Thanks for all of this honest reporting. I am a new subscriber and I feel like your level-headed investigations and quest for truth-telling have kept me sane the last few weeks. What is happening concurrently with the tech/government policing of political speech, is, in my opinion, a terrifying silencing of anyone who attempts to quest…
Thanks for all of this honest reporting. I am a new subscriber and I feel like your level-headed investigations and quest for truth-telling have kept me sane the last few weeks. What is happening concurrently with the tech/government policing of political speech, is, in my opinion, a terrifying silencing of anyone who attempts to question the prevailing science narrative. Is it a coincidence that this pandemic has enabled our government to illegally grant itself the authority to shut down small businesses, private schools, etc, eroding basic civil liberties of its citizens all in the name of "protecting them" whilst Amazon, FB, Google, Zoom, Twitter, Apple, et al become massively more powerful and rich? I think not. From the early days of the pandemic, there have been respected virologists, epidemiologists, doctors and statisticians who have argued that all of the restrictive measures were/are unnecessary and in fact, more harmful than the virus itself. They're routinely silenced on social media for spreading "misinformation" as the corporate media delights in daily death counts, ginning up paranoia and fear and promoting never-ending lockdowns and universal mask-use, without ever questioning the effectiveness of these measures or the dangers/damage that has been done to children, small business owners, our economy. I'm sure that none of the election irregularities were due to unprecedented, last-minute changes to election laws or just outright disregard for them - all in the name of "emergency powers" governors granted themselves.
There is much in what you say, but the governors did not grant themselves emergency powers. Public health emergency powers are among the powers reserved to the states (and to the people) by the Tenth Amendment, and most state constitutions, because they are emergency powers needed without delay for legislative deliberation, lodge these powers in the state executive.
I suppose I am referring more to those like Gavin Newsom, who has been governing under the emergency decree for almost a year. One superior court judge did rule that he overstepped his authority in what she called an "unconstitutional exercise of legislative power."
There is generally a time limitation on executive emergency powers in the states, though. Several governors have flaunted this, refusing to defer to legislatures. Widmer in MI is a great example.
How does the 10th amendment allow trampling of the 1st and 14th amendments? There is no exemption for "public health emergency powers". I'm not a constitutional scholar but can read. Surly, the constitution would discuss public health emergencies if it were necessary.
medicine was primitive when the constitution was written, a lot of people died all the time.
a series of court cases later, 1800s, 1900s, about quarantines presumably established the appropriate mechanisms for setting aside other rights and legal principles for the "common good" during epidemics (such as the 1918 Spanish Flu that killed millions).
If you really wanted to make a good case against the "prevailing science narrative" (by which I assume you mean dysfunctional and /or corrupt corporate-state institutions), you would simply cite REAL scientific dissidents, of which there are many.
Leave off the added conspiracy bs and the claims you are attempting to make will look much more credible.
As it is it looks like you are violating one of the basic principles of scientific-rationalism (objectivity), which is that say that you started with a narrative (a subjective set of ideas and values) and then cherry picked data, facts and evidence to fit that narrative.
If you want to argue for better science you use the scientific method.
If you are making a political argument against the corrupt nature of the political and economic establishment, your argument should PRIMARILY focus on the failure of the establishment to legitimize itself and gain the support of citizens.
One approach to reforms is working inside the system, usually via incremental changes.
Another is more sweeping, and populist and disruptive to entrenched power and wealth.
To be clear, the main problem with "science" now is that it has been corrupted by elite power and wealth, corporate influence.
One of the political tactics of right wing astroturfers* is to reframe an issue such as "medicine and bureaucratic corruption" (or "climate change" etc) merely to do damage to "the left".
What those right astroturfers are NOT doing is actually improving science.
Not that it will matter to you, but I have never published a single word in association with the anti-vaxxer movement and as far as I can see, did not mention the covid vaccine in my post.
Thanks for all of this honest reporting. I am a new subscriber and I feel like your level-headed investigations and quest for truth-telling have kept me sane the last few weeks. What is happening concurrently with the tech/government policing of political speech, is, in my opinion, a terrifying silencing of anyone who attempts to question the prevailing science narrative. Is it a coincidence that this pandemic has enabled our government to illegally grant itself the authority to shut down small businesses, private schools, etc, eroding basic civil liberties of its citizens all in the name of "protecting them" whilst Amazon, FB, Google, Zoom, Twitter, Apple, et al become massively more powerful and rich? I think not. From the early days of the pandemic, there have been respected virologists, epidemiologists, doctors and statisticians who have argued that all of the restrictive measures were/are unnecessary and in fact, more harmful than the virus itself. They're routinely silenced on social media for spreading "misinformation" as the corporate media delights in daily death counts, ginning up paranoia and fear and promoting never-ending lockdowns and universal mask-use, without ever questioning the effectiveness of these measures or the dangers/damage that has been done to children, small business owners, our economy. I'm sure that none of the election irregularities were due to unprecedented, last-minute changes to election laws or just outright disregard for them - all in the name of "emergency powers" governors granted themselves.
There is much in what you say, but the governors did not grant themselves emergency powers. Public health emergency powers are among the powers reserved to the states (and to the people) by the Tenth Amendment, and most state constitutions, because they are emergency powers needed without delay for legislative deliberation, lodge these powers in the state executive.
I suppose I am referring more to those like Gavin Newsom, who has been governing under the emergency decree for almost a year. One superior court judge did rule that he overstepped his authority in what she called an "unconstitutional exercise of legislative power."
I wish I could sign the petition to recall Newsom more than once.
There is generally a time limitation on executive emergency powers in the states, though. Several governors have flaunted this, refusing to defer to legislatures. Widmer in MI is a great example.
How does the 10th amendment allow trampling of the 1st and 14th amendments? There is no exemption for "public health emergency powers". I'm not a constitutional scholar but can read. Surly, the constitution would discuss public health emergencies if it were necessary.
medicine was primitive when the constitution was written, a lot of people died all the time.
a series of court cases later, 1800s, 1900s, about quarantines presumably established the appropriate mechanisms for setting aside other rights and legal principles for the "common good" during epidemics (such as the 1918 Spanish Flu that killed millions).
If you really wanted to make a good case against the "prevailing science narrative" (by which I assume you mean dysfunctional and /or corrupt corporate-state institutions), you would simply cite REAL scientific dissidents, of which there are many.
Leave off the added conspiracy bs and the claims you are attempting to make will look much more credible.
As it is it looks like you are violating one of the basic principles of scientific-rationalism (objectivity), which is that say that you started with a narrative (a subjective set of ideas and values) and then cherry picked data, facts and evidence to fit that narrative.
If you want to argue for better science you use the scientific method.
If you are making a political argument against the corrupt nature of the political and economic establishment, your argument should PRIMARILY focus on the failure of the establishment to legitimize itself and gain the support of citizens.
One approach to reforms is working inside the system, usually via incremental changes.
Another is more sweeping, and populist and disruptive to entrenched power and wealth.
To be clear, the main problem with "science" now is that it has been corrupted by elite power and wealth, corporate influence.
One of the political tactics of right wing astroturfers* is to reframe an issue such as "medicine and bureaucratic corruption" (or "climate change" etc) merely to do damage to "the left".
What those right astroturfers are NOT doing is actually improving science.
so you are saying you can no longer publish your anti-vaxxer calumnies and you plan to do so on these threads.
Glenn you must be so proud.
Not that it will matter to you, but I have never published a single word in association with the anti-vaxxer movement and as far as I can see, did not mention the covid vaccine in my post.
Nikki, he's either a bot, or a darned good imitation. Best to ignore him/it as much as possible. Glad to see you've subscribed.
Glad to be here! Thanks, Jeff.
and here is one of Glenn's Parler refugees he is counting on the secure his comfortable retirement.
Please take your useless insults to a different forum.
Adults are attempting to exchange perspectives.
Substack is disappointing : it's slow, buggy, has no way to hide annoying trolls…
thanks for the levity.
I hope he makes millions from this, but his retirement will never be as comfortable as 44’s
https://www.businessinsider.com/barack-obama-michelle-obama-net-worth-2018-7?amp
Enjoy YOUR check....