Your writing is obviously biased. There are doctors all over the world and peer reviewed studies that support Kennedy's assertions about the covid vaccines but you didn't quote any of them instead you cherry pick "experts" that support your biased claims. Disappointing article. It is too bad you didn't share more of Kennedy's positions - such as Ukraine, environmental, working to end the corruption in our regulatory agencies (the revolving door and the fact that the corporations have so much influence). This read much more like an opinion piece than journalism.
It read like a dismissive puff piece, as though you know there’s an issue with the establishment democrats that must be addressed but don’t actually believe it will ever come to anything.
It reads remarkably like a lot of media coverage of Trump in 2015. "The guy has some points but he's definitely crazy and we the elites have decided he has no chance of winning so just forget about him."
The author follows the familiar TFP scrip. Acknowledge that something terrible is wrong in the country and in this case RFK may be addressing some of the distress. But of course, the author accepts all the nostrums of the left: Trump is Hitler, questioning vaccines is idiocy, questioning election integrity will make one eligible for jail time. These articles give no insight into the reality we live in because they start from many of the positions of the woke ideology, and from these positions there can be no progress.
Mail in ballots w/o signature verification, ballot harvesting, the corruption of the media, Hollywood, tech giants and Zuckbucks alone insure Dems will always win. Keep in mind they also have overwhelming control of the county agencies that do the counting.
There can never be a solution to this corruption because we are cancelled if we even show an openness to question the corruption.
It is so depressing to have to agree with you concerning your assessment that the Democrats will always win. If election fraud (ballot harvesting, mail-in ballots, etc.) were eliminated and the media actually informed the pubic of the disastrous policies advocated by the Democrats, the next presidential election would be a landslide victory for any Republican candidate. Can you imagine if the media hammered away at illegal immigration, inflation, Democrat-supported district attorneys, and the economic consequences of this administration's energy policies? Biden's approval rating would drop to one percent, given the expected number of deranged people in any society.
If Kennedy wants to get real traction, I’d advise him to focus on deep state corruption and its unholy alliance with big tech and the mainstream media to stifle dissent. When the FBI and IRS can act as its enforcers and have their misdeeds encouraged, covered up and then ignored by Merrick Garland’s Just Us Department to the point where half the country believes it is being victimized, our democracy cannot be sustained.
I have to believe that most of the country KNOWS we are on a perilous path, but tribal instincts prevent “a coalition of the left and the right”. Kennedy is in a unique position to dissipate at least some of that tribalism. His pole numbers are an encouraging sign that some in the democrat party are willing to participate. I wish him well.
Deep state corruption is exactly what he’s focusing on in his campaign--his vaccine views are being focused on by others, especially in the media. That’s one reason this FP piece is disappointing --it’s just following alongside the MSM, with a less vicious attitude.
This is an honest and genuinely useful interview that Kim Iversen did if you want to hear from the man on a range of issues; highly recommend it.
I don't recall Trump having any of those shills backing him in 2016. They laughed at first and even had him on late-night talk shows as a living meme. I think Kennedy has a lot of momentum building behind him that will never be acknowledged by the media. If he takes the Sanders campaign as a lesson and fund raises outside of the billionaire/corporate cartel system, I think he will surprise everyone. And maybe he will garner some solid negative coverage. The type of coverage that served Trump so well in 2016 - the ratings of the established media were never higher and evaporated when sleepy Joe hit the stage. I am looking forward to see how many people come up from the grass roots to help tear the system to shreds!
"If he takes the Sanders campaign as a lesson and fund raises outside of the billionaire/corporate cartel system, I think he will surprise everyone," 100% agree.
I am still on the fence about the "almost" in that statement. I took a deep dive into the alt media "stolen election" narrative and must say, the amount of shenanigans pulled by the DNC and their troops does make one scratch ones head. Either that or the MAGA crowd faked some pretty compelling docudramas. Looking back at just how lousy Biden was a candidate it still amazes me that the hatred of the Orange Man was so great that more people voted for him than voted for Obama! We will never know the full truth and it doesn't matter much at this point, we are where we are. I prey we have a level and fair playing field next year. If the DNC sticks to their no-primary stance, I am afraid that prayer will go unanswered and it's game over for any chance of us ever having a truly democratic election again - assuming we ever really did. If Kennedy is sidelined by the establishment without even giving him a chance to debate sleepy Joe, let alone Trump or DeSantis, I hope he runs as an independent and disrupts the whole shit show.
I keep thinking if one person of esteem - notoriety or wealth, so much as dares to support him - it's over for the rest! They won't be able to censor or silence him! What we basically need is one person to step up and put the Country ahead of themselves - their career, reputation etc! Because that's exactly what this boils down to - he is the only PERSON capable of saving what little is even left of this Country and perhaps even restoring it!
The man lives in California and clearly knows everyone - who will have the courage to do the right thing? Taylor Swift? Britney Spears - Jennifer Lopez - Leonardo DeCaprio? It'll just take ONE!
Adult pretenders aren't the solution, folk who merely parrot the words of others in talk and song. Have you listened to them as their selves? The person of esteem you are looking for is someone like Elon, someone who has actually done something of worth. Won't be Elon though, like me he's on the spectrum and like me can tell you vaccines had fuck-all to do with us being who we are because in our day that vaccine regime didn't exist to anything like the extent it does now. Hollyweirdos won't help you; look elswhere.
I found the "coalition of the left and right" thing to be the most absurd notion in the entire article. A coalition of liberals and conservatives is possible, and indeed, is already happening in some ways. But left and right? In 2023? Keep dreaming. They might as well be inhabitants of different planets. The left seems to occupy a completely different reality from the one I do, and as long as they maintain their current chokehold on the Democratic party, the only Democrat I would even remotely consider voting for is a contrarian like Kennedy, and I even have issues with him.
“A coalition of liberals and conservatives is possible”
Maybe I’m showing my age but that’s how I, and I presume RFK define the left and right. What you call the left I call progressives when I’m being unduly kind. Generally I refer to them more accurately as Marxists
Maybe it used to be that way. Not all liberals are leftists and not all conservatives are right-wingers. I don't think the terms are synonymous. Many conservative commentators have described the distinction between liberals and the left. Liberals believe in free speech; leftists don't. Liberals believe in individual liberties; leftists don't. Liberals oppose government authoritarianism; leftists don't. Liberals and conservatives can find common ground, but not the left and the right or even the left and ordinary conservatives. The problem is that liberals continue voting for the left because they refuse to vote for a conservative, even though they might be more in agreement with them.
I still read him. He has been against vaccinating the young and men up to age 35-40. He has said the cost/benefit ratio is negative for those groups. However, he has always been in favor of vaccinating the aged and the unhealthy. The quote was about the testing protocol only. He has stated the data demonstrated the myocarditis issue in young men, but was buried. So, his issue was with not being "evidence based" as opposed to an anti-vaccine stance.
The mania to impose the tricky Covid vaccine on everyone was madness. The elderly and immunocompromised? Fine. But mandates for a vaccine that has waning efficacy and known side effects is totalitarian madness. What sane country would have allowed it? Or not torn limb from limb those who insisted upon it.
How about the mandate for college students which compelled taking a vaccine for which that age group had a statistically zero risk of death? The vaccine wasn’t even offered to that age group in some other (sane) countries.
Worse, or little kids. Whose moms they hectored and terrified. What a bunch of totalitarian freaks. And some of them still post here. No apologies. No amends. Like locusts on to the next mad jihad.
I had children at UW Madison, U of Iowa and Bama in 2020/2021. I was so glad none of those schools forced it on the students. The data in early 2020 proved beyond a doubt that, unless they had preexisting medical issue, 20 somethings had virtually zero risk of serious illness or death from Covid. It was primarily liberal elite schools that did so - schools with students who's parents likely instilled enough fear into them that they gladly took as many shots as they could.
Remember where Dr. Prasad works: UCSF. He could be fired or have his medical license revoked if he doesn't support the covered vaccines. I always keep that in mind when reading his posts.
Thank you for the interviews. For me, 2024 must be about anybody who opposes the Biden administration of clowns. Neither Kennedy or Williamson seem presidential to me, but....
I saw Kennedy speak in San Diego on Memorial Day. Kennedy actually IS very Presidential. More so than Trump or Biden that's for sure! The difference between RFK and other candidates is that he speaks about real issues in full sentences, no...full paragraphs...to the American people whom he considers to be intelligent enough to understand the complicated nature of issues. If you think he's crazy you haven't listened to him, you are simply forming your opinions based on other people's opinions. RFK doesn't use sound bites for tag lines. The media doesn't know what to do with actual in-depth, real answers to their questions so they chop up what he says and end up saying things like "he speaks to dead people". The piece is so biased, dismissive and un-researched it's shocking and making me wonder if TFP hasn't lost its way. No mention of RFK's life long dedication to real solutions to environmental issues? No mention of his intelligent discourse on history and the war in Ukraine? Let's rather dish on his house and his meditation and prayer and make him look crazy. WTF TFP?
Totally agree- I was also at his rally in San Diego and his speech was so smart and thoughtful. This article is a disgrace. I thought that the FP was better than this - sounds like CNN
Agreed this article could have focused on what RFK Jr was saying and his platform. The author is delusional. The number of people who used to scoff at 'anti-vaxxer's' are sheepishly walking away from the crap they used to spew by the tens of thousands a day.
The Democrats did a fantastic job of making all of the anti-vax hecklers look like the biggest stooges on earth. They look in their wallets and have less money. They look at their kids and they are dumber. They played by the rules and got knifed in the back. Then they got told to shut up.
The author thinks a bunch of them will sign up for this crap again. He is dead wrong.
RFK Jr. is Presidential? Trump is Presidential? These two sleazebags are Presidential?? What's your definition of Presidential? Charlie Sheen? My beloved country has lost its collective mind!
Biden has never in his life done a masterful job at anything. You can't possibly imagine he had anything to do with that, can you? He's a factotum. A figurehead. He's not in charge. He even says so accidentally - frequently ("They won't let me [do this, or say that").
Masterful is not a descriptor I would use for the White House's handling of anything. The fact that Biden said he would not negotiate at all, and then ended up having to do so does not spell mastery.
The problem with Kennedy is his message! Heal the divide seriously? The last thing he needs is more slogans because he is anything BUT like all the rest! You reminded me of an email I sent to his campaign - the message should be WATCH - LISTEN - LEARN exactly what you said! He also needs to have a website with interviews only so people CAN watch listen and LEARN!! He is the most unrehearsed and unrepetitive person that has ever run for POTUS! No platitudes, cliché's, slogans etc.!! He speaks the truth!
BJ - I agree that the "Heal the Divide" is not the best. Too many others have used it to poor effect. However, if you read the comments here there is actually a lot of crossover between the parties. My partner and I have always voted for opposite parties, but we both support RFK. So maybe there's something to it. And RFK does have a website where all his interviews are posted. Here it is: https://www.kennedy24.com/interviews
They are side shows. I think both of them are nut cases. She's a spiritualist and he is just plain nutz. Some of the things that comes out of his mouth are not just radical but crazy.
I have always been skeptical of the Kennedys. They are poor little rich boys who have never held a real job and don't need to. Politics is a hobby. JFK was a womanizer and I believe like Clinton a sexual predator. I might be wrong but that is what I believe.
The patriarch of the family, Joe Kennedy was an antisemitic, bootlegging gangster in the 1920s and by all accounts a horrible person. Harry Truman wanted to punch him out.
They are considered saints by the loony left. Teddy was a hard core alcoholic and sexual predator. He should have gone to jail for what he did to Mary Jo Kopechne but the Kennedys owned Massachusetts and all he got was a slap on the wrist. The same thing with his alcoholic, drug using son Patrick who while driving drunk, ran into a Capital Hill traffic barrier, following in his fathers footsteps. When he was a US congressional representative from Rhode Island, he said in a speech, " I Never Worked A Fuc*ing Day in My Life...." and those morons in Rhode Island reelected him.
So, yes, you might surmise from my rant that I have a low opinion of the Kennedys and the party that worships them.
Live in the past. I might point out that Biden has spent billions of dollars in Ukraine, much of it unaccounted for, and brought us to the brink of nuclear engagement. The press coverage mimics that of the Iraq war, later found to be an unmitigated disaster. The next war, I want all the Democrats to send their kids. No more wars being fought by people who can’t pay 80,000 dollars a year for college. I want to see all the Soros clan and tech titan heirs enlisting.
I agree. Every person in congress or high national office should have their kids drafted into the military. Have them put their children where their mouth is.
The hawks would have to send their children to the wars they so love and the anti-war advocates would then have to fight harder to see we don't go to war. Oh, and their children aren't sent to some admin post like Al Gore's father did for Al but they have to go to a line unit and eat crappy rations, dodge bullets and sleep in the mud.
You left out JFK's drug addictions and the Kennedy scion who was plausibly accused of rape down in Florida. Interesting book I read many years ago that stuck with me: Hunter S. Thompson's "Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail". He wrote it while working as a journalist for the Rolling Stone, following McGovern's campaign. Boy, there was a guy who disliked the Kennedy's. Some of his credible anecdotes are really surprising.
I have problems with the Kennedy family. But their power is, I think, largely a thing of the past. And I could see myself voting for Robert Jr. His skepticism about where America is now and how all our systems are failing is a good thing. If TDS Dems are willing to vote for a skeptic as long as he has a D after his name, that may be the only thing that saves us.
Having come from Massachusetts, I never dreamed I would see a time in my life when the Kennedy family was politically and culturally irrelevant in this country. But that's what they've become. The fact a Kennedy is running for office as an outsider and a long shot is something I would have thought unthinkable. I think any chance they had at continuing their dynasty died with JFK Jr. But I like the things RFK Jr. is saying.
When I was young I was staying at my grandma and grampa's farm. A show came on about JFK. I had thought he was a big hero. My Grandpa actually started swearing. He hated the Kennedys. I was shocked. He was very mild mannered and never swore.
Dr Prassad just like Dr John Campbell have been great to watch since 2020. I think Dr Prassad is just a little behind Dr Campbell in his revelations of how truly corrupt “the science” is. Give it another year or so and we will see him not saying a single good word about the Covid saga, not even the initial bullshit phase 3 trial that showed more deaths among the vaccinated than placebo group
That’s exactly the core of the problem: most people are incapable of getting the fact that reality is somewhere between black and white positions. It’s so easy to just join one tribe and reject blindly whatever “the other side” says. In this case, a reasonable position like the vaccines are good for the elderly and others at high risk but not recommandable for younger people. Hate is always a stronger, easier to follow emotion that the unsatisfying idea that the truth is somewhere in the middle. There is now even a derogatory term for those who dare to not think in black and white: “bothwayism” or something like that - that’s what I get when I post something in NYT comments that those zealots don’t like. Both sides, same deep disease.
I also thought his reply was off-base and odd. I actually wondered why it was included. He has argued numerous times about the true lack of Randomized Trials,
Surprised to see the word “debunked” in a free press article. That term is one of the bedrocks of cancel culture and the “believe the Science / in Fauci we Trust” community.
In my world, when I hear “debunked”, I think “someone doesn’t really like that view/journal article or whatever”. Because in science world, very seldom are things finally settled to the point where all the experts agree.
Struck me as typical of TFP. On the particular topic of vaccines Bari shows none of her signature questioning of the Narrative™ or any willingness to dig into the evidence. TFP just parrots what "everybody knows" as if it must be true because it's "common knowledge." On this topic Bari & Co are more of a piece with Krystal Ball—unserious about the issue and oddly willing to place trust blindly in the system and corporations they claim to be holding to account.
Sadly, regarding the Free Press's coverage of COVID-related matters, I must agree with you. I admire Bari, and I quit the New York Times because of the way she was treated. It's to be expected that I won't agree with everything she publishes, but the lack of journalistic rigor around COVID is more than disappointing. I'm not ready to cancel yet, but I have to choose my paid subscriptions carefully. The jury is out.
I made sure my subscription was set to cancel after reading this piece. Too many of the recent columns on Free Press seem lazily written to me. It is no longer a reliable source of investigative journalism or independent thinking.
I think it would have been important to note that Pharma lobbyists in Washington outnumber every other type and that our television news gets an estimated 70 percent of its revenue from Pharma ads. Just for starters. Anyone who feels that it is possible to get unbiased vaccine reporting from corporate media is sadly misinformed.
Bari has a very young child and wants to believe the best about the medical profession. Many have trusted their advice with disastrous results. Unfortunately the press muzzles reporting on this.
I agree. Overall, a fairly balanced piece. The author obviously still harbors some of the old "Camelot" worship that has run through the Democratic Party for my entire lifetime. This fantasy always raises my eyebrows, as the Kennedy administration was far from the great success old Democrats like to believe it was.
I think that Kennedy is a little nuts regarding vaccines, especially the much-tested-but-no-link-found autism claims. He is right about the lightly-tested Covid vaccines being pushed by the government and media. This, I don't have a huge problem with. I do have a problem with the government and media censoring vaccine criticism, even from some of the most qualified and respected medical professionals in the country, and the government's efforts to mandate the unproven vaccines. I'm not an anti-vaxxer - not even an anti-covid-vaxxer. I got 3 doses of the stuff and got Covid at least once (probably twice, but I wasn't going to run out and pay $25 for a test that, if positive, the treatment would have been the same - stay home, rest and drink lots of fluids).
As for populism in politics, it's a lot like salt in food. A small to moderate amount adds flavor/context, but too much ruins it.
Brian, I used to think that people talking about the vaccine link to autism were nuts too but when I allowed myself to actually read what the very intelligent, well informed and well read people who were on that side were saying (including Kennedy), I was shocked to realize how much of the science that vaccine safety is based on is terrible, captured and incomplete. It was eye opening to say the least and over time I have come to my own well researched belief that our schedule of childhood vaccines all have major safety issues that need addressing. The utter silence from the media is telling. It is a scared cow that can’t be questioned or discussed unless the discussion is one of praise, and the majority of the population has been misled by this.
The study that is heralded as the definitive study to ”prove” that vaccines don’t cause autism has so many flaws in , including majorly compromised authors with deep conflicts of interest (one of whom is now on the DOJ’s most wanted list for absconding with over $1M in US grant money). This is but one example of the issues that Kennedy discovered and has written and talked about. Why this is a “nuts” position to hold is baffling to me, but I used to be there, so I get your hesitation. I would just encourage you to spend the equivalent of a few hours reading what the other side has to say, it may be enlightening.
I know a highly educated couple who were super leftwing and fully onboard the pro-vaccine train (she had once been a pharma rep) but agreed—at a friend's request—to watch Vaxxed: From CoverUp to Catastrophe. Afterwards they determined to research every claim in the movie because they didn't—couldn't—believe it was true and wanted to debunk it. Instead, what they discovered up-ended their entire worldview. She is now a pro informed consent advocate and won't even take an aspirin.
The first time I got Covid, (which I picked up in Vegas, so not everything that happens there, stays there!) I took the test because my wife had a couple unused kits from her previous work in a hospital. After testing positive, I followed the recommendations on the packet and called my primary care physician. Well, nobody called me back for 4 days, by which time I was past the worst of it (fever, etc.). When they nurse finally called back and asked if there was anything I needed, I asked for some prescription (codeine) cough syrup so that I could sleep and therefore better fight off the remnants of the virus. Another 5 days passed before someone called to say the doc had signed the prescription, but they wanted to see if I still needed it. Well, no! This is why the second time, with much milder symptoms, I didn't even bother to get tested, much less call the doctor. The second time might have been some other respiratory virus, but it came shortly after a wave of Covid went though my daughter's circle of friends at high school and she had been sick a few days earlier. At this time, until I see the results of more testing, I have no intention of getting another Covid vaccine booster. With the much milder variants and natural immune function from infection, the risk-reward tradeoff no longer favors getting the shot, but I will keep reevaluating the situation as I get more information. I am 55, but fit and healthy, so I'm not at particularly high risk.
Ditto. Kennedy has been very vocal about the evisceration of our bill of rights, the partnership between government and big corporations which equals fascism and the total capture of the press. Moreover, he has said repeatedly in interviews the he is NOT an anti-vaxer or vaccine skeptic. He is concerned and skeptical about the safety of vaccines. Not one child hood vaccine has been tested against a placebo. Not one! Read Turtles All The Way Down for some properly sourced information on vaccines. And BTW- this is just personal opinion- but the use of the term “ debunked” is a bit unprofessional and often indicative of the lack of professional research underlying an article.
Preservation of the Republic, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights safeguarding the citizen is all that matters. This is a NEW AGE. A group of retro political grifter's have seized control of the world political narrative and are now attempting to redefine what it is to be a human being. Their's is a visionless devolution of society and politics as witnessed by their ineptitude in allowing the return of a possible nuclear confrontation, and their abandonment of human moral reason for the opportunity of personal financial gain. The realpolitik for the American citizen today is who will control access to free speech, expression and communication on tech platforms. That's the war they're waging.
Your definition of fascism is correct. But, I believe we are past the area of political/financial self-interested graft and squarely in the realm of the pathological. The DNC/D.C./corporate hog trough display's the same blinding megalomania, hubris and narcissism that defined the regimes of Hitler, Mao and "Uncle Joe". Their self-protecting move toward mass surveillance, the "be afraid" object lesson's of destroyed American lives and their willing financial support of "break a few egg's to make an omelette" Marxist utopians' to create chaos and division, clearly says they've departed sanity. The unfounded belief in their invincibility and their willingness (like all tyrants) to place themselves above individual freedom and dignity puts American's, and the world in peril.
The entirety of the fight for American freedom and survival lies in the Constitution. Europe, Australia and Canada are completely compromised. Their citizens are being arrested for thought and speech crimes. Movement restricted. Euthanasia on demand. Farmland and private property seized. Their societies molded and reshaped to fit the CCP ideal of totalitarian citizen control. Why not? That's where the Davos/Wall Street boy's make their money. And America? Nine dead and a dozen more senselessly wounded in Chicago this Memorial Day weekend. "ism's" are dead. The Constitution, the Republic and the citizen is all that remains.
Whom would we guinea pig to be the placebo arm? I.e. which persons would be selected to be infected so we can placebo-vaccinate them?
Ethically, we cannot do this. We have to think _ethics_ when we talk of using placebo controlled trials such that when it would not be ethical, other means are used for testing.
Countless studies have been done proving MMRs efficacy, and polio vaccine efficacy for example. And yet, Kennedy insisted he was right and people were harmed as immunity to MMR and others like polio has been diminished.
BTW, I am not likening the covid vaccines to the very well proven efficacy of MMR and polio vaccines and to whatever extent Kennedy may have barked against covid vacs for certain populations, I am in agreement as other leaders in the field have avered (e.g. Vinay Prasad, et al).
As I understand it, the argument against the trials is not that some should have been infected and given a placebo. (It would also be unethical to infect people deliberately and then give them the vaccine being studied before we even know if it works.) That is never the design- people are not deliberately infected, but the drugs are administered in a population where the pathogen is active and then monitored. All that needed to be done was inject some in the trial with the vaccine and leave others uninjected and then compare. Instead, they treated everyone- some with vaccine and some with something that was NOT a placebo but a substance that could have side effects of its own.
I haven’t read the trials myself so if this is incorrect, I will gladly stand corrected.
I guessed I'd see this nonsense here. RFK has been a force against vaccines of all kinds for many years, long before you kids invented Covid-19. I have seen kids die of measles, chickenpox, pneumococcal, meningococcal and H.influenzae meningitis. Pregnancies lost or damaged by rubella, kids left deaf by OM, and dying of tetanus or rabies isn't much fun. ALL of these are prevented by immunization. So don't confuse his blanket hatred of all vaccination with your disagreement with Fauci: that's small beans compared to the lives that vaccines save every day.
What you really ought to ask yourselves is this: should someone stupid enough to see vaccines as harmful be trusted to be president?
In 1986 a law was passed that gave pharmaceutical companies freedom from liability for childhood vaccines. Since that time (gold rush!), the vaccine schedule has tripled. Children now get something in the neighborhood of 72 shots. After the law passed, chronic disease in childhood skyrocketed, from 12 percent to now 54 percent. No one is allowed to question why over 50 percent of our children currently have chronic disease such as autism and adhd. This seems way more important to me than the pronoun beat which occupies our courageous journalists. If interested, see a documentary on this subject called, 1986: The Act (2020).
Just one clarification: the CDC pediatric schedule (pre Covid vax) recommended 69 vaccines from birth to age 18 (54 for birth to age 5); 72 was if including the recommended (but never safety tested) vaccines for pregnant women. Many of these are combo shots—trivalent/3-in-1 like MMR or DPT. I believe there is a 6-in-1 now in the pipeline or being tested for market. Worth noting: the rise in adverse events is noticeable in the clinical trials if you compare the original single shots to the multivalent: the more antigens combined in one shot the higher the adverse events reported in the trials.
I have yet to see anyone remotely justify giving a Hep B shot on the first day of life. Hep B is spread mainly by sex and needles. The shot wears off in about ten years. It is worth noting that most countries give this vaccine—which was originally developed for prostitutes and IV drug users—only if the mother tests positive for Hep B infection, a sane policy. Here we give it to all newborns, clearly a profit-driven decision. So, using neonates on the first day of life as a market. Pretty despicable in my book.
Yep—profit and nanny-state driven. Public health politicos decided to push it on newborns because the demographic it was developed to help are the least likely to pursue preventative medical care. On the (erroneous) presumption that the vaccine would confer lifelong immunity, they figured giving it to every newborn would solve their problem of getting it to the at-risk cohort. And then, of course, profits were too good to allow for actually following the science, so when it was discovered the vaccine's immunity wanes before babies even reach adolescence (much less have a chance to become prostitutes or IV drug addicts) they just kept the policy. Never mind the fact that a single dose has 17X the level of (neurotoxic) aluminum that the FDA has determined safe for an infant (calculated by bodyweight).
I read an interview a few years ago with a Danish doctor whose career is developing childhood vaccine programs for African nations—so obviously very pro-vax. She is also a mother and said (in response to a question I don't remember) that she would never consent to give her child a vaccine on the first day of life and couldn't believe the United States has HepB for newborns on their schedule, that it made zero sense. Yet "safe and effective" is the mantra of most American doctors and nurses no matter the vaccine or person. And "trust the science" that tells them and us we don't need to question, just blindly follow. I can't conceive of being that incurious and compliant.
This is the bottom line: 40 years of pedal to the metal vaxxing and we are way sicker overall than prior...yeah yeah, "correlation is not causation," but we are fools to not recognize this trend.
40? What do you guys say?—"Educate yourself"? Yeah, reading antivax sites on the internet. The first vaccine came about in 1701! Do you know anyone who has died of smallpox? It's incredibly unlikely as the vaccine works so well, and as a result smallpox has disappeared from the world. The only cases since have been lab leaks (ominous music and photos of Wuhan!) OK, let's get a bit more recent: do you know anyone who has died of any of the diseases I mentioned despite being vaccinated?
I am not saying you are wrong in stating we are sicker in some ways, but I defy you to prove it is from vaccines. Go on, try. You can't do it, as there is an utterly solid base of science showing that they work, and, BTW, I define "work" as being safer to have the vaccine than not having it.
I confess I'm a doctor. I have never received a dollar from a drug company (stupid me, apparently!) I just don't like to see patients die of unnecessary diseases. And those diseases are not old history. I expect you don't know what happened in the old USSR when it fell apart and childhood vaccines were not given? 4,000 deaths from a disease everyone had forgotten—diphtheria. I'm not old enough to have ever seen diphtheria, but I have seen and can recognise things like measles (two days before the rash by high fever and cough heard at the end of the street, and one day before the rash by Koplik's spots). I've seen chickenpox encephalitis kill a child. I did my best with IV antibiotics against bacterial meningitis, but sometimes lost. This isn't ancient history! Those diseases are waiting in the wings to kill your children if you don't vaccinate them. RFK seems to think there is a greater risk from the vaccines than from the diseases, but the onus is on him to prove his case, as no one else even begins to think he might be right.
I have not heard RFK say he thinks "there is a greater risk from vaccines than from diseases..." His point seems to be that the potential negative interactions of the dozens of vaccines currently in use has not been adequately addressed. I do not understand RFK to be categorically opposed to vaccines, as your comment suggests.
I’m sure I’m not the only person over 60 who wonders how all kids nowadays are deathly allergic to so many things. No evidence- I just know that nobody worried about peanut butter in a classroom years ago.
I had no idea that kids were subjected to so many vaccinations now.
I think most people who don't have young kids don't realize what the CDC schedule looks like these days. I think many assume it's little changed from what they or their kids once had. And in their ignorance they believe the hype and assume "anti-vaxxers" (very many of whom were indeed vaxxers until their child "took one for the team") are paranoid and crazy for questioning the safety and risks and exposing the shoddy science.
Another red herring argument. The truth has been wildly twisted a la "How to Lie With Statistics" in typical cult fashion, just like the "9/11 Truthers" did with their conspiracy nonsense about 9/11. The anti-vaccine movement can be wholly likened to a cult. And it is even more destructive.
The actual informatiion, however, is fully available exposing and debunking RFK's and his accolytes' false assertions regarding vaccines. I won't detail them here. Only those truly interested in the facts will look it all up as I am and have.
A small word of advice, Learn the difference between correlation and causation. They are not the same. RFK famously and destructively has equated these concepts effectively spreading false information that would scare anyone. To the extent he has not recanted and apologized for his contribution to loss of immunity to certain diseases, he cannot be forgiven let alone given another bully pulpit from which to spread more of his disinformation and on other of his hobby-horses besides vaccines.
Kennedy’s books are extensively fact-checked and footnoted. He has a small army of fact checkers. Your comment, by contrast, makes reference to all sorts of information you have but are too important to produce. Just repeating the old saw “correlation doesn’t equal causation” while true does not prove anything. Most scientific discoveries began with observations. For instance, we have the most vaccinated kids in the world. Our kids rank at the bottom in measures of health in industrialized countries. Over 50 percent now have a chronic illness, an appalling statistic. At the very least, this bears immediate and extensive scrutiny. Sadly, you are the one in a cult or on a payroll.
Well, interesting tactic I didn’t employ but you did. Attack the commenter. I have spent a great deal of time researching and fact checking which is how I can say Kennedy is wrong where he is. Reading this thread it is clear others have done the very cherry picking you accuse me of which you do because you somehow think I owe it to you to share all my years of work? Well, I don’t owe it to anyone especially to those who are merely relying on their belief in this person instead of having researched honestly for themselves.
You go and throw out another correlation as if you think it is a cause.... Do you have any thought about what the terrible American diet might have to do with America’s inordinately high number of sick children? For info, there’s no vaccine against crappy diet.
I never questioned all the kids vaccines and thought the people who didn't want to vaccinate their children were crazy. It is now clear to me I had never done my homework. Many fo these vaccines are either unnecessary or dangerous, or both.
That’s the problem. We trusted the professionals and assumed that they wouldn’t recommend something that wasn’t really necessary. When my pediatrician tried to push the Covid booster on my healthy kids, he said “I’m having the hardest time convincing families that this is good for their kids.” I was so disappointed but not surprised. I wish I could do childhood vaccines all over again and do only the ones that were truly necessary.
Christopher, I ask the same question of you “is someone stupid enough to believe that vaccines pose no harm at all be allowed to have an opinion on this page?” It only matters when it is your kid or your family who is disabled or better yet dies from a vaccine with no recourse
The notion that all these vaccines are all equally important is hogwash, and the fact that pharmaceutical companies were given a free pass in our highly litigious society is an enormous, undulating red flag. Do you know what else is not much fun? Watching an individual struggle through life with autism, and their family struggle both emotionally and financially to support them. Vaccine legitimacy can be established through a series of steps: Remove legal protections to pharmaceuticals, so they may be directly responsible financially for any consequences. Allow parents to choose which vaccines to administer to their kids (the idea that chicken pox’s threat is equal to that of, say, polio or tetanus, is laughable). And many more I do not have the time to mention here. Pharmaceuticals and the government dismiss all this out of hand and continue to make these companies impermeable to any lawsuits - of course this will raise red flags, ans it should in any society that prides itself on accountability.
Christopher, it us the rapidly expanding cocktail of vaxxes we give our kids and the unknown potential interactions between them that is a concern, not the effect of any given vax per se.
We should support everyone’s right to control whats injected into their kids or their own bodies. Likewise those who don’t vax should live with consequences.
As to RFKs chances of presidency - less than zero.
Im no fan of RFK Jr but let’s not twist what he says. He said himself in the interview- it isn’t the vaccines that he sees as harmful, he sees improperly tested and monitored drugs as harmful. If every one of the current vaccines was thoroughly tested and well monitored and approved by an organization without massive conflicts of interest- then let’s talk about that. Many people don’t see vaccine technology as the problem, but the companies that produce them.
You’d think holding the pharmaceutical companies that make our drugs and the governmental organizations that approve them to a high standard would be something that we can all agree on.
I am currently liviing in an expat community in Mexico filled with Democrats with whom I have many disagreements BUt there is an increasing number who, even after getting shots and booster shots, are rethinking the whole vaccine debacle. A very quiet anti-vax group was started about a year ago which has grown to over 50 in attendance all by word of mouth.. To be sure, this group will hardly swing an election but the more people hear from the many Canadians who live here and become aware of the restricitions Trudeau placed on the entire country and the more people hear of people who lost jobs or couldnt fly because they refused the vaccine, the more people are joining the group.
From what I hear, most of the Americans just drank the kool-aid out of fear of Covid and faith in Fauci. and had no idea what a stranglehold Fauci et al were exercising. Now that they are away from the American mass media and have a chance to talk to others in safe surroundings and think for themselves, they are changing their once iron-clad positions
To be sure the Thursday meetings are not advertised - this is still a nacent movement. But these expats are for the most part Dems who vote in large numbers. . It will be interesting to see when the election is held, if people are no longer put off by RFK Jr's anti-vax stance.
The government and media definitely overplayed the dangers of Covid to the common person. Fear is a very powerful control tool. I always questioned why when something was so dire that those in power would only push one solution: a vaccine. There weren't any national or regional campaigns to encourage a healthy lifestyle nor were doctors encouraged to try medications off-label in the hopes of getting a stranglehold on the virus. It all defied logic.
I think the DiSantis messaging that Trump gave the country over to Fauci and Pfizer is going to resonate among a good amount of people in the 2024 race.
In fairness to the author and The Free Press, it is intended as an opinion piece rather than objective reporting. However, it is shallow and deceptive and dismissive of the appalling corruption and ineptitude of the Biden administration.
It's curious that we're not hearing more (or anything, really) about the recent COVID International Summit 3 held at the European Parliament in Brussels on May 2-4, 2023. What do more than 30 senior physicians and research scientists from around the world have to say about their experiences attempting to save the lives of patients affected by COVID-19 and the vaccines? Are the vaccines safe and effective? What are the results of their research derived from real-time interaction with COVID-19 patients? What are their observations regarding government policies towards masking, lock downs and treatment protocols? And what about the children?
It shouldn't be necessary to point this out, but these individuals, with decades of experience in their respective specialties, are the opposite of conspiracy theorists and anti-vaxxers.
With one noticeable exception- the value of the comments section... like many have commented, their has been a palpable change in a lot of the writing recently. for awhile I didn't have a problem with never having an article written (or podcast guest) by any conservatives outside of faux-conservatives (also TDS sufferers) like French and that hack Jonah Goldberg.. but now the writing is starting to delve into mainstream press levels of narrative framing.. articles like this one and that piece of trash article by Nocera on DeSantis vs. Disney being 2 notable recent examples.... but the discussion in these comment sections is TFP's saving grace and the only reason I haven't canceled my subscription.....
I bailing from further reading of the comments on this piece. I could write 99% of the replies myself! We ARE the Choir; I think that might be the point. These toerags are trying to deter us from the most dangerous ideas threatening Demloonies and and those that advocate such by tricking themselves out with some of our less important clothing and trying to pass as moderates of goodwill.
Yeah and casually saying that being anti vax is a right wing thing, while ignoring the REASONS - that the FDA, CDC and NIH have been spewing nonstop lies and garbage science for 3 years to which folks are not unreasonably wondering "well, what else are they lying or off the charts wrong about"
BRAVO! Well said Tonya!!! As I began to read I thought to myself here's another one regurgitating the same ole garbage they all say! Jesus H. Christ can we get someone who actually does the research before penning another hit piece! I'm getting so sick and tired of the "vaccine skeptic" label!!! Hah! It's like one writes it and then they all follow suit - lemmings! Unbelievable!! Here's a novel idea - how about the fact that he's a staunch advocate for SAFE vaccines? What you have to love best about this label is - once people start popping their clogs by the millions, everyone WILL BE a vaccine skeptic or better yet - an ANTI-VAXER! So basically they're setting the table for him - talk about poetic justice!!
The author also keep repeating false accusation about RFK Jr. for example that he was comparing covid lockdowns to Nazi Germany. I was at the rally and he did not made that comparison, he compared the surveillance government that was being introduced during covid to Nazi Germany's totalitarian government, and he specifically said that at least during WWII people could escape to a different country, but with this kind of global threat there is nowhere to escape. This statement was used out of context, but other journalists gave him a possibility to explain himself, the author in question simply copied and pasted the sentence from some other publication.
At a time when people are afraid to speak out in a country with a 1st Amendment, I am terrified of the fascistic tendencies of the so called Democratic Party and their alliance with big weapons, big pharma, Silicon Valley and the likes of Bill Gates. This is a country divided, led by bureaucrats who feel that Biden is the best non entity. This is bloated Washington at its worse. The moneyed class is not distracted, but they sure want us to be.
It's funny how even those who have woken up to what their party has become will still scream "but Trump!". Both Kennedy and Williamson do just that in this article. Williamson talks about how a hatred and authoritarianism has taken root since 2020. It was there long before and is exactly what led them to believe they had to defeat the big bad Trump no matter the cost.
Remember they are generally speaking to the Democratic base in order to make some headway in the primary. It makes strategic sense because he is such passionately disliked figure in these circles. However this strategy may be misplaced if the Democratic Party pushes to avoid a primary.
Yes, DeSantis advocates the teaching of slavery, the Jim Crow era, and the legacy of racism but opposes the inclusion of Black Queer ideology and Marxist ideology in the curriculum. That is now considered fascism.
Our republic depends on an informed electorate. When apparently -- what? -- 60% of the electorate, including both left and right, pull their opinions out of a fever swamp of bad information, we're doomed. Your comment is BS.
I think the nightmare scenario for the Dems in 2024 is people not voting. I know several people who really hate Trump, who are really, really sorry they voted for Biden.
Were they among those sitting on the dirt in 2016 and shrieking like toddlers? I think so. Trump is a bombastic blowhard. But unlike the Dems, his policies actually helped working Americans.
They hate him because all the MSM, Social media, MIC and Democrats, leftist along with the corrupt government say so. 50 something Itel sign a paper , corrupt FBI, DOJ, CIA. Are we near the 12,500 year cycle yet?
You are correct. I’m one of those people. I can’t bring myself to vote for Trump but I will NOT vote for Biden either. If those are my only choices, I’ll have to sit this one out.
I feel the same despair over the choice of candidates, but I will give my vote to the candidate who advocates the least destructive policies re illegal immigration, exercise of Constitutional rights, economic well-being of Americans, judicial protection from an overreaching federal government, American strength and competence in supporting our allies and preventing aggression by hostile regimes, the size and power of government agencies, and divisive and radical ideologies that run counter to Enlightenment values and scientific reality.
I wouldn’t like that choice either but I am with Bagehot. We have to vote for the change we need. Rather than not voting, consider switching parties for the primaries, if your state requires it, and try to knock Trump off the table. If he stills wins, he has my vote.
It’s comically sad that in a country of 350 million people that the front runners are Trump and Biden. And the two other democrats are both 70! We all need to move on from these two fools!
You really have to wonder how Trump would have governed and how much could have been accomplished if the DOJ/FBI/CIA/Clintons hadn't mounted a completely false (see Durham report) soft coup to prevent the peaceful transfer of power to a new President. I can only imagine how anyone would have reacted knowing that the whole Uniparty (McConnell included) was participating in the farce to not only toss you from office but toss you in jail for the crime of winning an election.
You need only look at Trump’s latest attack against his former press secretary to understand his governing principle, of which he has only one, narcissistic power. How many examples, how much evidence, how many policy position flip flops will his supporters need to wake up? He is blasting one of his most loyal staffers, slamming the governance of the state his entire family resides in, and suggesting that Cuomo handled the pandemic better than DeSantis. The man is toxic! But worse than that, he’s unelectable. His core base loves him, in spite of everything, but he continues to fail everyone else. He’s done nothing to win back those independent voters he lost. Our country deserves so much better than Trump vs. Biden. Wake up America!
You’re so terribly afraid to speak out and yet here you are posting on a public forum about an article which is also in a public forum. Are the storm troopers at your door yet? Spend a day in a truly fascist country and see what the word really means.
The storm troopers (IRS) came to Matt Taibbi's door as he was testifying to Congress about the collusion between the Biden administration and Twitter. That my friend is fascism, literally. If you're not terrified yet you're not awake.
Not sure what your point is but I must ask if you similarly criticize Biden and many of his supporters that use the F word to describe not only their political opponents but also American citizens who have voted for those opponents. I often make the point in my posts that until someone clearly defines a derogatory term like fascist, white supremacist, domestic terrorist,, etc etc, they should be challenged to either provide a clear definition or refrain from STEREOTYPING those who do not share their views on whatever the issue of the day may be.
Not quite. You're describing corporatism. Fascism is the forced conscription of private enterprise into the service of an authoritarian government, ostensibly for the purpose of national security.
Biden is too busy being President and working for you to spend much time on who is or isn’t a fascist. It’s a ridiculous word to use imo to describe structures that are put in place to run governments.
Would you prefer anarchy? French Revolution anyone? How did that work out?
"Biden is too busy being President and working for you..." Please tell me you're joking? Biden is cognitively impaired. He can barely string together a coherent sentence. He is also congenitally corrupt. That is there for all to see. Either you are willfully delusional or a paid shill.
Is this sarcasm? What time did he “call a lid” on today’s activity? Was it 9:00 AM again?
Fascism is the combining of power of state and big business to their mutual benefit and power. You know, kind of like Twitter, Google, Facebook, YouTube, etc. controlling the propaganda. Pfizer, Military/Industrial complex, etc. draining the money from the government coffers.
So those are the choices? Fascism or anarchy? Still have no clue what your point is and whether you agree name calling and stereotyping should be condemned.
Many of us here aren’t using our full or real names. There’s a reason for that. Journalist Matt Taibbi got a “friendly visit” from the IRS a couple months ago to intimidate him.
I am and I do. I am unafraid of these clowns. A free people, a tough and resilient people, a moral people should never be afraid. Taibbi did what everyone needs to do. He was unafraid. He shouted to the rooftops what they had done Now we all know that we have a gangster government that needs to be dismantled.
I admire Taibbi. And among my 500+ Facebook contacts (all of whom are people that I would at least recognize on the street, though not all are close real life friends) I am 100% open with my views. However, I don't want leftist nutjobs going to my employer with lies or threatening my kids (which they have repeatedly shown willingness to do with others).
It is a sad state. You are correct to want to protect yourself. However, if everyone has that mindset, how will anything get better? They are basically counting on all of us being unwilling to put ourselves at risk. It is exactly how the USSR kept power...make everyone keep their heads down, and reward those who rat dissent out.
I am not saying you should speak up...everyone has to decide their own risk. But we should all be aware that our silence is why things continue to get worse.
Sghoul - Like I said, I do speak up in person and on my personal social media. Every single person that knows me knows where I stand. I have a unique and easily web / LinkedIn searchable name, though, and just don't want to splash my opinions all over the internet to strangers who could see my employer, my residence (a matter of public record), etc.
They need to have fear put into their little black shirted hearts.
The palmetto state needs to lead the charge. The clowns who surround me are tough talking cowards. "New York tough..." As they cower from a virus and let thugs terrorize women. And fail to prosecute their governor who murdered thousands in nursing homes.
Then please have some gratitude for this country, instead of persisting in your misguided belief that you’re somehow under threat. You’re not. This is a democracy. All points of view are available to all, no matter how much you deny it.
I see articles everyday about college professors who are terrified to speak their minds about many things they believe for fear of losing their jobs. Students who are unable to take an actual opposing side in a debate because they will automatically lose. I could go on and on. Where you been?
Many of us have been canceled by so called friends who were unwilli g to engage. The universities set the stage for what has spread to much of our society and culture. Thankfully we now have an increasingly number of writers like Bari, Taibbi , Sullivan and others who are making their voices heard. But to my knowledge that trend has yet to reach most businesses and schools that seek to indoctrinate and stifle free speech and thought and debate.
Come on guys, college is not real life. A lot of idiotic things go on in academia, but once students hit the real world, start working—and paying taxes, they wise up pretty quickly. Have a little faith in common sense prevailing.
No, Karen, they don’t. They go work for various bureaucracies or big corporations or schools and try to impose their distorted worldview on others. You can read SO MANY examples here on TFP alone.
Really? Have you seen the Substacks that discusses the absolute leftist mess that has infected debate teams now? Have you sat through a mandatory DEI course (indoctrination) at your company? Sat through a Town Hall at my company right after Musk took over where the Director of Communications said, “so of course we are no longer advertising on Twitter”. A lot of idiotic things are going on, not just in academia.
I'm surprised at your response. Who has not had to sit through "compliance training", yes, that is the words they use in the public school system. And it is happening every where, defense contractors to beer makers.
Karen, your admonition to chill out, academic craziness is not the real world is a view I shared until about 10 years ago. But that's wrong. Ideas do matter, and when one ideology dominates for a couple of generations, it does have a profound impact on "the real world." Witness corporate America today, "woke" as can be. Where do you think those ideas came from?
Wouldn't you say that college kids' minds are easily moulded, that they lack the foundation of common sense at their age? They can be highly responsive to the environment around them? Since that may be the case, they will take those experiences with them into their 'real life.' In the case of the debate participants, they will take their experience of censorship into the future. These students have been taught those who they should respect and let guide them are deciding certain subjects and responses are off-limits. THAT is a very real concern to me.
Those same kids are now running corporate America and so, the monster that was caged in academia is now alive and well and making big decisions in many companies.
That was the theory and it worked for a while. But the great Censorship Industrial Complex has taken over. And the democrats are pulling the levers. Even people on the left, like Glenn Greenwald and Bret Weinstein acknowledge that.
Having gratitude for this country does not preclude (in fact, it might demand) speaking out about the devastating level of government-driven censorship and threats to fundamental American rights. We are ALL under real, tangible threat.
It is ridiculous to suggest that a fear of draconian government overreach is “misguided.” To believe that, you must have been literally asleep for the past two and a half years.
All points of view are absolutely not freely available - and it is the current government that is directing and supporting the threats.
Parents peacefully speaking out at school board meetings about the revolting things happening in their child’s classroom are (BY THE GOVERNMENT) labeled terrorists - the literal FBI is going to school board meetings, taking down license plate numbers. That’s one tiny example.
If you truly believe that free thought and speech are not under real assault, you’re either naïve, wildly ill informed or so deeply supportive of the part in control that you’re willing to look the other way on a million examples of government supported, government encouraged, government demanded controls.
Please have some regard for someone expressing a different POV. Plus, does it not dawn on you that perhaps someone from a repressive nation might recognize the ideaology? Lastly, as I was reading the comments on fascism and what it means I was surprised to not see reference to the element of nationalism. But you provided it. In this country, at this time, IMO that is expressed by use of "democracy" as you do.
As I said on another post, no one’s changing anyone’s mind today. That’s fine. Good give and take I suppose. But, please stop making everything a catastrophe. That’s bothers me more than any POV attached to it.
I’m a 6th generation American whose ancestors were dairy farmers. I worry more about the disaffection with my country evinced in most posts here. It saddens me.
Karen, that is an interesting take on the 'criticism' of the US today. I actually read those comments as a calling out of what this country was founded on is eroding, ie. national pride, so the criticism is against those who are leading us down a different path. I very much believe in the greatness in the US which is why I am concerned for the government's division of its people through tactics such as censorship and demand for conformity, their definition of what is acceptable.
When the FBI CNA work with the Democrats to spread lies about the president and use for-profit information outlets to censor speech, we're not in a democracy anymore. Democrats are totally lawless and respect no boundaries and no disagreement. Any resistance is "hate speech" now.
I'm required to go into company meetings where Democrat politics are treated as unassailable truth and I can be fired or demoted for openly saying I don't agree with them. Politics shouldn't be in my company at all, but they are not only there but also literally every single other institution in the country.
Trump isn't much of a threat to the unholy axis of Big Government and Big Everything-Else. He was President for four years and didn't make a dent, folding, ultimately, to Big Pharma during the pandemic. "Draining the Swamp" is a bit harder than real estate development in Manhattan.
1) "Referring to the journalist Matt Taibbi, who, like The Free Press, angered many Democrats with his reporting on the Twitter Files, he said: “These people want to arrest Taibbi”—an allusion to Rep. Stacey Plaskett’s April 13 letter to Taibbi suggesting his reporting could land him in prison. “Their science is shit, and they’re war-mongering, racially- and gender-obsessed lunatics at this point. It’s madness.”"
and
2) "He meant what Dwight Eisenhower, in his famous 1960 farewell address, had called the “military-industrial complex,” which not only included weapons and weapons manufacturers but, Kennedy noted, “the federal science bureaucracy.”
You do not even have to think about Covid and the response to agree with the above. Just look at all the pharma/medicine/government/education/"science" involved in Radical Gender Ideology and the indoctrination and medicalization of children and teens.
Alliance with big weapons, Nelly? In the fiasco we call the debt ceiling vote the GOP (or the MAGA wing of it) is adamant for increased funding for the military. Cut everything else instead. They’ll cut medicare before they cut jets..
Savodnik excuses Youtube's censorship, saying"how else is the platform supposed to prevent the spread of bad information during a pandemic? ". But how does Youtube know what is "bad information". What makes them qualified to be the arbiters of truth? This is precisely the point of Free Speech, which is ALWAYS guaranteed by our Constitution, with NO exceptions. What Savodnik suggests is that violating Free Speech is O.K., and that the media get to decide when it is O.K. This is a right that was never awarded to them by the Constitution and violates the law of the land. The very reason for having free speech is that truth is an intangible and evanescent phenomena that no human has a monopoly on. Orwell described the nightmare that evolves when power gets to determine what is "TrueSpeak" and what is "Falsespeak". We are in many ways living that nightmare.
What is apparent to most sub stackers is that what has been labeled "misinformation, disinformation, or conspiracy theory" is mostly correct and simply is opposed to the seemingly totalitarian agenda of the current administration. This is precisely the reason free speech must be protected, and one major reason why Kennedy has decided to run. It is one of many reasons I will support him. Williamson is a sincere person, and I would support her if she won the nomination over Kennedy and Biden, but I believe Kennedy is better qualified because he has been wrestling his whole life against corrupt government agencies in his numerous bids to protect the environment and child health. His vaccination positions have consistently been supported by science, and the majority of Americans now understand the COVID-19 vaccines' safety and efficacy was overstated by government. The weakness of his campaign on this particular issue will increasingly become a strength, as people hunger more and more for truth in an age of lying and obfuscation.
The problem with what you're saying is the 1st Amendment is a proscription against the Government shutting down speech, not private companies controlling their product. With the Government effectively leaning on private companies it more or less comes to the same thing but I don't think it is technically illegal. The crux of the problem is the section 230 ruling (law?) That grants these companies prosecution for content, allowing them to be treated like neutral carriers of content they don't originate. When in fact they are "coloring the noise" to favor political sides. It could all be fixed without trying to misapply the 1st Amendment by stripping them of their Section 230 protections and treating these activities like the campaign contributions they in fact are.
I think this can be fixed through the 1st Amendment. The government’s behavior could clearly be views as coercive. Let a court give social media companies the backbone they need to tell the FBI etc to F off
First they have to want to do so! All the majors (except Twitter under new ownership) are run by leftists who are absolute big gov't sycophants as long as Democrats are in charge.
Yes. 230 was intended to protect them because they may be allowing content that would normally get them in trouble and/or because they were allowing so much content there was no way they could moderate it.
Since some of these companies have decided to moderate anyway, I don't think they should have 230 protection. Basically just make it one or the other. Either allow free speech and get 230 protection or moderate and then you are liable for what is said and done on your platform.
My understanding is that removing Section 230 protections would likely add censorship rather than abate it because every platform would become paranoid its users would say/do something that would invite a lawsuit, and so they would be more restrictive on speech, not less. And it would hurt the up-and-coming little guys by making them easy to target and take out with a well placed lawsuit.
I think the best remedy would be to prosecute the Tech giants under existing law, which was already decided by SCOTUS: per T Reid's point—government cannot do via private means what it cannot legally do on its own. Problem is, we need a DOJ that isn't part of the collusion scheme.
You can't sue a phone company for not stopping phone-calls with illegal discussions. Why? Because they don't stop any calls and thus can't be held accountable. They are a conduit of unmonitored content. The Section 230 protections treat them like this. Once they start actually monitoring and suppressing content, they are no longer like a phone company, and shouldn't be protected as such. They are like a newspaper. The ones that act like phone companies shouldn't be sue-able. The ones that act like newspapers should be sue-able, but the burden of proof should be substantial - like newspapers - to make it too costly to engage in frivolous lawsuits. Relying on the DOJ to prosecute these things is probably the least effective course of action.
I'll take your word for it. I hear so many conflicting arguments re: the pros and cons of ditching 230 that I can't form a clear opinion. But I sure agree with you re: relying on the DOJ. Too easy to politicize. As we all know.
He also ignores the fact that bad information came from the government sources that were treated as official truth, and some of those sources directly contradicted each other.
So the WHO was allowed to say lockdowns don't have any scientific basis, but people under lockdowns on the pretence of complete lies are not allowed to criticize lockdowns.
Savodnik supported that and continues to support that. "We lie to you to prevent other people from misleading you"
Does Kennedy believe climate scientists who don't believe carbon dioxide emissions are going to cause a catastrophe should be allowed to state their opinions? I believe he wants to suppress First Amendment rights as much as any other Democrat, he just has different policy priorities.
I haven't put enough thought (any, actually) into RFK Jr's anti-vaccine stance to have an informed opinion about it, but it sure seems like "science" has become so thoroughly politicized and corrupted over the past few decades that it's almost impossible to know what to believe or whom to trust anymore.
I've been following the vaccine issue for thirty years. What I saw with the Covid shots is the same playbook they've been running for decades, only this time they were in the spotlight. Just like with the Covid shots, all that reliable "science" that "proves" the safety of childhood vaccines has been bought and paid for—sometimes directly, sometimes indirectly—by the companies who stand to profit, and the regulatory agencies do nothing to interfere because they were quietly captured long ago by those corporations. You can see evidence of it in the revolving door between agency and corporate execs. Most people—including Bari et al—don't actually look into the details of the "settled" science on vaccine safety because it's...well..."settled." But what I typically observe when someone does look deeper than the Narrative™ is a change of perspective and an awakening to the reality that "safe and effective" is a marketing slogan, not an artifact of impartial scientific inquiry. We saw that with the Covid shots, too: they got branded "safe and effective" with literally no reliable, longterm data to support that claim. RFK Jr. has legitimate science to back up his claims, rather than the propaganda—massaged data—bought and paid for by corporations pursuing profits.
Tablet Magazine published an in-depth interview with RFK Jr. that dispelled a lot of misconceptions about him without ignoring some of his more outlandish claims. The author did a good job covering the vaccine controversy.
The three institutions: big Pharma, academia, and government (NIH, FDA, NIAID, etc…) control the vaccines and drugs in this country. Nothing gets done unless they say so and it supports their worldview.
“It’s basically building a coalition of the left and the right—a populist coalition,” Kennedy said. There were dangers in that, he conceded. “Populism is easy to hijack. Demagogues can easily hijack it by exploiting humanity’s negative, universal impulses: greed, anger, hatred, bigotry, self-pity, xenophobia, misogyny.” That was the danger of Trump.
No. The danger of Trump was, and still is, that he is a warrior against the deep state. Like an FBI that thumbs its nose at Congress. Like an IRS that intimidates Taibbi. Like district attorneys who let criminals go. Like Homeland Security that lets in millions of illegals and the menace some can become. We have reason to be angry. I want a president who gets that. Not one who foments it.
Yeah, we need to call out the Tump is a racist/xenophobe/etc lie every time. Trump is hated because he stands in opposition to the Deep State...but that cannot be acknowledged, so racism, blah blah.
He is only a 'warrior' against the deep state because they are against him. Trump is not the kind of person who fights for others. He fights for himself and is willing to bring his supporters along with him.
He is not a leader. He is a bully who happens to be doing what we want...for now.
I think Ross Perot’s 3rd party run had more to do with Clinton beating Bush than Pat Buchanan. This split the vote. Perot was right about the loss of manufacturing jobs that happened with NAFTA brought in under the Clinton and subsequent administrations.
Yeah. It’s a strong tell on just how shallow the intellectual rigor is in this piece when Bush 41 losing is attributed to Pat Buchanan winning zero states in the primary and not on Ross Perot getting 20% of the vote in the general.
The whole Perot thing was strange. He was leading over all and then dropped out. Then he came back in but nobody trusted him. I always wondered why he really dropped out. He would have been the first third part president ever. (That might be why)
I was baffled by the assertion that it was Pat Buchanan's fault. No one who wanted Pat Buchanan (and I knew almost no one who did) would have voted for Clinton instead. And a lot of people who had no use for Pat Buchanan voted for Ross Perot.
Omg, I’m sorry but a lot of you are simply divorced from reality. You might benefit from reading some actual history, not the weird narratives you appear to thrive on.
Karen, look in the mirror! Your seemingly love and trust in Biden absolutely blinds you. That you cannot recognize his corruption and basic stupidity on almost all issues says much more about you than those you believe are divorced from reality.
Some ridiculous bias in here: "If you’re YouTube, these are the basic rules of the road—how else is the platform supposed to prevent the spread of bad information during a pandemic? But if you’re RFK Jr., this is evidence of our broken system." Do you just accept that giant unaccountable organizations should get to decide what is and is not "bad information?" Are you ignoring the evidence in the Twitter Files that YouTube and other social media organizations are censorship agents of the State, removing content the FBI, DHS and other members of the "censorship industrial complex" decide they don't like? Your own boss, Bari Weiss, reported some of that!
You mentioned Trump's history of sexual assault but skipped over the multiple credible allegations against Biden. Remember how the Democrats united to dismiss #MeToo when Tara Reade's inconvenient accusation broke? Reade's mother had actually discussed it at the time in a call-in with Larry King, as I recall - pretty solid piece of circumstantial evidence. [Note added: I'm aware that Reade just defected to Russia but I don't think that invalidates her earlier accusation.]
As others have mentioned, Dr. Vinay Prassad is quite skeptical about much of the COVID vaccine "science" that's been forced on the global population. I think you cherry-picked a quote from him.
Also, why no serious discussion of RFK, Jr.'s policy positions?
Isn’t it funny how censorship is now presented as the natural response to “bad information?” It’s presented as the only possible response to something someone doesn’t like is a hallmark sign of totalitarianism. Hopefully the censorship will be the nail in the coffin for YT and MSM. Americans are on to the game now.
Weak and apologetic. This piece read like a "brave" article from the Times, showing that they could step a toe outside the insitutional line. Come on Free Press. A poor use of my time.
I too found the article lacking. It meandered here and there with no clear direction and inconsistent evidence. I don’t understand quite what the author meant to tell us.
I personally disagree, I thought it was illuminating. That even if RJKJr and MW have low chances of winning, there is a shift among Dem voters and even elites privately recognize it. It means that 2024 is up for grabs even with an incumbent running.
I don't disagree entirely with your few comments above. Notwithstanding, I don't find it illuminating to read that the Dems are are up for grabs. It's like finding it illuminating to read an article on wind and solar which has as its central argument that these power alternatives are subject to a lack of wind, cloudy days, poor integration with the grid, and are subject to fantasy ideas that battery storage might solve for any of these problems. Ie. "no shit sherlock." Tell me something I don't know. Dem problems are deeper than any of the insights you mention gaining from the article, and institutional Dem players, who should all be run out of town on a rail, are causing those problems for themselves to the detriment of all voters. Real journalism would dig in to that, name names, and seek to hold those responsible for Dem dysfunction accountable.
I would love to see a proper deep dive on the anti-vax movement. My bet is that it has exploded in the post-Covid era and I think there are actually valid arguments to both sides. Frankly, as with so many issues, the stubbornness to not acknowledge the nuances is just leading to more strife.
Absolutely, these candidates are compelling. Any human who announces and who speaks a sentence that suggests they’re even mildly skeptical of what all Americans can readily point out as utter nonsense overtaking the country is compelled to listen further. It doesn’t matter if they are outliers on one issue or another. If they demonstrate even just a modicum of common sense, they will get votes. Americans crave common sense now, and it seems rather hard to come by.
I got to see firsthand how the power of MSM works the other day, and how it controls the people who feed into the narrative.
Someone brought up RFK and apparently it was the first time they'd heard of him. They weren't quite sure what to think, they were fishing for talking points. And someone else said, "Oh I read about him, he's just like Trump."
And the other person said, ohhhhh... And that was that.
So simple and beautiful. Minds totally made up. Two people who take MSM seriously and they instinctively understood that they're supposed to think RFK is a bad man.
I was eavesdropping on people tuned into the narrative, is what I was doing. Wherever that narrative river meanders to, they will float along it without complaint.
The Democrat party has lost its way. While Kennedy has a few quirks he does embrace the true liberal doctrine of the former Democrat Party. In fact, JFK’s policies would be considered conservative today. What happened to them? When did they abandon the mantra of free speech and challenge to big government? “It is not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country” This has been reversed in the current Democrat Party.
The Dems embraced big government under FDR and even further under LBJ. They embraced corporations under Clinton and censorship under Obama. At least, that's the nutshell version as I know it. ;-)
I think either party will go the way of authoritarianism if they get enough power. Because they want to get their way. And the only way to always get what you want is through force. Whenever the Dems have gained power in my lifetime they abused it...and generally so did the Reps. Right now the Reps are in the right. But for many of them it is only because they have no other option.
Can we please get piece written by someone who has actually read RFK’s books and understands his criticisms of our institutions?? everyone in media is doing the same condescending, dismissive cheap shot type pieces on RFK. The playbook is very lame. They’ll write a one sentence strawman summary of nuanced position, then cherry pick an “expert” quote that contradicts the fake position to make RFK look nuts. This guy actually brought up the Krystal Ball interview where she didn’t even let RFK talk , as if she is some kind of expert. Very disappointing.
You can watch RFK, Jr. without edits on the All In podcast, he was interviewed last week. It was almost 2 hours and a great opportunity to let RFK, Jr. speak without interruption.
RFK has been on Megyn Kelly's podcast a couple of times as well. Her first interview of him was split into 2 episodes. I haven't had a chance to listen yet but will shortly.
As an outsider (Canadian) what I see is that Kennedy and DeSantis talk about real issues that matter to regular Americans. By contrast, the mainstream media, the Democratic and Republican leaderships, and the rest of the permanent state try to distract and divide the voters by fighting over nuances while agreeing on everything substantial. I doubt the uniparty will allow a Kennedy or even a DeSantis to win the election.
Your writing is obviously biased. There are doctors all over the world and peer reviewed studies that support Kennedy's assertions about the covid vaccines but you didn't quote any of them instead you cherry pick "experts" that support your biased claims. Disappointing article. It is too bad you didn't share more of Kennedy's positions - such as Ukraine, environmental, working to end the corruption in our regulatory agencies (the revolving door and the fact that the corporations have so much influence). This read much more like an opinion piece than journalism.
It read like a dismissive puff piece, as though you know there’s an issue with the establishment democrats that must be addressed but don’t actually believe it will ever come to anything.
It reads remarkably like a lot of media coverage of Trump in 2015. "The guy has some points but he's definitely crazy and we the elites have decided he has no chance of winning so just forget about him."
The author follows the familiar TFP scrip. Acknowledge that something terrible is wrong in the country and in this case RFK may be addressing some of the distress. But of course, the author accepts all the nostrums of the left: Trump is Hitler, questioning vaccines is idiocy, questioning election integrity will make one eligible for jail time. These articles give no insight into the reality we live in because they start from many of the positions of the woke ideology, and from these positions there can be no progress.
Mail in ballots w/o signature verification, ballot harvesting, the corruption of the media, Hollywood, tech giants and Zuckbucks alone insure Dems will always win. Keep in mind they also have overwhelming control of the county agencies that do the counting.
There can never be a solution to this corruption because we are cancelled if we even show an openness to question the corruption.
It is so depressing to have to agree with you concerning your assessment that the Democrats will always win. If election fraud (ballot harvesting, mail-in ballots, etc.) were eliminated and the media actually informed the pubic of the disastrous policies advocated by the Democrats, the next presidential election would be a landslide victory for any Republican candidate. Can you imagine if the media hammered away at illegal immigration, inflation, Democrat-supported district attorneys, and the economic consequences of this administration's energy policies? Biden's approval rating would drop to one percent, given the expected number of deranged people in any society.
👍
If Kennedy wants to get real traction, I’d advise him to focus on deep state corruption and its unholy alliance with big tech and the mainstream media to stifle dissent. When the FBI and IRS can act as its enforcers and have their misdeeds encouraged, covered up and then ignored by Merrick Garland’s Just Us Department to the point where half the country believes it is being victimized, our democracy cannot be sustained.
I have to believe that most of the country KNOWS we are on a perilous path, but tribal instincts prevent “a coalition of the left and the right”. Kennedy is in a unique position to dissipate at least some of that tribalism. His pole numbers are an encouraging sign that some in the democrat party are willing to participate. I wish him well.
Deep state corruption is exactly what he’s focusing on in his campaign--his vaccine views are being focused on by others, especially in the media. That’s one reason this FP piece is disappointing --it’s just following alongside the MSM, with a less vicious attitude.
This is an honest and genuinely useful interview that Kim Iversen did if you want to hear from the man on a range of issues; highly recommend it.
https://rumble.com/v288tw7-conversation-with-robert-f.-kennedy-jr.-how-the-powerful-captured-the-publi.html
Thanks
The problem is, how do you win an election without Big Tech backing you. It’s impossible.
I don't recall Trump having any of those shills backing him in 2016. They laughed at first and even had him on late-night talk shows as a living meme. I think Kennedy has a lot of momentum building behind him that will never be acknowledged by the media. If he takes the Sanders campaign as a lesson and fund raises outside of the billionaire/corporate cartel system, I think he will surprise everyone. And maybe he will garner some solid negative coverage. The type of coverage that served Trump so well in 2016 - the ratings of the established media were never higher and evaporated when sleepy Joe hit the stage. I am looking forward to see how many people come up from the grass roots to help tear the system to shreds!
"If he takes the Sanders campaign as a lesson and fund raises outside of the billionaire/corporate cartel system, I think he will surprise everyone," 100% agree.
"I don't recall Trump having any of those shills backing him in 2016".
And in 2020 with Big Tech, the Deep State and Mainstream Media completely allied AGAINST him, he almost won again.
I am still on the fence about the "almost" in that statement. I took a deep dive into the alt media "stolen election" narrative and must say, the amount of shenanigans pulled by the DNC and their troops does make one scratch ones head. Either that or the MAGA crowd faked some pretty compelling docudramas. Looking back at just how lousy Biden was a candidate it still amazes me that the hatred of the Orange Man was so great that more people voted for him than voted for Obama! We will never know the full truth and it doesn't matter much at this point, we are where we are. I prey we have a level and fair playing field next year. If the DNC sticks to their no-primary stance, I am afraid that prayer will go unanswered and it's game over for any chance of us ever having a truly democratic election again - assuming we ever really did. If Kennedy is sidelined by the establishment without even giving him a chance to debate sleepy Joe, let alone Trump or DeSantis, I hope he runs as an independent and disrupts the whole shit show.
What do you mean almost?
Agree, but only because they didn’t think they needed to put their finger on the scale at that time. That all changed in 2020.
They had their finger on the scale in 2016, they just miscalculated how much Hillary Clinton is despised. So in 2020 they went all in.
I keep thinking if one person of esteem - notoriety or wealth, so much as dares to support him - it's over for the rest! They won't be able to censor or silence him! What we basically need is one person to step up and put the Country ahead of themselves - their career, reputation etc! Because that's exactly what this boils down to - he is the only PERSON capable of saving what little is even left of this Country and perhaps even restoring it!
The man lives in California and clearly knows everyone - who will have the courage to do the right thing? Taylor Swift? Britney Spears - Jennifer Lopez - Leonardo DeCaprio? It'll just take ONE!
Adult pretenders aren't the solution, folk who merely parrot the words of others in talk and song. Have you listened to them as their selves? The person of esteem you are looking for is someone like Elon, someone who has actually done something of worth. Won't be Elon though, like me he's on the spectrum and like me can tell you vaccines had fuck-all to do with us being who we are because in our day that vaccine regime didn't exist to anything like the extent it does now. Hollyweirdos won't help you; look elswhere.
I have a feeling someone will jump on board. Won't be any of those you listed I'm afraid to say. All just a bit too entrenched in the big lie.
Or Big Media.
Not sure Bernie Sanders would agree with that
Bernie did pretty well in 2016, just not well enough.
"Just Us Department". Great line.
I found the "coalition of the left and right" thing to be the most absurd notion in the entire article. A coalition of liberals and conservatives is possible, and indeed, is already happening in some ways. But left and right? In 2023? Keep dreaming. They might as well be inhabitants of different planets. The left seems to occupy a completely different reality from the one I do, and as long as they maintain their current chokehold on the Democratic party, the only Democrat I would even remotely consider voting for is a contrarian like Kennedy, and I even have issues with him.
“A coalition of liberals and conservatives is possible”
Maybe I’m showing my age but that’s how I, and I presume RFK define the left and right. What you call the left I call progressives when I’m being unduly kind. Generally I refer to them more accurately as Marxists
Maybe it used to be that way. Not all liberals are leftists and not all conservatives are right-wingers. I don't think the terms are synonymous. Many conservative commentators have described the distinction between liberals and the left. Liberals believe in free speech; leftists don't. Liberals believe in individual liberties; leftists don't. Liberals oppose government authoritarianism; leftists don't. Liberals and conservatives can find common ground, but not the left and the right or even the left and ordinary conservatives. The problem is that liberals continue voting for the left because they refuse to vote for a conservative, even though they might be more in agreement with them.
Dr Prasad has posted many videos challenging covid vaccines and covid policy. I question whether he actually said what is quoted.
I was wondering about that also. I used to read all his substack posts until he went paywalled, and that supposed quote contradicts many, I believe.
I still read him. He has been against vaccinating the young and men up to age 35-40. He has said the cost/benefit ratio is negative for those groups. However, he has always been in favor of vaccinating the aged and the unhealthy. The quote was about the testing protocol only. He has stated the data demonstrated the myocarditis issue in young men, but was buried. So, his issue was with not being "evidence based" as opposed to an anti-vaccine stance.
The mania to impose the tricky Covid vaccine on everyone was madness. The elderly and immunocompromised? Fine. But mandates for a vaccine that has waning efficacy and known side effects is totalitarian madness. What sane country would have allowed it? Or not torn limb from limb those who insisted upon it.
How about the mandate for college students which compelled taking a vaccine for which that age group had a statistically zero risk of death? The vaccine wasn’t even offered to that age group in some other (sane) countries.
Worse, or little kids. Whose moms they hectored and terrified. What a bunch of totalitarian freaks. And some of them still post here. No apologies. No amends. Like locusts on to the next mad jihad.
I had children at UW Madison, U of Iowa and Bama in 2020/2021. I was so glad none of those schools forced it on the students. The data in early 2020 proved beyond a doubt that, unless they had preexisting medical issue, 20 somethings had virtually zero risk of serious illness or death from Covid. It was primarily liberal elite schools that did so - schools with students who's parents likely instilled enough fear into them that they gladly took as many shots as they could.
Or cloth face masks for toddlers? Insanity.
Remember where Dr. Prasad works: UCSF. He could be fired or have his medical license revoked if he doesn't support the covered vaccines. I always keep that in mind when reading his posts.
If Dr Prasad truly believes that the Covid vax was adequately tested, he is, as Noam Chomsky would say, a charlatan. That research is ongoing.
Big part of the problem is big pharma helps fund CDC and FDA. Fox watching the hen house, what could go wrong?
Thank you for the interviews. For me, 2024 must be about anybody who opposes the Biden administration of clowns. Neither Kennedy or Williamson seem presidential to me, but....
I saw Kennedy speak in San Diego on Memorial Day. Kennedy actually IS very Presidential. More so than Trump or Biden that's for sure! The difference between RFK and other candidates is that he speaks about real issues in full sentences, no...full paragraphs...to the American people whom he considers to be intelligent enough to understand the complicated nature of issues. If you think he's crazy you haven't listened to him, you are simply forming your opinions based on other people's opinions. RFK doesn't use sound bites for tag lines. The media doesn't know what to do with actual in-depth, real answers to their questions so they chop up what he says and end up saying things like "he speaks to dead people". The piece is so biased, dismissive and un-researched it's shocking and making me wonder if TFP hasn't lost its way. No mention of RFK's life long dedication to real solutions to environmental issues? No mention of his intelligent discourse on history and the war in Ukraine? Let's rather dish on his house and his meditation and prayer and make him look crazy. WTF TFP?
Totally agree- I was also at his rally in San Diego and his speech was so smart and thoughtful. This article is a disgrace. I thought that the FP was better than this - sounds like CNN
Agreed this article could have focused on what RFK Jr was saying and his platform. The author is delusional. The number of people who used to scoff at 'anti-vaxxer's' are sheepishly walking away from the crap they used to spew by the tens of thousands a day.
The Democrats did a fantastic job of making all of the anti-vax hecklers look like the biggest stooges on earth. They look in their wallets and have less money. They look at their kids and they are dumber. They played by the rules and got knifed in the back. Then they got told to shut up.
The author thinks a bunch of them will sign up for this crap again. He is dead wrong.
RFK Jr. is Presidential? Trump is Presidential? These two sleazebags are Presidential?? What's your definition of Presidential? Charlie Sheen? My beloved country has lost its collective mind!
Why do you think RFK is a “sleazebag”? What is this opinion based on?
Maybe you can provide some examples why you call RFK jr a sleazebag? Name calling only goes so far.
GTF, you ain't welcome.
I can't imagine him doing the masterful job that Biden has done in negotiating the debt ceiling.
Biden has never in his life done a masterful job at anything. You can't possibly imagine he had anything to do with that, can you? He's a factotum. A figurehead. He's not in charge. He even says so accidentally - frequently ("They won't let me [do this, or say that").
Masterful is not a descriptor I would use for the White House's handling of anything. The fact that Biden said he would not negotiate at all, and then ended up having to do so does not spell mastery.
WELL SAID Mo!!
The problem with Kennedy is his message! Heal the divide seriously? The last thing he needs is more slogans because he is anything BUT like all the rest! You reminded me of an email I sent to his campaign - the message should be WATCH - LISTEN - LEARN exactly what you said! He also needs to have a website with interviews only so people CAN watch listen and LEARN!! He is the most unrehearsed and unrepetitive person that has ever run for POTUS! No platitudes, cliché's, slogans etc.!! He speaks the truth!
BJ - I agree that the "Heal the Divide" is not the best. Too many others have used it to poor effect. However, if you read the comments here there is actually a lot of crossover between the parties. My partner and I have always voted for opposite parties, but we both support RFK. So maybe there's something to it. And RFK does have a website where all his interviews are posted. Here it is: https://www.kennedy24.com/interviews
True.
They are side shows. I think both of them are nut cases. She's a spiritualist and he is just plain nutz. Some of the things that comes out of his mouth are not just radical but crazy.
I have always been skeptical of the Kennedys. They are poor little rich boys who have never held a real job and don't need to. Politics is a hobby. JFK was a womanizer and I believe like Clinton a sexual predator. I might be wrong but that is what I believe.
The patriarch of the family, Joe Kennedy was an antisemitic, bootlegging gangster in the 1920s and by all accounts a horrible person. Harry Truman wanted to punch him out.
They are considered saints by the loony left. Teddy was a hard core alcoholic and sexual predator. He should have gone to jail for what he did to Mary Jo Kopechne but the Kennedys owned Massachusetts and all he got was a slap on the wrist. The same thing with his alcoholic, drug using son Patrick who while driving drunk, ran into a Capital Hill traffic barrier, following in his fathers footsteps. When he was a US congressional representative from Rhode Island, he said in a speech, " I Never Worked A Fuc*ing Day in My Life...." and those morons in Rhode Island reelected him.
So, yes, you might surmise from my rant that I have a low opinion of the Kennedys and the party that worships them.
Live in the past. I might point out that Biden has spent billions of dollars in Ukraine, much of it unaccounted for, and brought us to the brink of nuclear engagement. The press coverage mimics that of the Iraq war, later found to be an unmitigated disaster. The next war, I want all the Democrats to send their kids. No more wars being fought by people who can’t pay 80,000 dollars a year for college. I want to see all the Soros clan and tech titan heirs enlisting.
I agree. Every person in congress or high national office should have their kids drafted into the military. Have them put their children where their mouth is.
The hawks would have to send their children to the wars they so love and the anti-war advocates would then have to fight harder to see we don't go to war. Oh, and their children aren't sent to some admin post like Al Gore's father did for Al but they have to go to a line unit and eat crappy rations, dodge bullets and sleep in the mud.
You left out JFK's drug addictions and the Kennedy scion who was plausibly accused of rape down in Florida. Interesting book I read many years ago that stuck with me: Hunter S. Thompson's "Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail". He wrote it while working as a journalist for the Rolling Stone, following McGovern's campaign. Boy, there was a guy who disliked the Kennedy's. Some of his credible anecdotes are really surprising.
I have problems with the Kennedy family. But their power is, I think, largely a thing of the past. And I could see myself voting for Robert Jr. His skepticism about where America is now and how all our systems are failing is a good thing. If TDS Dems are willing to vote for a skeptic as long as he has a D after his name, that may be the only thing that saves us.
Having come from Massachusetts, I never dreamed I would see a time in my life when the Kennedy family was politically and culturally irrelevant in this country. But that's what they've become. The fact a Kennedy is running for office as an outsider and a long shot is something I would have thought unthinkable. I think any chance they had at continuing their dynasty died with JFK Jr. But I like the things RFK Jr. is saying.
Have you heard him speak? He doesn't talk. He whines.
When I was young I was staying at my grandma and grampa's farm. A show came on about JFK. I had thought he was a big hero. My Grandpa actually started swearing. He hated the Kennedys. I was shocked. He was very mild mannered and never swore.
As far as I can see they are leeches on society. Joe Kennedy stole his fortune fair and square. HIs spawn has been living off that fortune ever since.
I do not like political dynasties.
Me neither.
Here here! The Camelot fantasy disgusts me.
I suggest you listen to a few interviews of RFKjr. You can find them on YouTube.
Dr Prassad just like Dr John Campbell have been great to watch since 2020. I think Dr Prassad is just a little behind Dr Campbell in his revelations of how truly corrupt “the science” is. Give it another year or so and we will see him not saying a single good word about the Covid saga, not even the initial bullshit phase 3 trial that showed more deaths among the vaccinated than placebo group
That’s exactly the core of the problem: most people are incapable of getting the fact that reality is somewhere between black and white positions. It’s so easy to just join one tribe and reject blindly whatever “the other side” says. In this case, a reasonable position like the vaccines are good for the elderly and others at high risk but not recommandable for younger people. Hate is always a stronger, easier to follow emotion that the unsatisfying idea that the truth is somewhere in the middle. There is now even a derogatory term for those who dare to not think in black and white: “bothwayism” or something like that - that’s what I get when I post something in NYT comments that those zealots don’t like. Both sides, same deep disease.
God forbid there be good people on both sides!
I also thought his reply was off-base and odd. I actually wondered why it was included. He has argued numerous times about the true lack of Randomized Trials,
Overall I think the piece was balanced, but would admit the author does appear to harbor some bias against anti-vax opinions.
Yes, claims of “zero evidence“ reek of mainstream media, not deserving of Free Press.
Surprised to see the word “debunked” in a free press article. That term is one of the bedrocks of cancel culture and the “believe the Science / in Fauci we Trust” community.
In my world, when I hear “debunked”, I think “someone doesn’t really like that view/journal article or whatever”. Because in science world, very seldom are things finally settled to the point where all the experts agree.
Thank you Sharon! That is EXACTLY why that word bothers me. I haven't been able to articulate it appropriately before... you captured it perfectly.
Yeah, "debunk," thats Hillary speak for "our flaks have written a BS rebuttal."
Struck me as typical of TFP. On the particular topic of vaccines Bari shows none of her signature questioning of the Narrative™ or any willingness to dig into the evidence. TFP just parrots what "everybody knows" as if it must be true because it's "common knowledge." On this topic Bari & Co are more of a piece with Krystal Ball—unserious about the issue and oddly willing to place trust blindly in the system and corporations they claim to be holding to account.
Sadly, regarding the Free Press's coverage of COVID-related matters, I must agree with you. I admire Bari, and I quit the New York Times because of the way she was treated. It's to be expected that I won't agree with everything she publishes, but the lack of journalistic rigor around COVID is more than disappointing. I'm not ready to cancel yet, but I have to choose my paid subscriptions carefully. The jury is out.
Yes, they all need to read the Turtles book—including the methodology chapter on types of “evidence”, “proof” of benefit etc.
I made sure my subscription was set to cancel after reading this piece. Too many of the recent columns on Free Press seem lazily written to me. It is no longer a reliable source of investigative journalism or independent thinking.
I think it would have been important to note that Pharma lobbyists in Washington outnumber every other type and that our television news gets an estimated 70 percent of its revenue from Pharma ads. Just for starters. Anyone who feels that it is possible to get unbiased vaccine reporting from corporate media is sadly misinformed.
Very good point.
Bari has a very young child and wants to believe the best about the medical profession. Many have trusted their advice with disastrous results. Unfortunately the press muzzles reporting on this.
I agree. Overall, a fairly balanced piece. The author obviously still harbors some of the old "Camelot" worship that has run through the Democratic Party for my entire lifetime. This fantasy always raises my eyebrows, as the Kennedy administration was far from the great success old Democrats like to believe it was.
I think that Kennedy is a little nuts regarding vaccines, especially the much-tested-but-no-link-found autism claims. He is right about the lightly-tested Covid vaccines being pushed by the government and media. This, I don't have a huge problem with. I do have a problem with the government and media censoring vaccine criticism, even from some of the most qualified and respected medical professionals in the country, and the government's efforts to mandate the unproven vaccines. I'm not an anti-vaxxer - not even an anti-covid-vaxxer. I got 3 doses of the stuff and got Covid at least once (probably twice, but I wasn't going to run out and pay $25 for a test that, if positive, the treatment would have been the same - stay home, rest and drink lots of fluids).
As for populism in politics, it's a lot like salt in food. A small to moderate amount adds flavor/context, but too much ruins it.
Brian, I used to think that people talking about the vaccine link to autism were nuts too but when I allowed myself to actually read what the very intelligent, well informed and well read people who were on that side were saying (including Kennedy), I was shocked to realize how much of the science that vaccine safety is based on is terrible, captured and incomplete. It was eye opening to say the least and over time I have come to my own well researched belief that our schedule of childhood vaccines all have major safety issues that need addressing. The utter silence from the media is telling. It is a scared cow that can’t be questioned or discussed unless the discussion is one of praise, and the majority of the population has been misled by this.
The study that is heralded as the definitive study to ”prove” that vaccines don’t cause autism has so many flaws in , including majorly compromised authors with deep conflicts of interest (one of whom is now on the DOJ’s most wanted list for absconding with over $1M in US grant money). This is but one example of the issues that Kennedy discovered and has written and talked about. Why this is a “nuts” position to hold is baffling to me, but I used to be there, so I get your hesitation. I would just encourage you to spend the equivalent of a few hours reading what the other side has to say, it may be enlightening.
I know a highly educated couple who were super leftwing and fully onboard the pro-vaccine train (she had once been a pharma rep) but agreed—at a friend's request—to watch Vaxxed: From CoverUp to Catastrophe. Afterwards they determined to research every claim in the movie because they didn't—couldn't—believe it was true and wanted to debunk it. Instead, what they discovered up-ended their entire worldview. She is now a pro informed consent advocate and won't even take an aspirin.
why does anyone "test" for covid if they have cold?
Because, unlike the common cold, COVID is dangerous to those with compromised immune systems and the elderly - at least that’s why I would test.
The first time I got Covid, (which I picked up in Vegas, so not everything that happens there, stays there!) I took the test because my wife had a couple unused kits from her previous work in a hospital. After testing positive, I followed the recommendations on the packet and called my primary care physician. Well, nobody called me back for 4 days, by which time I was past the worst of it (fever, etc.). When they nurse finally called back and asked if there was anything I needed, I asked for some prescription (codeine) cough syrup so that I could sleep and therefore better fight off the remnants of the virus. Another 5 days passed before someone called to say the doc had signed the prescription, but they wanted to see if I still needed it. Well, no! This is why the second time, with much milder symptoms, I didn't even bother to get tested, much less call the doctor. The second time might have been some other respiratory virus, but it came shortly after a wave of Covid went though my daughter's circle of friends at high school and she had been sick a few days earlier. At this time, until I see the results of more testing, I have no intention of getting another Covid vaccine booster. With the much milder variants and natural immune function from infection, the risk-reward tradeoff no longer favors getting the shot, but I will keep reevaluating the situation as I get more information. I am 55, but fit and healthy, so I'm not at particularly high risk.
Balanced in that it proposes two non-viable candidates?
Overall I think this piece was the usual Controlled Opposition bollocks.
Ditto. Kennedy has been very vocal about the evisceration of our bill of rights, the partnership between government and big corporations which equals fascism and the total capture of the press. Moreover, he has said repeatedly in interviews the he is NOT an anti-vaxer or vaccine skeptic. He is concerned and skeptical about the safety of vaccines. Not one child hood vaccine has been tested against a placebo. Not one! Read Turtles All The Way Down for some properly sourced information on vaccines. And BTW- this is just personal opinion- but the use of the term “ debunked” is a bit unprofessional and often indicative of the lack of professional research underlying an article.
Yes, "debunk" is a code word meaning "does not conform to the dominant narrative."
Preservation of the Republic, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights safeguarding the citizen is all that matters. This is a NEW AGE. A group of retro political grifter's have seized control of the world political narrative and are now attempting to redefine what it is to be a human being. Their's is a visionless devolution of society and politics as witnessed by their ineptitude in allowing the return of a possible nuclear confrontation, and their abandonment of human moral reason for the opportunity of personal financial gain. The realpolitik for the American citizen today is who will control access to free speech, expression and communication on tech platforms. That's the war they're waging.
Your definition of fascism is correct. But, I believe we are past the area of political/financial self-interested graft and squarely in the realm of the pathological. The DNC/D.C./corporate hog trough display's the same blinding megalomania, hubris and narcissism that defined the regimes of Hitler, Mao and "Uncle Joe". Their self-protecting move toward mass surveillance, the "be afraid" object lesson's of destroyed American lives and their willing financial support of "break a few egg's to make an omelette" Marxist utopians' to create chaos and division, clearly says they've departed sanity. The unfounded belief in their invincibility and their willingness (like all tyrants) to place themselves above individual freedom and dignity puts American's, and the world in peril.
The entirety of the fight for American freedom and survival lies in the Constitution. Europe, Australia and Canada are completely compromised. Their citizens are being arrested for thought and speech crimes. Movement restricted. Euthanasia on demand. Farmland and private property seized. Their societies molded and reshaped to fit the CCP ideal of totalitarian citizen control. Why not? That's where the Davos/Wall Street boy's make their money. And America? Nine dead and a dozen more senselessly wounded in Chicago this Memorial Day weekend. "ism's" are dead. The Constitution, the Republic and the citizen is all that remains.
If the media repeats it enough (anti-vaxxer) they are hoping it becomes truth.
You bring up Kennedy's big red herring, Beth.
Whom would we guinea pig to be the placebo arm? I.e. which persons would be selected to be infected so we can placebo-vaccinate them?
Ethically, we cannot do this. We have to think _ethics_ when we talk of using placebo controlled trials such that when it would not be ethical, other means are used for testing.
Countless studies have been done proving MMRs efficacy, and polio vaccine efficacy for example. And yet, Kennedy insisted he was right and people were harmed as immunity to MMR and others like polio has been diminished.
BTW, I am not likening the covid vaccines to the very well proven efficacy of MMR and polio vaccines and to whatever extent Kennedy may have barked against covid vacs for certain populations, I am in agreement as other leaders in the field have avered (e.g. Vinay Prasad, et al).
As I understand it, the argument against the trials is not that some should have been infected and given a placebo. (It would also be unethical to infect people deliberately and then give them the vaccine being studied before we even know if it works.) That is never the design- people are not deliberately infected, but the drugs are administered in a population where the pathogen is active and then monitored. All that needed to be done was inject some in the trial with the vaccine and leave others uninjected and then compare. Instead, they treated everyone- some with vaccine and some with something that was NOT a placebo but a substance that could have side effects of its own.
I haven’t read the trials myself so if this is incorrect, I will gladly stand corrected.
I guessed I'd see this nonsense here. RFK has been a force against vaccines of all kinds for many years, long before you kids invented Covid-19. I have seen kids die of measles, chickenpox, pneumococcal, meningococcal and H.influenzae meningitis. Pregnancies lost or damaged by rubella, kids left deaf by OM, and dying of tetanus or rabies isn't much fun. ALL of these are prevented by immunization. So don't confuse his blanket hatred of all vaccination with your disagreement with Fauci: that's small beans compared to the lives that vaccines save every day.
What you really ought to ask yourselves is this: should someone stupid enough to see vaccines as harmful be trusted to be president?
In 1986 a law was passed that gave pharmaceutical companies freedom from liability for childhood vaccines. Since that time (gold rush!), the vaccine schedule has tripled. Children now get something in the neighborhood of 72 shots. After the law passed, chronic disease in childhood skyrocketed, from 12 percent to now 54 percent. No one is allowed to question why over 50 percent of our children currently have chronic disease such as autism and adhd. This seems way more important to me than the pronoun beat which occupies our courageous journalists. If interested, see a documentary on this subject called, 1986: The Act (2020).
Just one clarification: the CDC pediatric schedule (pre Covid vax) recommended 69 vaccines from birth to age 18 (54 for birth to age 5); 72 was if including the recommended (but never safety tested) vaccines for pregnant women. Many of these are combo shots—trivalent/3-in-1 like MMR or DPT. I believe there is a 6-in-1 now in the pipeline or being tested for market. Worth noting: the rise in adverse events is noticeable in the clinical trials if you compare the original single shots to the multivalent: the more antigens combined in one shot the higher the adverse events reported in the trials.
Thanks!
I have yet to see anyone remotely justify giving a Hep B shot on the first day of life. Hep B is spread mainly by sex and needles. The shot wears off in about ten years. It is worth noting that most countries give this vaccine—which was originally developed for prostitutes and IV drug users—only if the mother tests positive for Hep B infection, a sane policy. Here we give it to all newborns, clearly a profit-driven decision. So, using neonates on the first day of life as a market. Pretty despicable in my book.
Yep—profit and nanny-state driven. Public health politicos decided to push it on newborns because the demographic it was developed to help are the least likely to pursue preventative medical care. On the (erroneous) presumption that the vaccine would confer lifelong immunity, they figured giving it to every newborn would solve their problem of getting it to the at-risk cohort. And then, of course, profits were too good to allow for actually following the science, so when it was discovered the vaccine's immunity wanes before babies even reach adolescence (much less have a chance to become prostitutes or IV drug addicts) they just kept the policy. Never mind the fact that a single dose has 17X the level of (neurotoxic) aluminum that the FDA has determined safe for an infant (calculated by bodyweight).
I read an interview a few years ago with a Danish doctor whose career is developing childhood vaccine programs for African nations—so obviously very pro-vax. She is also a mother and said (in response to a question I don't remember) that she would never consent to give her child a vaccine on the first day of life and couldn't believe the United States has HepB for newborns on their schedule, that it made zero sense. Yet "safe and effective" is the mantra of most American doctors and nurses no matter the vaccine or person. And "trust the science" that tells them and us we don't need to question, just blindly follow. I can't conceive of being that incurious and compliant.
Guess Big Pharma wants to start 'em young. Sigh.
Thank you Ladies.
thanks Leah!
This is the bottom line: 40 years of pedal to the metal vaxxing and we are way sicker overall than prior...yeah yeah, "correlation is not causation," but we are fools to not recognize this trend.
One would have to engage in actual science to determine if it is correlation or causation. I do not predict that happening anytime soon.
40? What do you guys say?—"Educate yourself"? Yeah, reading antivax sites on the internet. The first vaccine came about in 1701! Do you know anyone who has died of smallpox? It's incredibly unlikely as the vaccine works so well, and as a result smallpox has disappeared from the world. The only cases since have been lab leaks (ominous music and photos of Wuhan!) OK, let's get a bit more recent: do you know anyone who has died of any of the diseases I mentioned despite being vaccinated?
I am not saying you are wrong in stating we are sicker in some ways, but I defy you to prove it is from vaccines. Go on, try. You can't do it, as there is an utterly solid base of science showing that they work, and, BTW, I define "work" as being safer to have the vaccine than not having it.
I confess I'm a doctor. I have never received a dollar from a drug company (stupid me, apparently!) I just don't like to see patients die of unnecessary diseases. And those diseases are not old history. I expect you don't know what happened in the old USSR when it fell apart and childhood vaccines were not given? 4,000 deaths from a disease everyone had forgotten—diphtheria. I'm not old enough to have ever seen diphtheria, but I have seen and can recognise things like measles (two days before the rash by high fever and cough heard at the end of the street, and one day before the rash by Koplik's spots). I've seen chickenpox encephalitis kill a child. I did my best with IV antibiotics against bacterial meningitis, but sometimes lost. This isn't ancient history! Those diseases are waiting in the wings to kill your children if you don't vaccinate them. RFK seems to think there is a greater risk from the vaccines than from the diseases, but the onus is on him to prove his case, as no one else even begins to think he might be right.
I have not heard RFK say he thinks "there is a greater risk from vaccines than from diseases..." His point seems to be that the potential negative interactions of the dozens of vaccines currently in use has not been adequately addressed. I do not understand RFK to be categorically opposed to vaccines, as your comment suggests.
Please address what the ladies had to say about HepB administration to infants. What is your take on that?
I’m sure I’m not the only person over 60 who wonders how all kids nowadays are deathly allergic to so many things. No evidence- I just know that nobody worried about peanut butter in a classroom years ago.
I had no idea that kids were subjected to so many vaccinations now.
I think most people who don't have young kids don't realize what the CDC schedule looks like these days. I think many assume it's little changed from what they or their kids once had. And in their ignorance they believe the hype and assume "anti-vaxxers" (very many of whom were indeed vaxxers until their child "took one for the team") are paranoid and crazy for questioning the safety and risks and exposing the shoddy science.
People don’t know. Nothing wrong with that. What I don’t like is the press and government actively working to prevent informed consent.
Another red herring argument. The truth has been wildly twisted a la "How to Lie With Statistics" in typical cult fashion, just like the "9/11 Truthers" did with their conspiracy nonsense about 9/11. The anti-vaccine movement can be wholly likened to a cult. And it is even more destructive.
The actual informatiion, however, is fully available exposing and debunking RFK's and his accolytes' false assertions regarding vaccines. I won't detail them here. Only those truly interested in the facts will look it all up as I am and have.
A small word of advice, Learn the difference between correlation and causation. They are not the same. RFK famously and destructively has equated these concepts effectively spreading false information that would scare anyone. To the extent he has not recanted and apologized for his contribution to loss of immunity to certain diseases, he cannot be forgiven let alone given another bully pulpit from which to spread more of his disinformation and on other of his hobby-horses besides vaccines.
Kennedy’s books are extensively fact-checked and footnoted. He has a small army of fact checkers. Your comment, by contrast, makes reference to all sorts of information you have but are too important to produce. Just repeating the old saw “correlation doesn’t equal causation” while true does not prove anything. Most scientific discoveries began with observations. For instance, we have the most vaccinated kids in the world. Our kids rank at the bottom in measures of health in industrialized countries. Over 50 percent now have a chronic illness, an appalling statistic. At the very least, this bears immediate and extensive scrutiny. Sadly, you are the one in a cult or on a payroll.
Well, interesting tactic I didn’t employ but you did. Attack the commenter. I have spent a great deal of time researching and fact checking which is how I can say Kennedy is wrong where he is. Reading this thread it is clear others have done the very cherry picking you accuse me of which you do because you somehow think I owe it to you to share all my years of work? Well, I don’t owe it to anyone especially to those who are merely relying on their belief in this person instead of having researched honestly for themselves.
You go and throw out another correlation as if you think it is a cause.... Do you have any thought about what the terrible American diet might have to do with America’s inordinately high number of sick children? For info, there’s no vaccine against crappy diet.
I never questioned all the kids vaccines and thought the people who didn't want to vaccinate their children were crazy. It is now clear to me I had never done my homework. Many fo these vaccines are either unnecessary or dangerous, or both.
That’s the problem. We trusted the professionals and assumed that they wouldn’t recommend something that wasn’t really necessary. When my pediatrician tried to push the Covid booster on my healthy kids, he said “I’m having the hardest time convincing families that this is good for their kids.” I was so disappointed but not surprised. I wish I could do childhood vaccines all over again and do only the ones that were truly necessary.
Christopher, I ask the same question of you “is someone stupid enough to believe that vaccines pose no harm at all be allowed to have an opinion on this page?” It only matters when it is your kid or your family who is disabled or better yet dies from a vaccine with no recourse
The notion that all these vaccines are all equally important is hogwash, and the fact that pharmaceutical companies were given a free pass in our highly litigious society is an enormous, undulating red flag. Do you know what else is not much fun? Watching an individual struggle through life with autism, and their family struggle both emotionally and financially to support them. Vaccine legitimacy can be established through a series of steps: Remove legal protections to pharmaceuticals, so they may be directly responsible financially for any consequences. Allow parents to choose which vaccines to administer to their kids (the idea that chicken pox’s threat is equal to that of, say, polio or tetanus, is laughable). And many more I do not have the time to mention here. Pharmaceuticals and the government dismiss all this out of hand and continue to make these companies impermeable to any lawsuits - of course this will raise red flags, ans it should in any society that prides itself on accountability.
Side effects from this post include headache, nausea and vomiting. Paid for by Pfizer.
Christopher, it us the rapidly expanding cocktail of vaxxes we give our kids and the unknown potential interactions between them that is a concern, not the effect of any given vax per se.
"should someone stupid enough to see vaccines as harmful be trusted to be president?"
Yes, when the alternative is someone mentally incapacitated or a lunatic.
Exactly!!
We should support everyone’s right to control whats injected into their kids or their own bodies. Likewise those who don’t vax should live with consequences.
As to RFKs chances of presidency - less than zero.
Im no fan of RFK Jr but let’s not twist what he says. He said himself in the interview- it isn’t the vaccines that he sees as harmful, he sees improperly tested and monitored drugs as harmful. If every one of the current vaccines was thoroughly tested and well monitored and approved by an organization without massive conflicts of interest- then let’s talk about that. Many people don’t see vaccine technology as the problem, but the companies that produce them.
You’d think holding the pharmaceutical companies that make our drugs and the governmental organizations that approve them to a high standard would be something that we can all agree on.
I am currently liviing in an expat community in Mexico filled with Democrats with whom I have many disagreements BUt there is an increasing number who, even after getting shots and booster shots, are rethinking the whole vaccine debacle. A very quiet anti-vax group was started about a year ago which has grown to over 50 in attendance all by word of mouth.. To be sure, this group will hardly swing an election but the more people hear from the many Canadians who live here and become aware of the restricitions Trudeau placed on the entire country and the more people hear of people who lost jobs or couldnt fly because they refused the vaccine, the more people are joining the group.
From what I hear, most of the Americans just drank the kool-aid out of fear of Covid and faith in Fauci. and had no idea what a stranglehold Fauci et al were exercising. Now that they are away from the American mass media and have a chance to talk to others in safe surroundings and think for themselves, they are changing their once iron-clad positions
To be sure the Thursday meetings are not advertised - this is still a nacent movement. But these expats are for the most part Dems who vote in large numbers. . It will be interesting to see when the election is held, if people are no longer put off by RFK Jr's anti-vax stance.
The government and media definitely overplayed the dangers of Covid to the common person. Fear is a very powerful control tool. I always questioned why when something was so dire that those in power would only push one solution: a vaccine. There weren't any national or regional campaigns to encourage a healthy lifestyle nor were doctors encouraged to try medications off-label in the hopes of getting a stranglehold on the virus. It all defied logic.
I think the DiSantis messaging that Trump gave the country over to Fauci and Pfizer is going to resonate among a good amount of people in the 2024 race.
I am one of those people.
In fairness to the author and The Free Press, it is intended as an opinion piece rather than objective reporting. However, it is shallow and deceptive and dismissive of the appalling corruption and ineptitude of the Biden administration.
Every article on here has some piece of leftie hornswaglle or bullshit in it. You aren't reading hard enough.
It's curious that we're not hearing more (or anything, really) about the recent COVID International Summit 3 held at the European Parliament in Brussels on May 2-4, 2023. What do more than 30 senior physicians and research scientists from around the world have to say about their experiences attempting to save the lives of patients affected by COVID-19 and the vaccines? Are the vaccines safe and effective? What are the results of their research derived from real-time interaction with COVID-19 patients? What are their observations regarding government policies towards masking, lock downs and treatment protocols? And what about the children?
It shouldn't be necessary to point this out, but these individuals, with decades of experience in their respective specialties, are the opposite of conspiracy theorists and anti-vaxxers.
Part 1 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bFLPWWCAHfQ
Part 2 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJ93mW_sMPo
This, like most Free Press articles, is indistinguishable from Mother Jones’ usual claptrap.
With one noticeable exception- the value of the comments section... like many have commented, their has been a palpable change in a lot of the writing recently. for awhile I didn't have a problem with never having an article written (or podcast guest) by any conservatives outside of faux-conservatives (also TDS sufferers) like French and that hack Jonah Goldberg.. but now the writing is starting to delve into mainstream press levels of narrative framing.. articles like this one and that piece of trash article by Nocera on DeSantis vs. Disney being 2 notable recent examples.... but the discussion in these comment sections is TFP's saving grace and the only reason I haven't canceled my subscription.....
I bailing from further reading of the comments on this piece. I could write 99% of the replies myself! We ARE the Choir; I think that might be the point. These toerags are trying to deter us from the most dangerous ideas threatening Demloonies and and those that advocate such by tricking themselves out with some of our less important clothing and trying to pass as moderates of goodwill.
Even with that, RFK, Jr. and Ms. Williamson are so much more than anything we have been given as a "choice" since 1968.
Yeah and casually saying that being anti vax is a right wing thing, while ignoring the REASONS - that the FDA, CDC and NIH have been spewing nonstop lies and garbage science for 3 years to which folks are not unreasonably wondering "well, what else are they lying or off the charts wrong about"
BRAVO! Well said Tonya!!! As I began to read I thought to myself here's another one regurgitating the same ole garbage they all say! Jesus H. Christ can we get someone who actually does the research before penning another hit piece! I'm getting so sick and tired of the "vaccine skeptic" label!!! Hah! It's like one writes it and then they all follow suit - lemmings! Unbelievable!! Here's a novel idea - how about the fact that he's a staunch advocate for SAFE vaccines? What you have to love best about this label is - once people start popping their clogs by the millions, everyone WILL BE a vaccine skeptic or better yet - an ANTI-VAXER! So basically they're setting the table for him - talk about poetic justice!!
Thanks, I’ll pass on reading this.
The author also keep repeating false accusation about RFK Jr. for example that he was comparing covid lockdowns to Nazi Germany. I was at the rally and he did not made that comparison, he compared the surveillance government that was being introduced during covid to Nazi Germany's totalitarian government, and he specifically said that at least during WWII people could escape to a different country, but with this kind of global threat there is nowhere to escape. This statement was used out of context, but other journalists gave him a possibility to explain himself, the author in question simply copied and pasted the sentence from some other publication.
At a time when people are afraid to speak out in a country with a 1st Amendment, I am terrified of the fascistic tendencies of the so called Democratic Party and their alliance with big weapons, big pharma, Silicon Valley and the likes of Bill Gates. This is a country divided, led by bureaucrats who feel that Biden is the best non entity. This is bloated Washington at its worse. The moneyed class is not distracted, but they sure want us to be.
The democrats are the real fascists. But say that to one of them and they will sputter, Trump! Seems they are also uninformed and incurious.
It's funny how even those who have woken up to what their party has become will still scream "but Trump!". Both Kennedy and Williamson do just that in this article. Williamson talks about how a hatred and authoritarianism has taken root since 2020. It was there long before and is exactly what led them to believe they had to defeat the big bad Trump no matter the cost.
Remember they are generally speaking to the Democratic base in order to make some headway in the primary. It makes strategic sense because he is such passionately disliked figure in these circles. However this strategy may be misplaced if the Democratic Party pushes to avoid a primary.
Not so much uninformed as misinformed, I think.
I’d sputter DeSantis before I’d sputter Trump. Trump is just an opportunistic buffoon. When it comes to fascism, DeSantis is the real deal.
Yes, DeSantis advocates the teaching of slavery, the Jim Crow era, and the legacy of racism but opposes the inclusion of Black Queer ideology and Marxist ideology in the curriculum. That is now considered fascism.
Oh brother
Comically stupid. A case in point.
Our republic depends on an informed electorate. When apparently -- what? -- 60% of the electorate, including both left and right, pull their opinions out of a fever swamp of bad information, we're doomed. Your comment is BS.
I think the nightmare scenario for the Dems in 2024 is people not voting. I know several people who really hate Trump, who are really, really sorry they voted for Biden.
Question is, why do they "hate" Trump?
Were they among those sitting on the dirt in 2016 and shrieking like toddlers? I think so. Trump is a bombastic blowhard. But unlike the Dems, his policies actually helped working Americans.
They hate him because all the MSM, Social media, MIC and Democrats, leftist along with the corrupt government say so. 50 something Itel sign a paper , corrupt FBI, DOJ, CIA. Are we near the 12,500 year cycle yet?
Our choices are terrible.
Hopefully the primary races yield something worthwhile.
Otherwise I’m going to have to build a deeper and wider mote.
You are correct. I’m one of those people. I can’t bring myself to vote for Trump but I will NOT vote for Biden either. If those are my only choices, I’ll have to sit this one out.
I feel the same despair over the choice of candidates, but I will give my vote to the candidate who advocates the least destructive policies re illegal immigration, exercise of Constitutional rights, economic well-being of Americans, judicial protection from an overreaching federal government, American strength and competence in supporting our allies and preventing aggression by hostile regimes, the size and power of government agencies, and divisive and radical ideologies that run counter to Enlightenment values and scientific reality.
I don't think that would be Biden.
Neither do the 80 or so million Americans that will vote for him.
That would be Kennedy.
Somewhat with the exception that Kennedy will not engage us in events that align with neo con insanity.
I wouldn’t like that choice either but I am with Bagehot. We have to vote for the change we need. Rather than not voting, consider switching parties for the primaries, if your state requires it, and try to knock Trump off the table. If he stills wins, he has my vote.
It’s comically sad that in a country of 350 million people that the front runners are Trump and Biden. And the two other democrats are both 70! We all need to move on from these two fools!
You really have to wonder how Trump would have governed and how much could have been accomplished if the DOJ/FBI/CIA/Clintons hadn't mounted a completely false (see Durham report) soft coup to prevent the peaceful transfer of power to a new President. I can only imagine how anyone would have reacted knowing that the whole Uniparty (McConnell included) was participating in the farce to not only toss you from office but toss you in jail for the crime of winning an election.
You need only look at Trump’s latest attack against his former press secretary to understand his governing principle, of which he has only one, narcissistic power. How many examples, how much evidence, how many policy position flip flops will his supporters need to wake up? He is blasting one of his most loyal staffers, slamming the governance of the state his entire family resides in, and suggesting that Cuomo handled the pandemic better than DeSantis. The man is toxic! But worse than that, he’s unelectable. His core base loves him, in spite of everything, but he continues to fail everyone else. He’s done nothing to win back those independent voters he lost. Our country deserves so much better than Trump vs. Biden. Wake up America!
You’re so terribly afraid to speak out and yet here you are posting on a public forum about an article which is also in a public forum. Are the storm troopers at your door yet? Spend a day in a truly fascist country and see what the word really means.
The storm troopers (IRS) came to Matt Taibbi's door as he was testifying to Congress about the collusion between the Biden administration and Twitter. That my friend is fascism, literally. If you're not terrified yet you're not awake.
Absolutely quasi fascism not to be confused with Nazism. And yes, I find it terrifying as in the state I live (Ca) many seem to be ok with it.
Not sure what your point is but I must ask if you similarly criticize Biden and many of his supporters that use the F word to describe not only their political opponents but also American citizens who have voted for those opponents. I often make the point in my posts that until someone clearly defines a derogatory term like fascist, white supremacist, domestic terrorist,, etc etc, they should be challenged to either provide a clear definition or refrain from STEREOTYPING those who do not share their views on whatever the issue of the day may be.
Fascism is the combining of power of state and big business to their mutual benefit and power. At the expense of the citizen.
A white supremacist is any white person who has done anything the left doesn’t like.
A domestic terrorist is the same.
Please add Hispanic (mall shooter), Indian (Uhaul driving Nazi) and Black (presidential candidate Larry Elder) to the white supremacist definition.
A+for the first paragraph( doubt that the history profs still teach that ). 😉for the next two paragraphs!
Not quite. You're describing corporatism. Fascism is the forced conscription of private enterprise into the service of an authoritarian government, ostensibly for the purpose of national security.
Fair refinement. But we now define national security as security against “MAGA Republicans”
We are now the “domestic terrorists” who deserve the full force of the Patriot Act wielded against us.
Sounds exactly what happened at Twitter..,,
We got that too
Biden is too busy being President and working for you to spend much time on who is or isn’t a fascist. It’s a ridiculous word to use imo to describe structures that are put in place to run governments.
Would you prefer anarchy? French Revolution anyone? How did that work out?
"Biden is too busy being President and working for you..." Please tell me you're joking? Biden is cognitively impaired. He can barely string together a coherent sentence. He is also congenitally corrupt. That is there for all to see. Either you are willfully delusional or a paid shill.
compost’s pseudonym
Compost as a Karen.
Now that's cute.
But apparently he and McCarthy cut a deal. Someone had to be speaking English there, right?
Or is the Speaker of the House (for now) also cognitively impaired (he might be..)
The Bee has the inside story:
https://babylonbee.com/news/deal-reached-on-debt-ceiling-as-mccarthy-offers-biden-two-pints-of-chocolate-chip-ice-cream
Is this sarcasm? What time did he “call a lid” on today’s activity? Was it 9:00 AM again?
Fascism is the combining of power of state and big business to their mutual benefit and power. You know, kind of like Twitter, Google, Facebook, YouTube, etc. controlling the propaganda. Pfizer, Military/Industrial complex, etc. draining the money from the government coffers.
So those are the choices? Fascism or anarchy? Still have no clue what your point is and whether you agree name calling and stereotyping should be condemned.
Karen your bot software left out a key descriptor....”playing”. Biden is too busy “playing” President. Try to proof read next time.
I’m too old for this. I bow out and will mute the thread.
Many of us here aren’t using our full or real names. There’s a reason for that. Journalist Matt Taibbi got a “friendly visit” from the IRS a couple months ago to intimidate him.
I am and I do. I am unafraid of these clowns. A free people, a tough and resilient people, a moral people should never be afraid. Taibbi did what everyone needs to do. He was unafraid. He shouted to the rooftops what they had done Now we all know that we have a gangster government that needs to be dismantled.
I admire Taibbi. And among my 500+ Facebook contacts (all of whom are people that I would at least recognize on the street, though not all are close real life friends) I am 100% open with my views. However, I don't want leftist nutjobs going to my employer with lies or threatening my kids (which they have repeatedly shown willingness to do with others).
It is a sad state. You are correct to want to protect yourself. However, if everyone has that mindset, how will anything get better? They are basically counting on all of us being unwilling to put ourselves at risk. It is exactly how the USSR kept power...make everyone keep their heads down, and reward those who rat dissent out.
I am not saying you should speak up...everyone has to decide their own risk. But we should all be aware that our silence is why things continue to get worse.
Sghoul - Like I said, I do speak up in person and on my personal social media. Every single person that knows me knows where I stand. I have a unique and easily web / LinkedIn searchable name, though, and just don't want to splash my opinions all over the internet to strangers who could see my employer, my residence (a matter of public record), etc.
They need to have fear put into their little black shirted hearts.
The palmetto state needs to lead the charge. The clowns who surround me are tough talking cowards. "New York tough..." As they cower from a virus and let thugs terrorize women. And fail to prosecute their governor who murdered thousands in nursing homes.
I was born in one and was lucky enough to have the parents that I had. I did not say I was totally muted.
Then please have some gratitude for this country, instead of persisting in your misguided belief that you’re somehow under threat. You’re not. This is a democracy. All points of view are available to all, no matter how much you deny it.
I see articles everyday about college professors who are terrified to speak their minds about many things they believe for fear of losing their jobs. Students who are unable to take an actual opposing side in a debate because they will automatically lose. I could go on and on. Where you been?
Many of us have been canceled by so called friends who were unwilli g to engage. The universities set the stage for what has spread to much of our society and culture. Thankfully we now have an increasingly number of writers like Bari, Taibbi , Sullivan and others who are making their voices heard. But to my knowledge that trend has yet to reach most businesses and schools that seek to indoctrinate and stifle free speech and thought and debate.
Come on guys, college is not real life. A lot of idiotic things go on in academia, but once students hit the real world, start working—and paying taxes, they wise up pretty quickly. Have a little faith in common sense prevailing.
No, Karen, they don’t. They go work for various bureaucracies or big corporations or schools and try to impose their distorted worldview on others. You can read SO MANY examples here on TFP alone.
Really? Have you seen the Substacks that discusses the absolute leftist mess that has infected debate teams now? Have you sat through a mandatory DEI course (indoctrination) at your company? Sat through a Town Hall at my company right after Musk took over where the Director of Communications said, “so of course we are no longer advertising on Twitter”. A lot of idiotic things are going on, not just in academia.
Call half of Americans white supremacists. Siccing the IRS on a brave journalist? Using the FBI as an American Stasi to rig an election?
Take off those rose colored glasses. Your are either delusional or have another agenda entirely.
I'm surprised at your response. Who has not had to sit through "compliance training", yes, that is the words they use in the public school system. And it is happening every where, defense contractors to beer makers.
Karen, your admonition to chill out, academic craziness is not the real world is a view I shared until about 10 years ago. But that's wrong. Ideas do matter, and when one ideology dominates for a couple of generations, it does have a profound impact on "the real world." Witness corporate America today, "woke" as can be. Where do you think those ideas came from?
Wouldn't you say that college kids' minds are easily moulded, that they lack the foundation of common sense at their age? They can be highly responsive to the environment around them? Since that may be the case, they will take those experiences with them into their 'real life.' In the case of the debate participants, they will take their experience of censorship into the future. These students have been taught those who they should respect and let guide them are deciding certain subjects and responses are off-limits. THAT is a very real concern to me.
Those same kids are now running corporate America and so, the monster that was caged in academia is now alive and well and making big decisions in many companies.
That was the theory and it worked for a while. But the great Censorship Industrial Complex has taken over. And the democrats are pulling the levers. Even people on the left, like Glenn Greenwald and Bret Weinstein acknowledge that.
Having gratitude for this country does not preclude (in fact, it might demand) speaking out about the devastating level of government-driven censorship and threats to fundamental American rights. We are ALL under real, tangible threat.
It is ridiculous to suggest that a fear of draconian government overreach is “misguided.” To believe that, you must have been literally asleep for the past two and a half years.
All points of view are absolutely not freely available - and it is the current government that is directing and supporting the threats.
Parents peacefully speaking out at school board meetings about the revolting things happening in their child’s classroom are (BY THE GOVERNMENT) labeled terrorists - the literal FBI is going to school board meetings, taking down license plate numbers. That’s one tiny example.
If you truly believe that free thought and speech are not under real assault, you’re either naïve, wildly ill informed or so deeply supportive of the part in control that you’re willing to look the other way on a million examples of government supported, government encouraged, government demanded controls.
Karen, you are way naive about the fragile state of American freedom today, esp the freedom to speak one's mind. But have a nice day.
Please have some regard for someone expressing a different POV. Plus, does it not dawn on you that perhaps someone from a repressive nation might recognize the ideaology? Lastly, as I was reading the comments on fascism and what it means I was surprised to not see reference to the element of nationalism. But you provided it. In this country, at this time, IMO that is expressed by use of "democracy" as you do.
As I said on another post, no one’s changing anyone’s mind today. That’s fine. Good give and take I suppose. But, please stop making everything a catastrophe. That’s bothers me more than any POV attached to it.
I’m a 6th generation American whose ancestors were dairy farmers. I worry more about the disaffection with my country evinced in most posts here. It saddens me.
Karen, it's not "disaffection" for the country people are expressing, but rather concern for it's survival in anything remotely like we once had.
"I worry more about the disaffection with my country evinced in most posts here".
I worry more about the apathy with my country evinced in your posts here.
Karen, that is an interesting take on the 'criticism' of the US today. I actually read those comments as a calling out of what this country was founded on is eroding, ie. national pride, so the criticism is against those who are leading us down a different path. I very much believe in the greatness in the US which is why I am concerned for the government's division of its people through tactics such as censorship and demand for conformity, their definition of what is acceptable.
I stand by my comment.
When the FBI CNA work with the Democrats to spread lies about the president and use for-profit information outlets to censor speech, we're not in a democracy anymore. Democrats are totally lawless and respect no boundaries and no disagreement. Any resistance is "hate speech" now.
I'm required to go into company meetings where Democrat politics are treated as unassailable truth and I can be fired or demoted for openly saying I don't agree with them. Politics shouldn't be in my company at all, but they are not only there but also literally every single other institution in the country.
DEI is fascist totalitarianism.
You might ask Matt Taibbi how insane it is to fear retaliation from an out-of-control government…
Trump isn't much of a threat to the unholy axis of Big Government and Big Everything-Else. He was President for four years and didn't make a dent, folding, ultimately, to Big Pharma during the pandemic. "Draining the Swamp" is a bit harder than real estate development in Manhattan.
Well stated.
Yes. The two best bits:
1) "Referring to the journalist Matt Taibbi, who, like The Free Press, angered many Democrats with his reporting on the Twitter Files, he said: “These people want to arrest Taibbi”—an allusion to Rep. Stacey Plaskett’s April 13 letter to Taibbi suggesting his reporting could land him in prison. “Their science is shit, and they’re war-mongering, racially- and gender-obsessed lunatics at this point. It’s madness.”"
and
2) "He meant what Dwight Eisenhower, in his famous 1960 farewell address, had called the “military-industrial complex,” which not only included weapons and weapons manufacturers but, Kennedy noted, “the federal science bureaucracy.”
You do not even have to think about Covid and the response to agree with the above. Just look at all the pharma/medicine/government/education/"science" involved in Radical Gender Ideology and the indoctrination and medicalization of children and teens.
The latest:
https://dailycaller.com/2023/05/24/major-journal-retracts-study-on-socially-contagious-transgenderism-among-kids-following-activist-threats/
The study: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10508-023-02576-9
Alliance with big weapons, Nelly? In the fiasco we call the debt ceiling vote the GOP (or the MAGA wing of it) is adamant for increased funding for the military. Cut everything else instead. They’ll cut medicare before they cut jets..
Savodnik excuses Youtube's censorship, saying"how else is the platform supposed to prevent the spread of bad information during a pandemic? ". But how does Youtube know what is "bad information". What makes them qualified to be the arbiters of truth? This is precisely the point of Free Speech, which is ALWAYS guaranteed by our Constitution, with NO exceptions. What Savodnik suggests is that violating Free Speech is O.K., and that the media get to decide when it is O.K. This is a right that was never awarded to them by the Constitution and violates the law of the land. The very reason for having free speech is that truth is an intangible and evanescent phenomena that no human has a monopoly on. Orwell described the nightmare that evolves when power gets to determine what is "TrueSpeak" and what is "Falsespeak". We are in many ways living that nightmare.
What is apparent to most sub stackers is that what has been labeled "misinformation, disinformation, or conspiracy theory" is mostly correct and simply is opposed to the seemingly totalitarian agenda of the current administration. This is precisely the reason free speech must be protected, and one major reason why Kennedy has decided to run. It is one of many reasons I will support him. Williamson is a sincere person, and I would support her if she won the nomination over Kennedy and Biden, but I believe Kennedy is better qualified because he has been wrestling his whole life against corrupt government agencies in his numerous bids to protect the environment and child health. His vaccination positions have consistently been supported by science, and the majority of Americans now understand the COVID-19 vaccines' safety and efficacy was overstated by government. The weakness of his campaign on this particular issue will increasingly become a strength, as people hunger more and more for truth in an age of lying and obfuscation.
The YouTube quote was egregious. It’s a platform and shouldn’t be picking and choosing which lawful content is available.
The problem with what you're saying is the 1st Amendment is a proscription against the Government shutting down speech, not private companies controlling their product. With the Government effectively leaning on private companies it more or less comes to the same thing but I don't think it is technically illegal. The crux of the problem is the section 230 ruling (law?) That grants these companies prosecution for content, allowing them to be treated like neutral carriers of content they don't originate. When in fact they are "coloring the noise" to favor political sides. It could all be fixed without trying to misapply the 1st Amendment by stripping them of their Section 230 protections and treating these activities like the campaign contributions they in fact are.
The govt can’t do via private means what it cannot legally do itself.
I think this can be fixed through the 1st Amendment. The government’s behavior could clearly be views as coercive. Let a court give social media companies the backbone they need to tell the FBI etc to F off
First they have to want to do so! All the majors (except Twitter under new ownership) are run by leftists who are absolute big gov't sycophants as long as Democrats are in charge.
Excellent point!
Yes. 230 was intended to protect them because they may be allowing content that would normally get them in trouble and/or because they were allowing so much content there was no way they could moderate it.
Since some of these companies have decided to moderate anyway, I don't think they should have 230 protection. Basically just make it one or the other. Either allow free speech and get 230 protection or moderate and then you are liable for what is said and done on your platform.
My understanding is that removing Section 230 protections would likely add censorship rather than abate it because every platform would become paranoid its users would say/do something that would invite a lawsuit, and so they would be more restrictive on speech, not less. And it would hurt the up-and-coming little guys by making them easy to target and take out with a well placed lawsuit.
I think the best remedy would be to prosecute the Tech giants under existing law, which was already decided by SCOTUS: per T Reid's point—government cannot do via private means what it cannot legally do on its own. Problem is, we need a DOJ that isn't part of the collusion scheme.
You can't sue a phone company for not stopping phone-calls with illegal discussions. Why? Because they don't stop any calls and thus can't be held accountable. They are a conduit of unmonitored content. The Section 230 protections treat them like this. Once they start actually monitoring and suppressing content, they are no longer like a phone company, and shouldn't be protected as such. They are like a newspaper. The ones that act like phone companies shouldn't be sue-able. The ones that act like newspapers should be sue-able, but the burden of proof should be substantial - like newspapers - to make it too costly to engage in frivolous lawsuits. Relying on the DOJ to prosecute these things is probably the least effective course of action.
That is what I think too - they are publishers as soon as the moderate content.
I'll take your word for it. I hear so many conflicting arguments re: the pros and cons of ditching 230 that I can't form a clear opinion. But I sure agree with you re: relying on the DOJ. Too easy to politicize. As we all know.
He also ignores the fact that bad information came from the government sources that were treated as official truth, and some of those sources directly contradicted each other.
So the WHO was allowed to say lockdowns don't have any scientific basis, but people under lockdowns on the pretence of complete lies are not allowed to criticize lockdowns.
Savodnik supported that and continues to support that. "We lie to you to prevent other people from misleading you"
Does Kennedy believe climate scientists who don't believe carbon dioxide emissions are going to cause a catastrophe should be allowed to state their opinions? I believe he wants to suppress First Amendment rights as much as any other Democrat, he just has different policy priorities.
Dig deeper before you assert claims that because a journal retracted a paper that it is false.
Haven’t you learned from the past three years how politics , $$ and tribalism rule what gets printed in medical journals?
I haven't put enough thought (any, actually) into RFK Jr's anti-vaccine stance to have an informed opinion about it, but it sure seems like "science" has become so thoroughly politicized and corrupted over the past few decades that it's almost impossible to know what to believe or whom to trust anymore.
I've been following the vaccine issue for thirty years. What I saw with the Covid shots is the same playbook they've been running for decades, only this time they were in the spotlight. Just like with the Covid shots, all that reliable "science" that "proves" the safety of childhood vaccines has been bought and paid for—sometimes directly, sometimes indirectly—by the companies who stand to profit, and the regulatory agencies do nothing to interfere because they were quietly captured long ago by those corporations. You can see evidence of it in the revolving door between agency and corporate execs. Most people—including Bari et al—don't actually look into the details of the "settled" science on vaccine safety because it's...well..."settled." But what I typically observe when someone does look deeper than the Narrative™ is a change of perspective and an awakening to the reality that "safe and effective" is a marketing slogan, not an artifact of impartial scientific inquiry. We saw that with the Covid shots, too: they got branded "safe and effective" with literally no reliable, longterm data to support that claim. RFK Jr. has legitimate science to back up his claims, rather than the propaganda—massaged data—bought and paid for by corporations pursuing profits.
Tablet Magazine published an in-depth interview with RFK Jr. that dispelled a lot of misconceptions about him without ignoring some of his more outlandish claims. The author did a good job covering the vaccine controversy.
https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/arts-letters/articles/robert-f-kennedy-jr-interview-david-samuels
Tablet is generally fantastic and well worth your time!
Thank you so much for sharing this-
The three institutions: big Pharma, academia, and government (NIH, FDA, NIAID, etc…) control the vaccines and drugs in this country. Nothing gets done unless they say so and it supports their worldview.
“It’s basically building a coalition of the left and the right—a populist coalition,” Kennedy said. There were dangers in that, he conceded. “Populism is easy to hijack. Demagogues can easily hijack it by exploiting humanity’s negative, universal impulses: greed, anger, hatred, bigotry, self-pity, xenophobia, misogyny.” That was the danger of Trump.
No. The danger of Trump was, and still is, that he is a warrior against the deep state. Like an FBI that thumbs its nose at Congress. Like an IRS that intimidates Taibbi. Like district attorneys who let criminals go. Like Homeland Security that lets in millions of illegals and the menace some can become. We have reason to be angry. I want a president who gets that. Not one who foments it.
Like attorney generals who target political opponents….
Like a DOJ that allows threatening Supreme Court Justices in their homes. Like a Democrat Party that encourages rioting during a pandemic.
Mostly peaceful riots, declared "freedom zones," and no masks is scientifically proven to fill liberals' big bags of smug.
Preach, sister!
Yeah, we need to call out the Tump is a racist/xenophobe/etc lie every time. Trump is hated because he stands in opposition to the Deep State...but that cannot be acknowledged, so racism, blah blah.
He is only a 'warrior' against the deep state because they are against him. Trump is not the kind of person who fights for others. He fights for himself and is willing to bring his supporters along with him.
He is not a leader. He is a bully who happens to be doing what we want...for now.
Plus the quoted comment is nothing more than my-populism-is-better-than-your-populism.
I think Ross Perot’s 3rd party run had more to do with Clinton beating Bush than Pat Buchanan. This split the vote. Perot was right about the loss of manufacturing jobs that happened with NAFTA brought in under the Clinton and subsequent administrations.
That sucking sound was dead on accurate
Yes it was.
Yeah. It’s a strong tell on just how shallow the intellectual rigor is in this piece when Bush 41 losing is attributed to Pat Buchanan winning zero states in the primary and not on Ross Perot getting 20% of the vote in the general.
The whole Perot thing was strange. He was leading over all and then dropped out. Then he came back in but nobody trusted him. I always wondered why he really dropped out. He would have been the first third part president ever. (That might be why)
Spot on re: Perot, he's the reason Bush Sr lost. Buchanan was a minor factor in that outcome. More evidence that our author is "misinformed"
This is the truth.
I was baffled by the assertion that it was Pat Buchanan's fault. No one who wanted Pat Buchanan (and I knew almost no one who did) would have voted for Clinton instead. And a lot of people who had no use for Pat Buchanan voted for Ross Perot.
RFK is the man for the times...many Democrats are too stupid to realize this guy is a gift
I can’t see how anyone could prefer Biden over Kennedy.
Omg, I’m sorry but a lot of you are simply divorced from reality. You might benefit from reading some actual history, not the weird narratives you appear to thrive on.
Karen looks at a stumbling, bumbling, doddering and corrupt fool and deludes herself that this is normal behavior for the leader of the free world.
Beyond delusional.
People who are victims of mass formation, do not perceive it. Wake up Karen.
LOL-they certainly are
Well, just as it depends on who is counting the votes it also depends on who is writing the “actual” history.
Karen, look in the mirror! Your seemingly love and trust in Biden absolutely blinds you. That you cannot recognize his corruption and basic stupidity on almost all issues says much more about you than those you believe are divorced from reality.
Biden was not a good Senator. What has changed?
This is projection, Karen.
You are really smug.
Examples ?
Is your Substack active?
The Democrat party has been captured by the left.
Even if some democrats can see this, they won’t speak up or be visible in any way, for fear of getting cancelled.
But the thing is, they are only superficially “left” and even those positions, they have distorted beyond reason.
Some ridiculous bias in here: "If you’re YouTube, these are the basic rules of the road—how else is the platform supposed to prevent the spread of bad information during a pandemic? But if you’re RFK Jr., this is evidence of our broken system." Do you just accept that giant unaccountable organizations should get to decide what is and is not "bad information?" Are you ignoring the evidence in the Twitter Files that YouTube and other social media organizations are censorship agents of the State, removing content the FBI, DHS and other members of the "censorship industrial complex" decide they don't like? Your own boss, Bari Weiss, reported some of that!
You mentioned Trump's history of sexual assault but skipped over the multiple credible allegations against Biden. Remember how the Democrats united to dismiss #MeToo when Tara Reade's inconvenient accusation broke? Reade's mother had actually discussed it at the time in a call-in with Larry King, as I recall - pretty solid piece of circumstantial evidence. [Note added: I'm aware that Reade just defected to Russia but I don't think that invalidates her earlier accusation.]
As others have mentioned, Dr. Vinay Prassad is quite skeptical about much of the COVID vaccine "science" that's been forced on the global population. I think you cherry-picked a quote from him.
Also, why no serious discussion of RFK, Jr.'s policy positions?
Isn’t it funny how censorship is now presented as the natural response to “bad information?” It’s presented as the only possible response to something someone doesn’t like is a hallmark sign of totalitarianism. Hopefully the censorship will be the nail in the coffin for YT and MSM. Americans are on to the game now.
When discussing “Kennedy” it’s advisable not to bring up sexual transgressions of an opponent.
Yes, the author is a fan of how YouTube censors content.
Weak and apologetic. This piece read like a "brave" article from the Times, showing that they could step a toe outside the insitutional line. Come on Free Press. A poor use of my time.
I too found the article lacking. It meandered here and there with no clear direction and inconsistent evidence. I don’t understand quite what the author meant to tell us.
I personally disagree, I thought it was illuminating. That even if RJKJr and MW have low chances of winning, there is a shift among Dem voters and even elites privately recognize it. It means that 2024 is up for grabs even with an incumbent running.
I don't disagree entirely with your few comments above. Notwithstanding, I don't find it illuminating to read that the Dems are are up for grabs. It's like finding it illuminating to read an article on wind and solar which has as its central argument that these power alternatives are subject to a lack of wind, cloudy days, poor integration with the grid, and are subject to fantasy ideas that battery storage might solve for any of these problems. Ie. "no shit sherlock." Tell me something I don't know. Dem problems are deeper than any of the insights you mention gaining from the article, and institutional Dem players, who should all be run out of town on a rail, are causing those problems for themselves to the detriment of all voters. Real journalism would dig in to that, name names, and seek to hold those responsible for Dem dysfunction accountable.
I would love to see a proper deep dive on the anti-vax movement. My bet is that it has exploded in the post-Covid era and I think there are actually valid arguments to both sides. Frankly, as with so many issues, the stubbornness to not acknowledge the nuances is just leading to more strife.
There is a huge difference -- conveniently ignored in the essay -- between anti vax and anti Covid "vax."
True but the dangers of the covid vax leads to legit question: what is the true safety profile of the others? Why is this a forbidden question?
abso-friggin-lutely
Never suggested that is was!
☝️THIS☝️
Amen to that.
Well said
Absolutely, these candidates are compelling. Any human who announces and who speaks a sentence that suggests they’re even mildly skeptical of what all Americans can readily point out as utter nonsense overtaking the country is compelled to listen further. It doesn’t matter if they are outliers on one issue or another. If they demonstrate even just a modicum of common sense, they will get votes. Americans crave common sense now, and it seems rather hard to come by.
You are dead on. Common sense is highly underrated.
Americans crave a leader. I cannot believe I'm saying this, but given the choice between RFK Jr., Biden, and Trump, it would be no contest.
I got to see firsthand how the power of MSM works the other day, and how it controls the people who feed into the narrative.
Someone brought up RFK and apparently it was the first time they'd heard of him. They weren't quite sure what to think, they were fishing for talking points. And someone else said, "Oh I read about him, he's just like Trump."
And the other person said, ohhhhh... And that was that.
So simple and beautiful. Minds totally made up. Two people who take MSM seriously and they instinctively understood that they're supposed to think RFK is a bad man.
You were eavesdropping on lemmings
I was eavesdropping on people tuned into the narrative, is what I was doing. Wherever that narrative river meanders to, they will float along it without complaint.
Isn't it amazing how brain washed people are
Yup 👉🏼 lemmings
It is astonishing how some humans can be so stupid.
This is tribal.
100%. There was never a single question about what are his policies, what is he saying, who is he? No...
Just a vague allusion to him being like Trump and now he's in the disfavored pile and that's all
The Democrat party has lost its way. While Kennedy has a few quirks he does embrace the true liberal doctrine of the former Democrat Party. In fact, JFK’s policies would be considered conservative today. What happened to them? When did they abandon the mantra of free speech and challenge to big government? “It is not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country” This has been reversed in the current Democrat Party.
The Dems embraced big government under FDR and even further under LBJ. They embraced corporations under Clinton and censorship under Obama. At least, that's the nutshell version as I know it. ;-)
Yes, RFK, Jr. will be labeled “right wing” very soon.
The Democrat party has been captured by the left.
That’s what happened.
And liberals are too scared to speak up.
Hiding under their bed.
I think either party will go the way of authoritarianism if they get enough power. Because they want to get their way. And the only way to always get what you want is through force. Whenever the Dems have gained power in my lifetime they abused it...and generally so did the Reps. Right now the Reps are in the right. But for many of them it is only because they have no other option.
$$$$$
Can we please get piece written by someone who has actually read RFK’s books and understands his criticisms of our institutions?? everyone in media is doing the same condescending, dismissive cheap shot type pieces on RFK. The playbook is very lame. They’ll write a one sentence strawman summary of nuanced position, then cherry pick an “expert” quote that contradicts the fake position to make RFK look nuts. This guy actually brought up the Krystal Ball interview where she didn’t even let RFK talk , as if she is some kind of expert. Very disappointing.
Agreed. Bari are you listening?
Listening? I doubt it!
You can watch RFK, Jr. without edits on the All In podcast, he was interviewed last week. It was almost 2 hours and a great opportunity to let RFK, Jr. speak without interruption.
Krystal Ball: This vax stance of yours is a red line for me, let’s discuss.
RFKjr: let’s talk about where you think I am wrong
Krystal Ball: you’re wrong and we don’t have time to debate this!
RFK has been on Megyn Kelly's podcast a couple of times as well. Her first interview of him was split into 2 episodes. I haven't had a chance to listen yet but will shortly.
As an outsider (Canadian) what I see is that Kennedy and DeSantis talk about real issues that matter to regular Americans. By contrast, the mainstream media, the Democratic and Republican leaderships, and the rest of the permanent state try to distract and divide the voters by fighting over nuances while agreeing on everything substantial. I doubt the uniparty will allow a Kennedy or even a DeSantis to win the election.
Yes