I agree, Sirius Lee. Mr. bueplum wrote to me, “Like any republican conservative, I have no issues with vaccines in general and for adults in particular.” That is clever argumentation, excepting that others of the same political leanings — as I have — disagree with Mr. bueplum. Rather, by citing the comment above, I too conclude Mr. bueplum does “push” the state agenda with such zeal as to convince me as he wrote, “I don't care what he [Kennedy] has to say about Fauci, that's Fauci’s problem.” But then Mr. bueplum argues for Fauci’s position, so this seems disingenuous.
Mr. bueplum speaks about “a common sense approach to disease control based on facts on the ground.”
“Facts on the ground” should include issues of data collection and manipulation, mischaraterization, changing goalposts and word definitions throughout the last two years “to lfatten the curve,” and massively inflated AND deflated data as simple data anomalies demonstrate, along with my favorite “from” and “with” and “presumed” classifications for causes of death, a taxonomy only a Fauci could love.
Here's a fact on the ground. Official fact.
Data as of 29 December 2021
https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/region/china
( 4,849 reported and “official” deaths in China / 1,439,323,776 total population ) x 100 = 0.00337 %
Quite an anomaly among the "official" data. Facts on the ground.
Sirius Lee rightly observes, "...you quote - liberally I might add - from the thoroughly corrupt .govs and mockingbird media." Also part of the facts on the ground.
“Like any republican conservative, I have no issues with vaccines in general and for adults in particular.” That is clever argumentation, excepting that others of the same political leanings — as I have — disagree with Mr. bueplum. “
That would be Mrs. Blueplum to you, thank you, tho. Stating a platform plank that supercedes Reagan, isn’t an ‘argumentation’. You may disagree with that plank, but it’s still there on the floor. You can pretend it isn’t there, but it still demands respect.
So many strawmen, so little time:
” bueplum does “push” the state agenda with such zeal “
define ‘state agenda,’ coherently if you can...but do tell, oh wise one of shiny fifty cent words, what agenda isn’t already being actively and enthusiastically offered on a giant silver platter to Dems and Socialists by continuing to parrot those discouraging - Republicans specifically - from protecting themselves from a disease that can maim and kill or maim others? What’s the inspired logic, the grand plan, behind actively promoting hesitancy and spread of infection with scary bedtime stories and fabrications, when doing so only prolongs the pandemic, cancels football, and pressures hospitals into crisis triage and denial of care, and more unnecessary deaths to join the 1 in 6 infected to date and the 1 in every 400 Americans already dead?
Fact. 90%+ of those maimed or dying are unvaccinated.
Fact: Dems are 90% vaccinated.
Fact: Seniors are 85%-90% vaccinated.
Fact: Republicans are 65% vaccinated.
Question: Which party voters are most likely the majority of those dying from covid?
Bonus question: which ‘deep state’ do those voter deaths most benefit?
““Facts on the ground”
yet that somehow doesn’t apply for Jr or other pied pipers? Blind acceptance and blind defense rules the day in denier land.
““from” and “with” and “presumed” classifications for causes of death, a taxonomy only a Fauci could love.”
Au Contraire’ mon frere. It’s the pandemic deniers that absolutely insisted, no, demanded, their use, and demanded the MEDIA differentiate. It happened right here. And the deniers still remain attached at the hip to the words. “Covid is deadly; protect yourself” contradicts the pandemic denier credo and is way too scary a thought for Libras of the world who still can’t make up their minds what to do 2 years on. But dead is dead and the dead weren’t dead before catching Covid. And who did they catch covid from? It doesn’t spontaneously generate.
Re: vaccines: Mumps is 88% effective vaccine, so is pertussis, but not for 12%. Are they not vaccines under this new paranoid freakout about a definition update to reflect science of 2021 or should we go back to the 1798 and 1881 definition for ‘innoculations’ that also weren’t guaranteed to prevent symptoms? I don’t care what we call them as long as they ‘flatten the curve’ on hospitalizations and deaths. And that, they are doing very well.