincidence. Maybe they are right this time despite their outstanding record of being wrongmall the rest of the time.
And Jabbers are experts at making endless excuses for their failures, All while pretending their failure is success.
They are also known to stoop so low as to villainize and demonize any that won’t agree to their plan.
So tell us, How many coincidences does it take to make a fact?
When is a conspiracy only a conspiracy in the mind of the accuser?
That must be it, it’s the accusers that are committing the conspiracy they accuse others of.
Hotcoffee your comment is truth my friend.
Thanks
%100 accurate …
Too many coincidences
☮️❤️🇺🇸
That’s right.
Why do the powerful get away with murder¿?
Because it’s how power has always exerted influence.
Some People Know How The Battle Between Good And Evil That Has Existed Throughout The Ages
Look at the criminals who get caught up in petty bullshit, Some manage to get away with it.
Those are the lucky ones.
There are many who can science the shit our of man’s greed and avarice, and those are very well educated and clever human beings who have their means to the sane ends
And Pro-Jabbers are experts at seeing coincidence in every consequence.
🕯🌳Who cares. 🖖🖖
Denmark also has at least 82% fully vaccinated and as the PM noted, there is has been a “decoupling” of infections and ICUs.
The US is nearly 20 percentage points behind.
China Began Subjecting American Diplomats To Anal COVID-19 Tests Right After Biden Was Inaugurated.
https://www.judicialwatch.org/documents/jw-v-state-covid-test-january-2022-02111/
Will they be doing that to the athletes too?
Will that be next here?
Do you plan to bend over?
Looks like an entire country doesn’t subscribe to your precious “consensus of the scientific medical community” Kym !?!?! 😂
These Four Factors Are Linked To Higher Long-COVID Risk, Study Suggests
https://www.iflscience.com/health-and-medicine/these-four-factors-are-linked-to-higher-longcovid-risk-study-suggests/
“The part the post gets right is that fentanyl now ranks No. 1 on the list of biggest killers of 18-to-45 year olds in the United States, and by a wide margin.
The calculations were made by the group Families Against Fentanyl, using data drawn from a mortality database maintained by the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The group looked at the past three years: April 2018 to April 2019; April 2019 to April 2020; and April 2020 to April 2021.
The group’s calculation found that fentanyl was the biggest killer in that age group in all three years, and that the margin has been growing.”
https://www.wral.com/fact-check-how-do-fentanyl-overdoses-compare-to-deaths-from-covid-19-other-causes/20054542/
And Biden still supports the cartels.
‘Betraying the American people’: Leaked video reveals Joe Biden’s ‘hush hush’ migrant invasionBy
Miranda Devine
January 26, 2022
https://nypost.com/author/miranda-devine/
Meanwhile, American streets are littered with American homeless and addicts that can’t get help.
🕯🌳And that’s his fault how. 🖖🖖
Since he opened the border, there has been much more fentenayl. It’s not rocket science
Amazing how since biden opened the Mexican border fentenayl deaths have skyrocketed. Yes, let’s go Brandon
The fentanyl wave precedes bidets presidency and border policy by a good bit.
Of course, it was also aided by the ACA creating government incentives to finance opiate medicated treatment for opiate addiction and Biden spent most of his career as the senator for the state that has made its economic and political base on providing the on shore tax and liability haven for large corporate interests including pharmaceutical companies.
But the opiate epidemic is more a symptom of the broader cultural necrosis that gives us the type of political system that delivers people like Biden or Trump to the pinnacle of power. It’s not something Biden created
He didn’t create it but he’s sure deliberately assisting it.
Most of our politicians are likely profiting off of it in some way, definitely.
Insurance, pharmaceuticals, prisons. These are the industries that dominate American industry these days and they all profit from the opioid epidemic, so I’m sure their employed representatives also profit and are also not motivated to stop it.
Don’t forget, Joe worships at the Dupont employees church. Right down the street from the Astra Zeneca campus. These are his peeps
I call the pesticide isle in stores, death row.
Elbow grease not round up, (agent orange)
Stop killing the bees.
And leave the children alone.
Table 1. Recommended Child and Adolescent Immunization Schedule for ages 18 years or younger, United States, 2021
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/schedules/hcp/imz/child-adolescent.html
How many parents read the ingredients or warnings?
Not enough
Watch Live | Trucker Convoy approaches Toronto
The Freedom Convoy had HUGE support in Ontario today! We love the support out here and we’re happy to see that you’re not going to take it anymore!!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSMEa2Ox2LE&t=241s&ab_channel=Tireroaster%27sGarage
4 min.
I am guessing every truck involved, is not making its scheduled delivery. That oughta demand some action.
But our Sec. of Transportation is busy spending 1.3 trillion $$$ on equity instead of bridges and potholes. A person who couldn’t fix potholes in his own town as Mayor.
And that bond Ca. passed for the train to nowhere for $80 B is now costing 180B and already more than a year past completion date.
Our priority, stop truck drivers sitting alone in the trucks from making deliveries cause they aren’t boosted.
As I was saying…..
Aging Pittsburgh bridge collapses in early morning while cars were driving on it
Fri, January 28, 2022, 9:29 AM
https://news.yahoo.com/aging-pittsburgh-bridge-collapses-early-124850754.html
Anyone seen Buttigieg?
Definitely some seriously mixed up priorities, that’s for sure.☕
And the people are willing to do without the deliveries to cheer the truckers on, hmm……………
HUNDREDS of Canadians cheer on ‘Freedom Convoy’ of 50,000 truckers driving toward the capital to protest vaccine mandate: Lawmakers are told to ‘lock your doors’ and avoid the protest
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10449587/American-truckers-join-Canadas-Freedom-Convoy-protesting-vax-mandate-rigs-stretch-45-MILES.html
and
Trudeau ‘Isolating’ At Home in Bid to Dodge Massive Canadian Trucker Caravan He Smeared As ‘Fringe Minority’
https://www.informationliberation.com/?id=62844
🕯🌳Boo. 🖖🖖