The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewMichelle Malkin Archive
Family Sovereignty Under Siege
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Parents, beware. The dominion you have over your own children is under attack like never before. Teenage puppets for Big Pharma are being deployed on the ground and across social media airwaves to convince their peers to inject themselves with experimental drugs to allegedly prevent a disease for which the youth mortality rate is practically zero.

“Do it for the herd” is the new rallying cry of designated “VaxTeen ambassadors” spearheading COVID-19 jab pop-up clinics at schools and churches nationwide targeting 25 million American children ages 12 to 17. VaxTeen is propped up by Google, the biotech lobby, and the Public Goods Project (a mysterious public health nonprofit backed by Silicon Valley, ad agencies and drug companies). As of last week, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation, more than 2 million 12-15-year-olds and 2.5 million 16-17-year-olds had received at least one COVID-19 vaccine dose. That’s about 12% and 31% of adolescents in each respective age group.

Increasing those rates has nothing to do with a cure and everything to do with control and conformity. That is why “skeptical” and “hesitant” moms and dads — in other words, independent-thinking and responsible moms and dads — are viewed as obstacles and enemies to be overcome for the “public good.” The Kaiser Family Foundation crew has raised an alarm over the nearly 25% of all parents in a recent survey who said they would not allow their teens to be vaccinated. “Parental consent,” two NBC News reporters bemoaned, is a problem that children must “contend with across the country” — as if parental authority over children is a problem to combat, not a God-given right to protect.

Last December, I warned in this column about the erosion of informed consent at the dawn of the most coercive era of medical tyranny in human history. The once-sacred principles enshrined in the Nuremberg Code and the Helsinki Declaration — autonomy and self-determination over medical decisions, voluntary exercise of the free power of choice, full disclosure of all relevant information and competency of the individual — have vanished. Since the Washington, D.C., City Council’s adoption of legalizing immunization of children younger than 12 without parental consent, several more jurisdictions have put family sovereignty in their crosshairs.

In Pennsylvania, a proposed state law would allow teens 14 and up to evade parental control and get the COVID-19 shot. The Philadelphia Board of Health declared in a recent order that “individuals 11 years of age and older” can now “consent to (their) own immunization with a COVID-19 vaccine under an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA), without the approval or consent of a parent or guardian.” In Arizona, a court order can be obtained to allow for vaccination if a parent does not consent. In San Francisco, minors 12 and up have been granted the right to “self-consent” to COVID-19 shots without parental permission.

ORDER IT NOW

In addition, North Carolina teenagers can receive vaccinations (not just COVID-19) without parental consent; teenagers 14 and up in Tennessee and Alabama don’t need consent; in Oregon, those 15 and older can evade parental consent laws; in Iowa, health care providers have discretion over children and teens’ demands for vaccines.

The corporate-backed VaxTeen ambassadors are using TikTok, Instagram, Facebook and Twitter to lure students to their pop-up clinics, where free pretzels, ice cream and live music are in abundance. In Santa Clara County, California, the vax bribery is over-the-top: gift cards to Starbucks or Chipotle and backstage football stadium passes in partnership with the San Francisco 49ers.

The COVID-19 tyrants are using kiddie human shields to crank up the propaganda to drive ever-greater wedges between children and their parents. Unvaxxed kids are being told by know-it-all adolescent shills that “hesitant” parents are responsible for a “dangerous tide of misinformation.” But they won’t be told about Big Pharma’s immunity from vaccine lawsuits or that the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program has paid out more than $4.3 billion to the vaccine-injured since 1988 or that the pioneer behind mRNA technology was censored by Twitter last week for daring to discuss the troubling phenomenon of “vaccine shedding.”

The idea that easily influenced teenagers, let alone 11-year-old kids, could provide medical consent voluntarily and in a competent manner in this insane and evil climate is a human rights abomination. They are being bombarded by pro-COVID-19 vaccination Hollywood agitprop, conditioned by ubiquitous pro-COVID-19 vaccination content on social media, held hostage in public schools, deceived by Big Pharma’s omissions and suppression of data, and viciously turned against their parents by a coordinated peer pressure campaign to stigmatize all dissent, no matter how mild.

Make no mistake: This isn’t war on a pandemic. This is war on the nuclear family.

Michelle Malkin’s email address is MichelleMalkinInvestigates@protonmail.com. To find out more about Michelle Malkin and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate website at www.creators.com.

 
Hide 41 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. It is not clear why parents have any say in the matter of their children’s vaccination at all. Parents do not own their children. Children are not property. Parents generally have their own interests at heart when dealing with children, not the best interests of the children. Parents are not experts in medical care or most issues dealing with children. 100 years ago when “children” represented a parent’s retirement plan perhaps the case could be made that parents had an interest in the children. Those days are long gone. Plainly Ms Malkin’s position is archaic at best or more likely dangerous.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    @Harry Huntington

    • Commie: Achmed E. Newman

    , @Charlie M.
    @Harry Huntington

    Moronic commentary, Huntington.

    By definition minors are not competent to make decisions that may have serious consequences. That is why they are not allowed to sign legal contracts, you idiot. Until they reach majority their parents are legally responsible for their welfare, as well they should be, and that is why they should have the ability and right to make important medical decisions for their children. It is absolutely frightening that jaw-droppingly STUPID people like you are allowed to vote. God deliver us!!!

    Replies: @Harry Huntington

    , @Resartus
    @Harry Huntington


    Parents do not own their children. Children are not property.

     

    Pretty much are, as long as they provide financial backing to them...
    Food, clothing, lodging etc....

    Replies: @Harry Huntington

    , @animalogic
    @Harry Huntington

    Given the questionable nature of the mRna Vac' there's room to support parental rights. However, those rights must have limits -- the thought of some parent essentially condemning some child to death or disability via a daft religous belief (ie no blood transfusions with a particular sect) is frankly, sickening

    Replies: @PJ London

    , @ruralguy
    @Harry Huntington

    Good point, Harry. Legally, the children are "minors" without the full legal rights of adults, until they reach the statutory age, .. usually 18. This makes sense, because they lack the legal "competence" to make decisions. So, the parents are expected to act on their behalf. But, when a child turns 18, or when they are full grown adults, or even when they are parents, they don't always have the competence to make decisions. With a mean IQ of 100, most adults lack the cognitive thought to make good decisions, so perhaps the state should act on their behalf, as well as on the behalf of their their children.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman

    , @KeltCindy
    @Harry Huntington

    I guess I'm kind of weird.

    In my case, the "ulterior" motive for holding off on subjecting my kids to this mRNA crap involves the fact that I LOVE them...

    Sucks that the Sputnik-V vaccine will never be available in the States, because we'd be first in line for it if it was.

    Anywho—just sayin'...

    Love, Cindy

    , @bike-anarkist
    @Harry Huntington

    The "New Responsibility", brought to you by some "woke" that thinks that because children are not property, the parents don't have responsibility.

    I'm glad that my parents gave a shit about me wanting to join the Armed Forces, as they informed me that I most likely be taking orders from an American, and not in Canada.

    As well, they educated me on better eating habits, enjoying alcoholic bevs (mostly beer), go smoke cannabis outside and explore my surroundings.

    They encouraged riding the bike because there is more freedom than driving a car, and at that time, Greyhound existed and was very affordable.

    When I was a child, I would get a fever after every vax. At about 6 or 7y.o., I became very sick from a vaccination; the one that gives the scar on the arm. I was sick for almost two months, with a fever around 38-39 C.
    My mother and father made sure that was the last childhood vax I would get.

    Thanks Mum and Dad.
    I am very glad they didn't cop out.

  2. Well stated, Michelle. I thought that FaUci and his lies being exposed would stop the madness avalanche but, I guess the world has passed by some of us who bother to spend time digging and researching and educating ourselves to actually think for ourselves…let the sheep continue to be led to slaughter.

  3. If you vote, this is your fault. You have enabled the politicians to create the environment where your parental rights are now considered null and void to the superior right of the political class.

    You should be ashamed of yourselves.

    • Replies: @KeltCindy
    @RoatanBill

    ...Because there were plenty of voting options representing a broad range of interests for the electorate to choose from...

    Dad-burned, awnry voters are always screwing things up!

    Dag-nabbit, I say!!

    Love, Cindy

  4. My children are vaccinated. People assume wrongly, that this is just another virus, like a cold or flu virus, from which you can easily recover. There is a good chance this virus was engineered in a biological warfare lab, to do damage. It does. It targets the alveolar type II cells in the lung, which are stem cells that have ACE2 protein receptors on the surface. The virus crowns attaches to those receptors to gain entry into the cell. So, if it kills the cells, they may not regenerate, or take several years to regenerate, because they are stem cells. This is permanent damage, even in people with mild symptoms and regardless of age. A German study found the same long-term damage, or inflammation in 50% of the infected peoples’ heart, regardless of severity of the symptoms and age. Other studies are showing even higher levels of permanent damage or inflammation, in blood vessels and other organs.

    Seriously, .. this is a weapon. It was either designed either by people to inflict serious damage on others, or it was evolved naturally, to pack a one-two punch to its victims: the first round damages them with pre-existing conditions, .. so the next round can more easily spread. Vaccinate yourself and your children.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    @ruralguy

    Let me get this straight, Rural Guy: The virus is a weapon made by evil people to destroy us. The vaccines for it, hastily rushed to market by these same governments, are for are own good and just perfectly safe though. Uh, OK, knock yourself out. (Hopefully, not literally.)

    PS: There is absolutely no reason to vaccinate children. They haven't been as affected by this Kung Flu anymore than they've been affected by thunder and lightning. "If the thunder don't get you, then the COVID will." [H/T - the Dead]

    Replies: @ruralguy

    , @Unpersoned by fb
    @ruralguy


    My children are vaccinated.
     
    Then your children are likely infertile. Well done you!
    Listening to all that covid propaganda obviously scared you enough to no bother learning about any dangers associated with this EXPERIMENAL medication, and led you to offering your own children as human guinea pigs.

    Will they thank you for this in years to come? The FACT is, you don't know one way or the other.

    Seriously, .. this is a weapon. It
     
    Well done Ron for relentlessly feeding this particular hysteria. Good job dude.

    Replies: @ruralguy

    , @KittyCats
    @ruralguy

    Children have about a zero risk of dying from this bioengineered virus that was designed as a bioweapon? Why subject them to an experimental bioengineered injection? We need to allow their beautifully designed immune systems to do their jobs.

    Replies: @ruralguy

    , @Hans
    @ruralguy

    It's very likely an engineered virus, but the "vaccine" makers are in on the agenda. BIG mistake to take the kill shot instead of safe treatments such as ivermection and hcq.

  5. @Harry Huntington
    It is not clear why parents have any say in the matter of their children's vaccination at all. Parents do not own their children. Children are not property. Parents generally have their own interests at heart when dealing with children, not the best interests of the children. Parents are not experts in medical care or most issues dealing with children. 100 years ago when "children" represented a parent's retirement plan perhaps the case could be made that parents had an interest in the children. Those days are long gone. Plainly Ms Malkin's position is archaic at best or more likely dangerous.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman, @Charlie M., @Resartus, @animalogic, @ruralguy, @KeltCindy, @bike-anarkist

    • Commie: Achmed E. Newman

  6. @ruralguy
    My children are vaccinated. People assume wrongly, that this is just another virus, like a cold or flu virus, from which you can easily recover. There is a good chance this virus was engineered in a biological warfare lab, to do damage. It does. It targets the alveolar type II cells in the lung, which are stem cells that have ACE2 protein receptors on the surface. The virus crowns attaches to those receptors to gain entry into the cell. So, if it kills the cells, they may not regenerate, or take several years to regenerate, because they are stem cells. This is permanent damage, even in people with mild symptoms and regardless of age. A German study found the same long-term damage, or inflammation in 50% of the infected peoples' heart, regardless of severity of the symptoms and age. Other studies are showing even higher levels of permanent damage or inflammation, in blood vessels and other organs.

    Seriously, .. this is a weapon. It was either designed either by people to inflict serious damage on others, or it was evolved naturally, to pack a one-two punch to its victims: the first round damages them with pre-existing conditions, .. so the next round can more easily spread. Vaccinate yourself and your children.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman, @Unpersoned by fb, @KittyCats, @Hans

    Let me get this straight, Rural Guy: The virus is a weapon made by evil people to destroy us. The vaccines for it, hastily rushed to market by these same governments, are for are own good and just perfectly safe though. Uh, OK, knock yourself out. (Hopefully, not literally.)

    PS: There is absolutely no reason to vaccinate children. They haven’t been as affected by this Kung Flu anymore than they’ve been affected by thunder and lightning. “If the thunder don’t get you, then the COVID will.” [H/T – the Dead]

    • Replies: @ruralguy
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Achmed Newman: You're arguments both make no sense and you misattribute -- a logical error.

    Rushed to market? These vaccines went through a standard FDA approval process. It's a rigorous process with much peer review and three phases of clinical trials. The Government didn't develop the vaccines nor rush the process. The peer reviews were by several independent panels of the nation’s top scientists, biostatisticians and ethicists who had no vested interest in them. FDA career professionals then reviewed the recommendations from these independent panels as well as the data.

    Over 300 million doses have been administered without problems.

    You say "there is absolutely no reason to vaccinate children." Where is your analysis to support this claim?

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman

  7. @Harry Huntington
    It is not clear why parents have any say in the matter of their children's vaccination at all. Parents do not own their children. Children are not property. Parents generally have their own interests at heart when dealing with children, not the best interests of the children. Parents are not experts in medical care or most issues dealing with children. 100 years ago when "children" represented a parent's retirement plan perhaps the case could be made that parents had an interest in the children. Those days are long gone. Plainly Ms Malkin's position is archaic at best or more likely dangerous.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman, @Charlie M., @Resartus, @animalogic, @ruralguy, @KeltCindy, @bike-anarkist

    Moronic commentary, Huntington.

    By definition minors are not competent to make decisions that may have serious consequences. That is why they are not allowed to sign legal contracts, you idiot. Until they reach majority their parents are legally responsible for their welfare, as well they should be, and that is why they should have the ability and right to make important medical decisions for their children. It is absolutely frightening that jaw-droppingly STUPID people like you are allowed to vote. God deliver us!!!

    • Replies: @Harry Huntington
    @Charlie M.

    That is why government should make those decisions or competent medical people should make those decisions on health issues. Parents' role should be custodians at best.

  8. @ruralguy
    My children are vaccinated. People assume wrongly, that this is just another virus, like a cold or flu virus, from which you can easily recover. There is a good chance this virus was engineered in a biological warfare lab, to do damage. It does. It targets the alveolar type II cells in the lung, which are stem cells that have ACE2 protein receptors on the surface. The virus crowns attaches to those receptors to gain entry into the cell. So, if it kills the cells, they may not regenerate, or take several years to regenerate, because they are stem cells. This is permanent damage, even in people with mild symptoms and regardless of age. A German study found the same long-term damage, or inflammation in 50% of the infected peoples' heart, regardless of severity of the symptoms and age. Other studies are showing even higher levels of permanent damage or inflammation, in blood vessels and other organs.

    Seriously, .. this is a weapon. It was either designed either by people to inflict serious damage on others, or it was evolved naturally, to pack a one-two punch to its victims: the first round damages them with pre-existing conditions, .. so the next round can more easily spread. Vaccinate yourself and your children.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman, @Unpersoned by fb, @KittyCats, @Hans

    My children are vaccinated.

    Then your children are likely infertile. Well done you!
    Listening to all that covid propaganda obviously scared you enough to no bother learning about any dangers associated with this EXPERIMENAL medication, and led you to offering your own children as human guinea pigs.

    Will they thank you for this in years to come? The FACT is, you don’t know one way or the other.

    Seriously, .. this is a weapon. It

    Well done Ron for relentlessly feeding this particular hysteria. Good job dude.

    • Agree: bike-anarkist
    • Replies: @ruralguy
    @Unpersoned by fb

    You said "Then your children are likely infertile." Where is your analysis to support this? You also said "Listening to all that covid propaganda obviously scared you." That is both a logical error and a poor assumption. I read several peer-reviewed journal papers on the subject. I'm certainly not an expert and it takes me time to read through them, but I strive to take a rigorous approach to understanding things.

  9. @Harry Huntington
    It is not clear why parents have any say in the matter of their children's vaccination at all. Parents do not own their children. Children are not property. Parents generally have their own interests at heart when dealing with children, not the best interests of the children. Parents are not experts in medical care or most issues dealing with children. 100 years ago when "children" represented a parent's retirement plan perhaps the case could be made that parents had an interest in the children. Those days are long gone. Plainly Ms Malkin's position is archaic at best or more likely dangerous.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman, @Charlie M., @Resartus, @animalogic, @ruralguy, @KeltCindy, @bike-anarkist

    Parents do not own their children. Children are not property.

    Pretty much are, as long as they provide financial backing to them…
    Food, clothing, lodging etc….

    • Replies: @Harry Huntington
    @Resartus

    The 13th Amendment says that people cannot own other people. It does not carve out an exception for youth. Time for government to step up and reduce parents to a caretaker role at best and for government to demand that parents do rational things like vaccinate children.

    Replies: @Resartus, @Adam Smith

  10. @ruralguy
    My children are vaccinated. People assume wrongly, that this is just another virus, like a cold or flu virus, from which you can easily recover. There is a good chance this virus was engineered in a biological warfare lab, to do damage. It does. It targets the alveolar type II cells in the lung, which are stem cells that have ACE2 protein receptors on the surface. The virus crowns attaches to those receptors to gain entry into the cell. So, if it kills the cells, they may not regenerate, or take several years to regenerate, because they are stem cells. This is permanent damage, even in people with mild symptoms and regardless of age. A German study found the same long-term damage, or inflammation in 50% of the infected peoples' heart, regardless of severity of the symptoms and age. Other studies are showing even higher levels of permanent damage or inflammation, in blood vessels and other organs.

    Seriously, .. this is a weapon. It was either designed either by people to inflict serious damage on others, or it was evolved naturally, to pack a one-two punch to its victims: the first round damages them with pre-existing conditions, .. so the next round can more easily spread. Vaccinate yourself and your children.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman, @Unpersoned by fb, @KittyCats, @Hans

    Children have about a zero risk of dying from this bioengineered virus that was designed as a bioweapon? Why subject them to an experimental bioengineered injection? We need to allow their beautifully designed immune systems to do their jobs.

    • Replies: @ruralguy
    @KittyCats

    Yes, they have close to no risk of dying from this virus, but the issue is what damage this virus does to their stem cells and other damage that isn't easily repaired.

    Children receive many vaccinations throughout their childhood, because those viruses do much harm to them. In England several hundred years ago, the expected lifespan of an person was only about 25-27 years of age, because so many children died of diseases. In 1850, in this country, males had a life expectancy of 40 and female had a life expectancy of 42. Stroll through any graveyard in the 19th century and you'll be shocked at the number of people that died from diseases. In those ages, immune systems failed. Viruses and bacteria evolve to overcome defenses.

  11. A trend in tv shows and movies over the last several decades is that teenagers are depicted as smart, and parents as bumbling fools. Teens believe this, and it makes them especially susceptible to any sales pitch coming from the teenage puppets. Also, spending hours on their phones every day strongly reinforces this phenomenon. When I was young a long time ago, it was different. Sure, teens regularly disagreed with parents and fought with them; but we didn’t think we were smarter and better equipped to make complicated judgment calls.

  12. @Harry Huntington
    It is not clear why parents have any say in the matter of their children's vaccination at all. Parents do not own their children. Children are not property. Parents generally have their own interests at heart when dealing with children, not the best interests of the children. Parents are not experts in medical care or most issues dealing with children. 100 years ago when "children" represented a parent's retirement plan perhaps the case could be made that parents had an interest in the children. Those days are long gone. Plainly Ms Malkin's position is archaic at best or more likely dangerous.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman, @Charlie M., @Resartus, @animalogic, @ruralguy, @KeltCindy, @bike-anarkist

    Given the questionable nature of the mRna Vac’ there’s room to support parental rights. However, those rights must have limits — the thought of some parent essentially condemning some child to death or disability via a daft religous belief (ie no blood transfusions with a particular sect) is frankly, sickening

    • Replies: @PJ London
    @animalogic

    Believing in the 'cult' of science is stupid and sickening.
    Every single "Scientific fact" and every "Medical fact" has been proven wrong!
    Show a science fact or medical fact from 200 years ago which is still believable.
    The purpose of both today is to make money and if anybody dares to go against the mainstream then they are demonised and excluded.
    I could give thousands of examples but here are three.
    Vaccination causes Autism. Beyond any discussion or doubt but you will lose your livelihood and be destroyed if you say so.
    Cancer was cured 100% by 2 different methods in 1930s. Gaston Naessons and Royal Rife cured 100s of terminally ill patients who had been given days to live by the cancer experts and cured ALL of them.
    Not a single person has died of AIDS.
    However each of these scams has made billions and trillions of dollars for the scam artists.
    So take your science voodoo and shove it where it may do you some good as an enema.
    Ivermectin will cure completely the current scam and it costs only a few cents.
    Try getting it.

    Replies: @animalogic

  13. @Charlie M.
    @Harry Huntington

    Moronic commentary, Huntington.

    By definition minors are not competent to make decisions that may have serious consequences. That is why they are not allowed to sign legal contracts, you idiot. Until they reach majority their parents are legally responsible for their welfare, as well they should be, and that is why they should have the ability and right to make important medical decisions for their children. It is absolutely frightening that jaw-droppingly STUPID people like you are allowed to vote. God deliver us!!!

    Replies: @Harry Huntington

    That is why government should make those decisions or competent medical people should make those decisions on health issues. Parents’ role should be custodians at best.

  14. @Resartus
    @Harry Huntington


    Parents do not own their children. Children are not property.

     

    Pretty much are, as long as they provide financial backing to them...
    Food, clothing, lodging etc....

    Replies: @Harry Huntington

    The 13th Amendment says that people cannot own other people. It does not carve out an exception for youth. Time for government to step up and reduce parents to a caretaker role at best and for government to demand that parents do rational things like vaccinate children.

    • Replies: @Resartus
    @Harry Huntington


    Time for government to step up and reduce parents to a caretaker role at best and for government to demand that parents do rational things like vaccinate children.
     
    So, you are claiming, that Obamacare was wrong in forcing parents to pay for the kids Health Insurance till they are 26......

    Replies: @Harry Huntington

    , @Adam Smith
    @Harry Huntington

    The 13th says no such thing. The 13th, 14th and 16th grant “government” a monopoly on the use of involuntary servitude.


    “Time for government to step up and reduce parents to a caretaker role at best and for government to demand...”
     
    Do you believe that the people masquerading as “government” own their subjects?
    You sound like a dangerous, deranged, authoritarian statist.

    Replies: @Harry Huntington

  15. @animalogic
    @Harry Huntington

    Given the questionable nature of the mRna Vac' there's room to support parental rights. However, those rights must have limits -- the thought of some parent essentially condemning some child to death or disability via a daft religous belief (ie no blood transfusions with a particular sect) is frankly, sickening

    Replies: @PJ London

    Believing in the ‘cult’ of science is stupid and sickening.
    Every single “Scientific fact” and every “Medical fact” has been proven wrong!
    Show a science fact or medical fact from 200 years ago which is still believable.
    The purpose of both today is to make money and if anybody dares to go against the mainstream then they are demonised and excluded.
    I could give thousands of examples but here are three.
    Vaccination causes Autism. Beyond any discussion or doubt but you will lose your livelihood and be destroyed if you say so.
    Cancer was cured 100% by 2 different methods in 1930s. Gaston Naessons and Royal Rife cured 100s of terminally ill patients who had been given days to live by the cancer experts and cured ALL of them.
    Not a single person has died of AIDS.
    However each of these scams has made billions and trillions of dollars for the scam artists.
    So take your science voodoo and shove it where it may do you some good as an enema.
    Ivermectin will cure completely the current scam and it costs only a few cents.
    Try getting it.

    • Replies: @animalogic
    @PJ London

    Dear oh dear.
    You are completely riddled with internal contradiction) hypocracy.
    Science is complete bullshit -- except for the computer & internet you used & the drug which you so heartfelt recommend (Ivermectin).
    You are lost in anger & delusion.

  16. @Achmed E. Newman
    @ruralguy

    Let me get this straight, Rural Guy: The virus is a weapon made by evil people to destroy us. The vaccines for it, hastily rushed to market by these same governments, are for are own good and just perfectly safe though. Uh, OK, knock yourself out. (Hopefully, not literally.)

    PS: There is absolutely no reason to vaccinate children. They haven't been as affected by this Kung Flu anymore than they've been affected by thunder and lightning. "If the thunder don't get you, then the COVID will." [H/T - the Dead]

    Replies: @ruralguy

    Achmed Newman: You’re arguments both make no sense and you misattribute — a logical error.

    Rushed to market? These vaccines went through a standard FDA approval process. It’s a rigorous process with much peer review and three phases of clinical trials. The Government didn’t develop the vaccines nor rush the process. The peer reviews were by several independent panels of the nation’s top scientists, biostatisticians and ethicists who had no vested interest in them. FDA career professionals then reviewed the recommendations from these independent panels as well as the data.

    Over 300 million doses have been administered without problems.

    You say “there is absolutely no reason to vaccinate children.” Where is your analysis to support this claim?

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    @ruralguy

    Yeah, nobody had a vested interest. Sure. You sound pretty naive about this Feral Government of ours, RG. As for the virus, there have been hardly any problems with kids getting hospitalized, much less dying from it. Yes, there HAVE been problems.

    Let me put it this way: It's not that I'm resisting getting the jab because I think it has a serious chance of killing me. However, neither does the Flu Manchu*. However, the latter has known effects, while the former has unknown ones. I'll leave it to the others - they can have mine. For kids and young women who may have fertility problems later, why in the heck would you take the chance?


    [EDIT in 5-min window:] From another comment of yours: "In England several hundred years ago, the expected lifespan of an person was only about 25-27 years of age..." Uhh, no. Think "Does It Make Sense?" (Infant mortality was averaged in.)

    .

    * I've been exposed over and over again to it, among lots of people, since last March, or whenever it was officially around.

  17. @Unpersoned by fb
    @ruralguy


    My children are vaccinated.
     
    Then your children are likely infertile. Well done you!
    Listening to all that covid propaganda obviously scared you enough to no bother learning about any dangers associated with this EXPERIMENAL medication, and led you to offering your own children as human guinea pigs.

    Will they thank you for this in years to come? The FACT is, you don't know one way or the other.

    Seriously, .. this is a weapon. It
     
    Well done Ron for relentlessly feeding this particular hysteria. Good job dude.

    Replies: @ruralguy

    You said “Then your children are likely infertile.” Where is your analysis to support this? You also said “Listening to all that covid propaganda obviously scared you.” That is both a logical error and a poor assumption. I read several peer-reviewed journal papers on the subject. I’m certainly not an expert and it takes me time to read through them, but I strive to take a rigorous approach to understanding things.

  18. @KittyCats
    @ruralguy

    Children have about a zero risk of dying from this bioengineered virus that was designed as a bioweapon? Why subject them to an experimental bioengineered injection? We need to allow their beautifully designed immune systems to do their jobs.

    Replies: @ruralguy

    Yes, they have close to no risk of dying from this virus, but the issue is what damage this virus does to their stem cells and other damage that isn’t easily repaired.

    Children receive many vaccinations throughout their childhood, because those viruses do much harm to them. In England several hundred years ago, the expected lifespan of an person was only about 25-27 years of age, because so many children died of diseases. In 1850, in this country, males had a life expectancy of 40 and female had a life expectancy of 42. Stroll through any graveyard in the 19th century and you’ll be shocked at the number of people that died from diseases. In those ages, immune systems failed. Viruses and bacteria evolve to overcome defenses.

  19. @Harry Huntington
    It is not clear why parents have any say in the matter of their children's vaccination at all. Parents do not own their children. Children are not property. Parents generally have their own interests at heart when dealing with children, not the best interests of the children. Parents are not experts in medical care or most issues dealing with children. 100 years ago when "children" represented a parent's retirement plan perhaps the case could be made that parents had an interest in the children. Those days are long gone. Plainly Ms Malkin's position is archaic at best or more likely dangerous.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman, @Charlie M., @Resartus, @animalogic, @ruralguy, @KeltCindy, @bike-anarkist

    Good point, Harry. Legally, the children are “minors” without the full legal rights of adults, until they reach the statutory age, .. usually 18. This makes sense, because they lack the legal “competence” to make decisions. So, the parents are expected to act on their behalf. But, when a child turns 18, or when they are full grown adults, or even when they are parents, they don’t always have the competence to make decisions. With a mean IQ of 100, most adults lack the cognitive thought to make good decisions, so perhaps the state should act on their behalf, as well as on the behalf of their their children.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    @ruralguy


    With a mean IQ of 100, most adults lack the cognitive thought to make good decisions, so perhaps the state should act on their behalf, as well as on the behalf of their their children.
     
    OK, now I can't tell if you're being sarcastic, are high as a kite, or are an actual living, breaking, freakin' Communist like Mr. Huntington.

    Replies: @ruralguy

  20. @ruralguy
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Achmed Newman: You're arguments both make no sense and you misattribute -- a logical error.

    Rushed to market? These vaccines went through a standard FDA approval process. It's a rigorous process with much peer review and three phases of clinical trials. The Government didn't develop the vaccines nor rush the process. The peer reviews were by several independent panels of the nation’s top scientists, biostatisticians and ethicists who had no vested interest in them. FDA career professionals then reviewed the recommendations from these independent panels as well as the data.

    Over 300 million doses have been administered without problems.

    You say "there is absolutely no reason to vaccinate children." Where is your analysis to support this claim?

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman

    Yeah, nobody had a vested interest. Sure. You sound pretty naive about this Feral Government of ours, RG. As for the virus, there have been hardly any problems with kids getting hospitalized, much less dying from it. Yes, there HAVE been problems.

    Let me put it this way: It’s not that I’m resisting getting the jab because I think it has a serious chance of killing me. However, neither does the Flu Manchu*. However, the latter has known effects, while the former has unknown ones. I’ll leave it to the others – they can have mine. For kids and young women who may have fertility problems later, why in the heck would you take the chance?

    [EDIT in 5-min window:] From another comment of yours: “In England several hundred years ago, the expected lifespan of an person was only about 25-27 years of age…” Uhh, no. Think “Does It Make Sense?” (Infant mortality was averaged in.)

    .

    * I’ve been exposed over and over again to it, among lots of people, since last March, or whenever it was officially around.

  21. @ruralguy
    @Harry Huntington

    Good point, Harry. Legally, the children are "minors" without the full legal rights of adults, until they reach the statutory age, .. usually 18. This makes sense, because they lack the legal "competence" to make decisions. So, the parents are expected to act on their behalf. But, when a child turns 18, or when they are full grown adults, or even when they are parents, they don't always have the competence to make decisions. With a mean IQ of 100, most adults lack the cognitive thought to make good decisions, so perhaps the state should act on their behalf, as well as on the behalf of their their children.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman

    With a mean IQ of 100, most adults lack the cognitive thought to make good decisions, so perhaps the state should act on their behalf, as well as on the behalf of their their children.

    OK, now I can’t tell if you’re being sarcastic, are high as a kite, or are an actual living, breaking, freakin’ Communist like Mr. Huntington.

    • Agree: Adam Smith
    • Replies: @ruralguy
    @Achmed E. Newman

    I'm about as far from the left as possible. The state needs to classify all residents of the U.S. that have an IQ under 100, as legal minors, without voting rights, because they can't rationally make decisions and because their population is growing rapidly. Today, the U.S. is electorate no longer functions because four underclasses, Black, Hispanics, poor whites, and effeminate males/females, dominates our culture and is radically changing it to accommodate them. But, if you look at productivity, total factor productivity, and real wages over the past 50 years, ALL economic and social progress is occurring among the top 20%. This top 20% is the bedrock of the nation. They should dominate the electorate. If this misguided dominance of these underclasses continues, the situation will get deadly. A country without a productive class of workers will devolve into crime and anarchy. The only way to turn it around is to take away voting rights from those with an IQ under 100 and from the effeminate.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman

  22. @PJ London
    @animalogic

    Believing in the 'cult' of science is stupid and sickening.
    Every single "Scientific fact" and every "Medical fact" has been proven wrong!
    Show a science fact or medical fact from 200 years ago which is still believable.
    The purpose of both today is to make money and if anybody dares to go against the mainstream then they are demonised and excluded.
    I could give thousands of examples but here are three.
    Vaccination causes Autism. Beyond any discussion or doubt but you will lose your livelihood and be destroyed if you say so.
    Cancer was cured 100% by 2 different methods in 1930s. Gaston Naessons and Royal Rife cured 100s of terminally ill patients who had been given days to live by the cancer experts and cured ALL of them.
    Not a single person has died of AIDS.
    However each of these scams has made billions and trillions of dollars for the scam artists.
    So take your science voodoo and shove it where it may do you some good as an enema.
    Ivermectin will cure completely the current scam and it costs only a few cents.
    Try getting it.

    Replies: @animalogic

    Dear oh dear.
    You are completely riddled with internal contradiction) hypocracy.
    Science is complete bullshit — except for the computer & internet you used & the drug which you so heartfelt recommend (Ivermectin).
    You are lost in anger & delusion.

  23. @ruralguy
    My children are vaccinated. People assume wrongly, that this is just another virus, like a cold or flu virus, from which you can easily recover. There is a good chance this virus was engineered in a biological warfare lab, to do damage. It does. It targets the alveolar type II cells in the lung, which are stem cells that have ACE2 protein receptors on the surface. The virus crowns attaches to those receptors to gain entry into the cell. So, if it kills the cells, they may not regenerate, or take several years to regenerate, because they are stem cells. This is permanent damage, even in people with mild symptoms and regardless of age. A German study found the same long-term damage, or inflammation in 50% of the infected peoples' heart, regardless of severity of the symptoms and age. Other studies are showing even higher levels of permanent damage or inflammation, in blood vessels and other organs.

    Seriously, .. this is a weapon. It was either designed either by people to inflict serious damage on others, or it was evolved naturally, to pack a one-two punch to its victims: the first round damages them with pre-existing conditions, .. so the next round can more easily spread. Vaccinate yourself and your children.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman, @Unpersoned by fb, @KittyCats, @Hans

    It’s very likely an engineered virus, but the “vaccine” makers are in on the agenda. BIG mistake to take the kill shot instead of safe treatments such as ivermection and hcq.

  24. @Harry Huntington
    @Resartus

    The 13th Amendment says that people cannot own other people. It does not carve out an exception for youth. Time for government to step up and reduce parents to a caretaker role at best and for government to demand that parents do rational things like vaccinate children.

    Replies: @Resartus, @Adam Smith

    Time for government to step up and reduce parents to a caretaker role at best and for government to demand that parents do rational things like vaccinate children.

    So, you are claiming, that Obamacare was wrong in forcing parents to pay for the kids Health Insurance till they are 26……

    • Replies: @Harry Huntington
    @Resartus

    Actually, if government was to set the rules, requiring parents to pay for children's health care, until we move to Medicare for all, is perfectly fine. The point is that government also should instruct parents on accepted medical practices. And government should mandate certain outcome like the use of vaccines.

    Replies: @Resartus

  25. @Achmed E. Newman
    @ruralguy


    With a mean IQ of 100, most adults lack the cognitive thought to make good decisions, so perhaps the state should act on their behalf, as well as on the behalf of their their children.
     
    OK, now I can't tell if you're being sarcastic, are high as a kite, or are an actual living, breaking, freakin' Communist like Mr. Huntington.

    Replies: @ruralguy

    I’m about as far from the left as possible. The state needs to classify all residents of the U.S. that have an IQ under 100, as legal minors, without voting rights, because they can’t rationally make decisions and because their population is growing rapidly. Today, the U.S. is electorate no longer functions because four underclasses, Black, Hispanics, poor whites, and effeminate males/females, dominates our culture and is radically changing it to accommodate them. But, if you look at productivity, total factor productivity, and real wages over the past 50 years, ALL economic and social progress is occurring among the top 20%. This top 20% is the bedrock of the nation. They should dominate the electorate. If this misguided dominance of these underclasses continues, the situation will get deadly. A country without a productive class of workers will devolve into crime and anarchy. The only way to turn it around is to take away voting rights from those with an IQ under 100 and from the effeminate.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    @ruralguy

    A lack of voting rights is not the same as classification of a legal minor, Rural Guy. Those are two entirely different things! Only men who are net taxpayers and property owners should be allowed to vote, but that ought to be up to each State. It WAS, before 4 of the Amendments to the US Constitution: Amendment XV, Amendment XIX*, Amendment XXIV, and Amendment XXVI. Most of the Amendments of the Constitution passed/ratified after the first 10 (Bill of Rights) were big fuck ups, in fact.

    Leave it to the States, and for that matter, if the States still were free to leave, then it could all work out, Rural Guy. I just think your wording before made it sound like you think government of some sort should run these people's life and take their choices away. We've tried with 55 years of Socialism, and that didn't work. I take back my insult because I understand what you mean now - voting rights.

    .

    * See also Part 2 and Part 3. You will find Peak Stupidity's whole series on "Peak Constitutional Amendment" under our Morning Constitutional Topic Key.

    Replies: @ruralguy

  26. But I thought that kids were supposed to “just say no!” to drugs?

  27. @Harry Huntington
    @Resartus

    The 13th Amendment says that people cannot own other people. It does not carve out an exception for youth. Time for government to step up and reduce parents to a caretaker role at best and for government to demand that parents do rational things like vaccinate children.

    Replies: @Resartus, @Adam Smith

    The 13th says no such thing. The 13th, 14th and 16th grant “government” a monopoly on the use of involuntary servitude.

    “Time for government to step up and reduce parents to a caretaker role at best and for government to demand…”

    Do you believe that the people masquerading as “government” own their subjects?
    You sound like a dangerous, deranged, authoritarian statist.

    • Agree: Achmed E. Newman
    • Replies: @Harry Huntington
    @Adam Smith

    Since William the First, it has been understood under the Common Law that the Sovereign owned all the property, which would include the labor of the subjects.

  28. @Harry Huntington
    It is not clear why parents have any say in the matter of their children's vaccination at all. Parents do not own their children. Children are not property. Parents generally have their own interests at heart when dealing with children, not the best interests of the children. Parents are not experts in medical care or most issues dealing with children. 100 years ago when "children" represented a parent's retirement plan perhaps the case could be made that parents had an interest in the children. Those days are long gone. Plainly Ms Malkin's position is archaic at best or more likely dangerous.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman, @Charlie M., @Resartus, @animalogic, @ruralguy, @KeltCindy, @bike-anarkist

    I guess I’m kind of weird.

    In my case, the “ulterior” motive for holding off on subjecting my kids to this mRNA crap involves the fact that I LOVE them…

    Sucks that the Sputnik-V vaccine will never be available in the States, because we’d be first in line for it if it was.

    Anywho—just sayin’…

    Love, Cindy

  29. @RoatanBill
    If you vote, this is your fault. You have enabled the politicians to create the environment where your parental rights are now considered null and void to the superior right of the political class.

    You should be ashamed of yourselves.

    Replies: @KeltCindy

    …Because there were plenty of voting options representing a broad range of interests for the electorate to choose from…

    Dad-burned, awnry voters are always screwing things up!

    Dag-nabbit, I say!!

    Love, Cindy

  30. @ruralguy
    @Achmed E. Newman

    I'm about as far from the left as possible. The state needs to classify all residents of the U.S. that have an IQ under 100, as legal minors, without voting rights, because they can't rationally make decisions and because their population is growing rapidly. Today, the U.S. is electorate no longer functions because four underclasses, Black, Hispanics, poor whites, and effeminate males/females, dominates our culture and is radically changing it to accommodate them. But, if you look at productivity, total factor productivity, and real wages over the past 50 years, ALL economic and social progress is occurring among the top 20%. This top 20% is the bedrock of the nation. They should dominate the electorate. If this misguided dominance of these underclasses continues, the situation will get deadly. A country without a productive class of workers will devolve into crime and anarchy. The only way to turn it around is to take away voting rights from those with an IQ under 100 and from the effeminate.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman

    A lack of voting rights is not the same as classification of a legal minor, Rural Guy. Those are two entirely different things! Only men who are net taxpayers and property owners should be allowed to vote, but that ought to be up to each State. It WAS, before 4 of the Amendments to the US Constitution: Amendment XV, Amendment XIX*, Amendment XXIV, and Amendment XXVI. Most of the Amendments of the Constitution passed/ratified after the first 10 (Bill of Rights) were big fuck ups, in fact.

    Leave it to the States, and for that matter, if the States still were free to leave, then it could all work out, Rural Guy. I just think your wording before made it sound like you think government of some sort should run these people’s life and take their choices away. We’ve tried with 55 years of Socialism, and that didn’t work. I take back my insult because I understand what you mean now – voting rights.

    .

    * See also Part 2 and Part 3. You will find Peak Stupidity‘s whole series on “Peak Constitutional Amendment” under our Morning Constitutional Topic Key.

    • Replies: @ruralguy
    @Achmed E. Newman

    The law recognizes many incapacities in individuals: the inability to consent to medical treatment, the inability to manage finances, testamentary incapacity, the inability to live independently, the inability to contract, etc. These incapacities or incompetence's limit their legal rights. A child is a legal minor because of these incompetence's or incapacities. As older aged adults slip into dementia, they also lose their rights to make decisions. Surprisingly, though, the courts refuse to consider the competence to vote. A person with dementia can legally vote, even though they aren't capable of rational thought. I think the reason the courts refuse to address this huge issue is that the cognitive skills of anyone with an IQ of less than 100 really aren't sufficient to vote, so applying this legal concept to voting would rule out 50% of the voters and likely more. But, it cannot be ignored. The statistical mean for reading comprehension of American adults is at the 4th-5th grade level. These adults lack the competence to vote and many lack the ability to function in day to day life. I'm serious. I saw this when I managed a low-income apartment complex on the side. It's not discussed openly, but in the lower classes very few adults can function. They lack the capacities to make almost any decision. That's why the concept of legal minor needs to extend well beyond children.

    Replies: @Adam Smith

  31. @Resartus
    @Harry Huntington


    Time for government to step up and reduce parents to a caretaker role at best and for government to demand that parents do rational things like vaccinate children.
     
    So, you are claiming, that Obamacare was wrong in forcing parents to pay for the kids Health Insurance till they are 26......

    Replies: @Harry Huntington

    Actually, if government was to set the rules, requiring parents to pay for children’s health care, until we move to Medicare for all, is perfectly fine. The point is that government also should instruct parents on accepted medical practices. And government should mandate certain outcome like the use of vaccines.

    • Replies: @Resartus
    @Harry Huntington


    The point is that government also should instruct parents on accepted medical practices.
     
    You should write your Congress Critter....
    You are making a great case for not deducting children on your taxes.....
  32. @Adam Smith
    @Harry Huntington

    The 13th says no such thing. The 13th, 14th and 16th grant “government” a monopoly on the use of involuntary servitude.


    “Time for government to step up and reduce parents to a caretaker role at best and for government to demand...”
     
    Do you believe that the people masquerading as “government” own their subjects?
    You sound like a dangerous, deranged, authoritarian statist.

    Replies: @Harry Huntington

    Since William the First, it has been understood under the Common Law that the Sovereign owned all the property, which would include the labor of the subjects.

  33. So, you believe in the divine right of kings, romans 13 and slavery. How quaint.

    Under the Common Law, “The Divine Right of Kings” has not been recognized since King John of England autographed the Magna Carta on June 15, 1215 at Runnymede.

    Here, on this side of the pond…

    Sovereignty itself is, of course, not subject to law, for it is the author and source of law; but, in our system, while sovereign powers are delegated to the agencies of government, sovereignty itself remains with the people, by whom and for whom all government exists and acts.

    • Thanks: Achmed E. Newman
  34. @Harry Huntington
    @Resartus

    Actually, if government was to set the rules, requiring parents to pay for children's health care, until we move to Medicare for all, is perfectly fine. The point is that government also should instruct parents on accepted medical practices. And government should mandate certain outcome like the use of vaccines.

    Replies: @Resartus

    The point is that government also should instruct parents on accepted medical practices.

    You should write your Congress Critter….
    You are making a great case for not deducting children on your taxes…..

    • LOL: Achmed E. Newman
  35. @Achmed E. Newman
    @ruralguy

    A lack of voting rights is not the same as classification of a legal minor, Rural Guy. Those are two entirely different things! Only men who are net taxpayers and property owners should be allowed to vote, but that ought to be up to each State. It WAS, before 4 of the Amendments to the US Constitution: Amendment XV, Amendment XIX*, Amendment XXIV, and Amendment XXVI. Most of the Amendments of the Constitution passed/ratified after the first 10 (Bill of Rights) were big fuck ups, in fact.

    Leave it to the States, and for that matter, if the States still were free to leave, then it could all work out, Rural Guy. I just think your wording before made it sound like you think government of some sort should run these people's life and take their choices away. We've tried with 55 years of Socialism, and that didn't work. I take back my insult because I understand what you mean now - voting rights.

    .

    * See also Part 2 and Part 3. You will find Peak Stupidity's whole series on "Peak Constitutional Amendment" under our Morning Constitutional Topic Key.

    Replies: @ruralguy

    The law recognizes many incapacities in individuals: the inability to consent to medical treatment, the inability to manage finances, testamentary incapacity, the inability to live independently, the inability to contract, etc. These incapacities or incompetence’s limit their legal rights. A child is a legal minor because of these incompetence’s or incapacities. As older aged adults slip into dementia, they also lose their rights to make decisions. Surprisingly, though, the courts refuse to consider the competence to vote. A person with dementia can legally vote, even though they aren’t capable of rational thought. I think the reason the courts refuse to address this huge issue is that the cognitive skills of anyone with an IQ of less than 100 really aren’t sufficient to vote, so applying this legal concept to voting would rule out 50% of the voters and likely more. But, it cannot be ignored. The statistical mean for reading comprehension of American adults is at the 4th-5th grade level. These adults lack the competence to vote and many lack the ability to function in day to day life. I’m serious. I saw this when I managed a low-income apartment complex on the side. It’s not discussed openly, but in the lower classes very few adults can function. They lack the capacities to make almost any decision. That’s why the concept of legal minor needs to extend well beyond children.

    • Replies: @Adam Smith
    @ruralguy

    Low IQ voters are the foundation of Our Democracy™.

  36. @ruralguy
    @Achmed E. Newman

    The law recognizes many incapacities in individuals: the inability to consent to medical treatment, the inability to manage finances, testamentary incapacity, the inability to live independently, the inability to contract, etc. These incapacities or incompetence's limit their legal rights. A child is a legal minor because of these incompetence's or incapacities. As older aged adults slip into dementia, they also lose their rights to make decisions. Surprisingly, though, the courts refuse to consider the competence to vote. A person with dementia can legally vote, even though they aren't capable of rational thought. I think the reason the courts refuse to address this huge issue is that the cognitive skills of anyone with an IQ of less than 100 really aren't sufficient to vote, so applying this legal concept to voting would rule out 50% of the voters and likely more. But, it cannot be ignored. The statistical mean for reading comprehension of American adults is at the 4th-5th grade level. These adults lack the competence to vote and many lack the ability to function in day to day life. I'm serious. I saw this when I managed a low-income apartment complex on the side. It's not discussed openly, but in the lower classes very few adults can function. They lack the capacities to make almost any decision. That's why the concept of legal minor needs to extend well beyond children.

    Replies: @Adam Smith

    Low IQ voters are the foundation of Our Democracy™.

  37. The mere fact that there are so many incentives being offered to get people to take a “cure” should make any reasonable person suspicious.

    If they were offering vaccines out of a windowless van with “Free Candy” spraypainted on the side, would that be enough to make people question motives?

    • Agree: Achmed E. Newman
  38. For almost a century in the USA vaccines have been required for children starting school. School is also mandatory. The polio vaccine was viewed as a god send. The State has always had the power to act first and have a hearing later. The State has long had the power to deprive parents of there children based on opinions of social workers that are nearly impossible to fight. Christian Scientists who refuse to treat their sick child can lose them. Nothing new here. We are a better society because of these policies.

    There hadn’t been any national progress against Covid-19 until vaccines were introduced. Oddly, there had been little difference in outcomes between red and blue States. Most likely airport traffic patterns and open borders between States rendered any contradictory policies moot. Oddly, the pandemic denier deserves full credit for fast tracking vaccine development. Odd, because it is inconsistent with his constant denial of health risks associate with Covid-19. Even more odd, is Trump’s vaccine refusals belongs mostly to Trump loyalists. It looks like Brazil is an unprecedented disaster.

  39. I am a stanch Republican but I have no clue why intelligent people do not get the vaccine. The worst pandemic in our life times and the cure is to get everyone vaccinated. I think people who do refuse the vaccine should have to go to jail for 2 weeks and pay a $500 fine and double it every month. Maybe even consider man slaughter charges for spreading the virus.

    • Replies: @Resartus
    @ShortPutt


    The worst pandemic in our life times and the cure is to get everyone vaccinated.
     
    Really, 2018/9 Flu cases reached 38 Million, in about 5 months of the season....
    We are at nearly 18 months and have 4 to 5 million less cases of covid....

    Around 80% of hospitalizations were obese, the % of deaths were about the same...
    The avg age for deaths is around 75yo....
    Recent report, around 40% of deaths were due to Bacterial Infections acquired while hospitalized...

    Covid is not even the flu....
    The issue we have is reverence for Government.....
  40. @Harry Huntington
    It is not clear why parents have any say in the matter of their children's vaccination at all. Parents do not own their children. Children are not property. Parents generally have their own interests at heart when dealing with children, not the best interests of the children. Parents are not experts in medical care or most issues dealing with children. 100 years ago when "children" represented a parent's retirement plan perhaps the case could be made that parents had an interest in the children. Those days are long gone. Plainly Ms Malkin's position is archaic at best or more likely dangerous.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman, @Charlie M., @Resartus, @animalogic, @ruralguy, @KeltCindy, @bike-anarkist

    The “New Responsibility”, brought to you by some “woke” that thinks that because children are not property, the parents don’t have responsibility.

    I’m glad that my parents gave a shit about me wanting to join the Armed Forces, as they informed me that I most likely be taking orders from an American, and not in Canada.

    As well, they educated me on better eating habits, enjoying alcoholic bevs (mostly beer), go smoke cannabis outside and explore my surroundings.

    They encouraged riding the bike because there is more freedom than driving a car, and at that time, Greyhound existed and was very affordable.

    When I was a child, I would get a fever after every vax. At about 6 or 7y.o., I became very sick from a vaccination; the one that gives the scar on the arm. I was sick for almost two months, with a fever around 38-39 C.
    My mother and father made sure that was the last childhood vax I would get.

    Thanks Mum and Dad.
    I am very glad they didn’t cop out.

  41. @ShortPutt
    I am a stanch Republican but I have no clue why intelligent people do not get the vaccine. The worst pandemic in our life times and the cure is to get everyone vaccinated. I think people who do refuse the vaccine should have to go to jail for 2 weeks and pay a $500 fine and double it every month. Maybe even consider man slaughter charges for spreading the virus.

    Replies: @Resartus

    The worst pandemic in our life times and the cure is to get everyone vaccinated.

    Really, 2018/9 Flu cases reached 38 Million, in about 5 months of the season….
    We are at nearly 18 months and have 4 to 5 million less cases of covid….

    Around 80% of hospitalizations were obese, the % of deaths were about the same…
    The avg age for deaths is around 75yo….
    Recent report, around 40% of deaths were due to Bacterial Infections acquired while hospitalized…

    Covid is not even the flu….
    The issue we have is reverence for Government…..

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Michelle Malkin Comments via RSS