NYC EMT & Fire Department Union Boss Presents Cogent, Comprehensive, Factual, Rational Argument Against Vaccines For Members

Argument, COVID-19, Critique, Ethics, Healthcare, Intelligence, Judaism & Jews, Labor, Race, Reason

2 Replies

I believe uber-progressive anchor Alex Witt, of MSNBC, likely went easy on Oren Barzilay because she must have believed the president of Emergency Medical Services Local 2507 of District Council 37 (President of Uniform EMTs, Paramedics & Inspectors – New York City Fire Department) to be a working-class man of an acceptably exotic ethnicity.

To me of course, the name screamed Israeli. As did the clear, comprehensive argument style, and cogent replies to everyone of the woman’s arguments for vaccine mandates.

Barzilay argued against mandates for his members. These are arguments that not one of the dimwits usually entertained on the idiot’s lantern (the TV) has proven able to rattle off.

In arguing against the mandates, Barzilay told Witt:

        1. No conclusive evidence exists to show the vaccines are not harmful. On the contrary, the CDC website reports over 12,000 deaths from these vaccines and thousands injured, or having sustained some medical issues.
        2. The vaccines are not FDA approved and clinical trials have been limited and of short duration; no longitudinal data.
        3. In reply to Witt’s idiot question—which nobody in American media seems capable of refuting, and it is, “Have you and family not received the mumps, measles, polio vaccinations, and once the vaccines move from Emergency Authorization to FDA approved status, will you instruct your guys to take it?”—Barzilay did not miss a beat. He returned to Witt’s first point, emphasizing that older vaccines (I’ve recently gotten two Shingles shots) have over a decade of data behind them. The COVID vaccines went to market and into arms after 6 months of production, and even less time devoted to data collection and analysis.
        4. He is not telling his people not to get vaccinated; all Barzilay is insisting on is choice for his members, as to what they place in their bodies until the data are in.
        5. He wants to know (asking in a cynical, rhetorical manner) if the City will cover the expenses of those who have an adverse reaction. That’s unknown, argued Barzilay. I would argue one better: When admitted into hospital following vaccination, with a plethora of symptoms, you are more often than not subjected to batteries of tests that always appear aimed at ruling-out correlation with vaccination, instead of treating what could be dangerous symptoms.
          In the zeal to avoid implicating the vaccine in a reaction—individuals who suffer a reaction in proximity to vaccination might not even receive antidotes as soon as they need them. The aim of untrustworthy medical personnel seems to be to exonerate the vaccinators rather than assume a reaction and prevent a patient from dying.
          Essentially, medical personal have lost our trust that indeed they can spring into action, in the event we suffer adverse reactions to their ill-researched vaccines.
        6. Oren disputes that all his members are, as Witt assumed, grateful for the vaccines, since some have died following vaccination. He cannot definitively prove causation, but they died shortly thereafter. Two of Oren’s Local members died within 4 days of receiving the vaccine.

       

    3. RELATED READING: “Could Vaccine Resisters Be WACO’d?”

The Woke Conservatism Of Ben Domenech And Fox News

Conservatism, Democrats, History, Populism, Propaganda, Pseudo-history, Race, Racism, Republicans, The State

2 Replies

Ben Domenech continues to sell soothing, snake-oil conservatism on FOX News Primetime.

In fact, Woke conservatism is a good moniker for Domenech’s conservatism .

Fox News, sometimes mistaken for the real deal, has signed this John McCain clan member on as a contributor. It’s how Beltway conservatives keep the wealth and the consensus in the political family.

When TV admits outsiders in, it’s only ever if, like J.D. Vance type elites, they’ve slithered  up through the Ivy League, or the military-industrial-complex; have gotten elected, preferably in moderate districts. There isn’t an independent thinker in the District of Columbia radius.

This time, On August 2, in dulcet tones, Domenech—who has a great speaking voice—was selling some court historian’s idea that Lincoln and his supporters were the quintessential populists.

That is quite funny. Lincoln was “a wealthy railroad lawyer”; “a card-carrying member of the Northern corporate elite“:

Via Tom DiLorenzo:

Lincoln proudly boasted that he had made more speeches promoting protectionism or legal plunder than on any other subject. He stumped for Whig party protectionist candidates for decades, and established himself as the most rabid mercantilist in American politics, the political son of Alexander Hamilton. As the general counsel of the Illinois Central Railroad who had represented all the major railroad corporations in the Mid-West, he was a card-carrying member of the Northern corporate elite who traveled on the legal circuit in a private train car courtesy of the Illinois Central, accompanied by an entourage of Illinois Central executives (See John Starr, Lincoln and the Railroads). As such, the Illinois plutocracy sponsored and financed his candidacy. A key part of their strategy was to use Lincoln’s protectionist credentials to win over the steel-manufacturing state of Pennsylvania which had the second-largest number of electoral votes at the time. Joseph Medill, the influential editor of the Chicago Press and Tribune, sold the Lincoln candidacy to the Pennsylvania Republican party by pointing out what a slick politician he was, “an old [Henry] Clay Whig, right on the tariff and . . . exactly right on all other issues.”

“DiLorenzo and His Critics on the Lincoln Myth” is pretty neat, especially as Jim Ostrowski mentions the upheaval caused by the publication, in 2002, in WND of my review of Tom’s The Real Lincoln.

With two of the leading political websites in the world heralding his tome, Mises.org and LewRockwell.com, and his book selling like statist intellectuals’ souls, the Church of Lincoln could not ignore DiLorenzo. When Ilana Mercer fired her starter’s pistol, the congregation raced to attack the book before it was even published.

 

UPDATED (8/1): Unheard Of In America: British Parliamentary Committee Issues Report About Underprivileged Whites

America, Argument, Britain, Conservatism, Government, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim, Race, Racism

Leave a reply

It could not happen in the USA!

The Economist reports that “a [British] parliamentary committee,” no less, has issued a report about the difficulties of  “working-class white pupils.” They are underperforming.

The magazine covers evenhandedly  how “the use of the phrase ‘white privilege’ may harm poor white youngsters who, by definition, are nearer the bottom of the socioeconomic pyramid than the top.”

More crucially, can you imagine a US Congressional committee even commissioning such a report? I can’t. The Republicans would certainly not push for such long-overdue fact-finding. They have not! Why not? UPDATED (8/1): Humor: Question: Why have Republicans not got a congressional committee looking into white underprivilege and disadvantage, as the British have? Answer: Because Republicans “think” JD Vance’s novel, Hillbilly Elegy, is social science. 

Why, there would be riots in the streets if white poverty and underprivilege got attention from the representatives of those poor, underprivileged whites.

The Johnson column calmly explains what each side means when it asserts or rejects “white privilege”:

As is often the case, the two sides of this debate seem to mean very different things by this concise but explosive term. Sensible folk who give credence to the idea of “white privilege” argue that, whatever their other problems, white people do not face the same race-based disadvantages as ethnic minorities, from the minor (a shopkeeper training a wary eye on them) to the more serious (teachers reflexively judging them to be less capable than they really are).

But some sceptics of “white privilege” think it implies that every white person is privileged in an overall way—or even that, merely by existing, white people are complicit in the discrimination suffered by minorities. For some who interpret it this way, the concept is discredited by the existence of poor white people.

In recent years, however, the word has been widely used to refer to the advantages enjoyed by the white majority in countries such as Britain and America. In the raging culture wars, “white privilege” is now among the many phrases lobbed like online grenades between opposing camps. Since the combatants cannot agree on what it means, it is not surprising that there is no consensus on whether it exists and what should be done about it.

The problem with these terms is their compression. They are signposts rather than arguments, only making sense in the context of more elaborate reasoning. Those who use them often seem to hope that the catchphrases invoke all the nuances of the underlying concepts. In the vituperative, tweet-length exchanges that now pass for political debate, that is usually wishful thinking.

Kind of banal and sanctimonious. The take-away news here being that a British “parliamentary committee [actually] released a report into under-performing working-class white pupils.”

Unheard of in American halls of power.

FROM: “Culture-war terms can compress complex ideas in an unhelpful way:In discussions of group differences and grievances, nuance is vital.”

WATCH: UPDATED (8/1): Humor Alert: When Democrats And Pelosi’s Republican Poodles Weep; There Is Mirth In the Vance-Mercer Studio

Comedy & Humor, Conservatism, Crime, Criminal Injustice, Culture, Democracy, Democrats, Elections, libertarianism, Paleolibertarianism, Republicans

2 Replies

WATCH: David and I discuss the ins-and-outs of the Jan. 6 Committee, also the Democrats’ September 11: Menstrual America Vs. MAGA America.

When Democrats and Pelosi’s Republican Poodles Weep; There is Mirth in the Vance-Mercer Studio:

The harder the Democrats and Nancy Pelosi’s Republican poodles wept—the greater was the mirth in the David Vance and ilana Mercer studio. Our superstar of a producer was in stitches, too. Good times.

UPDATE (8/1/021): Humor Alert: I never watch my own videos. So did I REALLY ask David, of https://HardTruthWithDavidVanceAndilanaMercer.podbean.com/, if Speaker Pelosi has a drinking problem? A viewer insist I did. David agrees.

https://rumble.com/embed/vhxj2z/?pub=fyb9t

Must something manifestly hilarious be marked with a “Humor Alert” before people allow laughter? Maybe Brits and their South African former subjects have a different sense of humor? This appended comment is way funny, too. Learn Brit humor: