Posted on 09/06/2025 1:10:09 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
The COVID vaccine debate sparks anew in Senate hearing.
WASHINGTON — As he sat in the hot seat during a Senate hearing Thursday morning, Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. recognized that he was in the center of a religious debate — on vaccines.
On one side were finance committee Democrats and a couple of Republicans who are staunchly pro-vaccine. (I support COVID vaccines too. I just think the health care establishment ought to be a little more humble.)
On the other side were Republicans who loved Kennedy for resisting the establishment orthodoxy — or what Democrats refer to with their reverent voice as “The Science.” (RELATED: The Wages of COVID — Part Two)
I felt as if I had gone back in time to 2020, when there were two distinctly different ways of looking at COVID policy.
As I watched the hearing, I felt as if I had gone back in time to 2020, when there were two distinctly different ways of looking at COVID policy.
When COVID first hit America, blue-state politicians focused on the death toll from COVID as they forced extended school closures, restaurant and church shutdowns, and mandatory masks for children. In their panic, they failed to consider the long-term effects of their measures. (RELATED: The Wages of COVID — Part One)
Their approach was especially bad for healthy children who suffered a worse toll from isolation and a stunted education than from the virus. And guess who did not apologize to America’s children.
Like President Donald Trump in late 2020, RFK Jr. in 2025 was more focused on the big picture than jabs. When Democrats talked about his vaccine skepticism, he countered with the rise in U.S. infant mortality rates after decades of decline. Ditto autism and chronic illnesses. (RELATED: The Wages of COVID —)
(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.org ...
RFK Jr. did well during the inquisition.
Well Debra J Saunders has made herself completely irrelevant by supporting COVID vaccines. If I ever wanted to be taken seriously I would never admit to supporting a vaccine for a respiratory virus which cannot be vaccinated against regardless of the infection or the vaccine. The immune response to a respiratory virus does not happen until the virus takes hold and a vaccine is supposed to prevent it from taking hold. I liked her until now.
I completely ignore Dan from Squirrel Hill ever since he proudly admitted to being anti Trump. You don’t come back from that. Ben Shapiro too. And anyone who uses b/c instead of because.
And right there's where I stopped reading. . .
Exactly. Any article that opens with “I support covid vaccines” shows a biased and uninformed author, and likely one who wants to walk the line between truth and remaining popular with leftists.
Not even going to click the link.
Oh no. I missed that one. Otherwise consider myself a fan and frequent reader of our own.
I’l look for that, reluctantly.
“Tastes great. Less filling.”
They control the narrative by leading both sides of a debate for which both sides agree on some same underlying premises or they distract from the real issue to be addressed.
They are unwilling to look at the different types of vaccines, their primary purposes, and that many have different missions in a public health setting.
I have taken non mRNA vaccines, that have been properly tests, and have a purpose of once vaccinated, preventing illness. Mumps, measles, chicken pox, are such vaccines. There purpose is to provide herd immunity via natural exposure plus vaccination.
Other vaccines such as the Covid-19 were designed to not prevent catching the disease, or preventing its spread, but to reduce the severity of the illness, by mRNA replicating within the body to provide continued new antibodies. The biggest problem with the Covid-19 vaccines were that they were not adequately tested to learn all side effects and they were nearly mandatory forced upon young people who have little change of being harmed by Covid-19. But mass hysteria was occurring and government pushed a “solution” that gave people a sense that something was being done. We have found out that there are lots of harmful side effects to some who took these mRNA vaccines
webheart wrote: Well Debra J Saunders has made herself completely irrelevant by supporting COVID vaccines. If I ever wanted to be taken seriously I would never admit to supporting a vaccine for a respiratory virus which cannot be vaccinated against regardless of the infection or the vaccine.”
“In the Sept. 4 hearing, Kennedy said that Operation Warp Speed was “genius” because it “it got the vaccine to market that was perfectly matched to the virus at that time, when it was badly needed because there was low natural immunity and or people getting very badly injured by COVID.””
How do you reconcile RFKjr’s statement that the vaccine was pefectly matched to the virus with your allegation that a respiratory virus cannot be vaccinated against?
Dan from Squirrel Hill is anti-Trump? Wow, that does it for me too.
I object, and the author misses her unintentional slur. WE are the ones with the science, not the so-called ‘reverent left.’ WE have the receipts and still the left denies.
There are even some here who believe that we must provide evidence to move forward despite all of the revelations of the past couple of years.
I object to the term ‘covid skeptic’. It’s no different than the derisive term ‘anti-vaxxer’ used so liberally - ahem - by others here.
The term which ought be adopted:
COVID Realists (or the-like, but certainly not the debased ‘truther’ term). The author discredits herself with her poor title.
If there’s a better term which doesn’t come to my mind at this writing, submit it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.