anyone currently shocked by the fact that the politicians in power recant and reverse the views they held when they were in opposition (and vice versa) has simply not paid any attention to history.

that's 100% to be expected.

where you stand depends up where you sit.

always.

this latest biden refusal to commit to a view on packing SCOTUS until after the election is just this same phenomenon.

if he wins, he's for packing it. if he loses, he'll be against it.

this is because almost none of these people stand on any principles.

they just seek power.
this is why it's so hard to trust any of them.

and why shouldn't they act this way?

it's what we reward. we all accept their lies even when we KNOW they are lies. we elect them anyway.

we accept that all we ever get is the lesser of evils.

will biden pay any price? nope.
it's behavioralism 101

the fault lies not w/ these narcissistic liars & sociopaths, it lies with us

we're the ones electing them & putting up with monstrous & dishonest behavior because "it's not as bad as what the other guy would do."

those are the railroad tracks to tyranny.
it demands a question:

if the outcome of an election is so impactful that it can make or ruin your life or save or lose the republic (as many claim it is) is that not proof positive that the government is FAR too powerful?

do you really want to gamble for such stakes?
you know the game is rigged by two increasing nasty and power hungry parties neither of whom respects your rights.

most agree it's always a choice between the lesser of evils.

yet we keep giving the government more power and rewarding liars and tyrants.
this is like protecting your home from fire by surrounding it with dry hay bales and filling the basement w/ gasoline soaked rags

the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results

so how else are we to diagnose this?

#DemandBetter

More from el gato malo

for those looking for a compendium of mask studies this set from swiss policy research looks useful and has some good links and discussion.

also attaching 2 past debunkings of widely disseminated US studies that health officials have attempted to

first, the kansas study spread by CDC and so many "twitterdocs" and politicians.

it's a master class in cherry picking and misusing data through truncation.

the data proving it was false was widely available at the time it was


also the mass general study, a classic of the "sun-dance" variant: use no control group and then presume that any action undertaken was the result of some thing you did.

ignore the fact that the whole rest of (unmasked) massachusetts got the same


the fact that CDC has been spreading studies like these and using them alongside flimsy lab bench experiments with no clinical outcomes or even real world measurement speaks poorly of both CDC & the evidence for masks

the good studies do not support use



and lab bench droplet projection studies are meaningless.

it's one tiny aspect of a large system and may actually be counterproductive if masks are nebulizing droplets and making virus more aerosol in spread and more deeply
google censorship of great barrington declaration: update.

this morning, there was no link to it in a direct google search.

now, there is.

could this be because certain internet felines noticed this and @chiproytx and @tedcruz helped call them out on this?

we may never know.


but i'd like to think so.

the google page is still a mess. it's still mostly fringe publication hit pieces and conspiracy theories.

when "mother jones" is your top media result for a science search, well, that says it all, doesn't it?

yikes.

i mean, why would we trust THESE people instead of a reporter at one of the most partisan rags on earth? oh, wait..

they are not being censored for being wrong. they're being censored for being right and being credible

they're censored because the other side cannot rebut them


and that is simply not a thing we can or should tolerate, especially not in a search engine.

so remember this. look for it in the future. demand primary sources.

use other search engines.

bing seems to be seeking to inform, not to inflame and mislead.


if you missed it, the original thread was here:

(and yes, lots of people duplicated my finding this morning)

i'd be curious to see what they are all seeing
did you consider checking the facts before buying into such hysterical claims?

this is LA department of health services hospital census. it's essentially identical to the levels from last year.

the media have had a severe tendency to overstate these issues. https://t.co/ktTPIbKcdQ


as you can see, visits to emergency departments have been quite stable for 4 months.


and ICU bed availability has been flat for the whole month of december.

keep in mind that 90-100% ICU capacity is normal this time of year and that all ICU's must be able to flex to 120% (by federal law) and most can hit 150%.


and if you will not take my word for it, just ask the CEO's of the hospitals in texas everyone was so breathless about this summer.

they were not worried. and they were


hospital census in LA seems to be about 3000 patients below where it was in july.

this seems to imply a drop in staffed beds which, contrary to the narrative is not from "exhaustion" but rather from people being laid off or staying home because kids are not in school.

More from Politics

You May Also Like

The UN just voted to condemn Israel 9 times, and the rest of the world 0.

View the resolutions and voting results here:

The resolution titled "The occupied Syrian Golan," which condemns Israel for "repressive measures" against Syrian citizens in the Golan Heights, was adopted by a vote of 151 - 2 - 14.

Israel and the U.S. voted 'No'
https://t.co/HoO7oz0dwr


The resolution titled "Israeli practices affecting the human rights of the Palestinian people..." was adopted by a vote of 153 - 6 - 9.

Australia, Canada, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, and the U.S. voted 'No' https://t.co/1Ntpi7Vqab


The resolution titled "Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and the occupied Syrian Golan" was adopted by a vote of 153 – 5 – 10.

Canada, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, and the U.S. voted 'No'
https://t.co/REumYgyRuF


The resolution titled "Applicability of the Geneva Convention... to the
Occupied Palestinian Territory..." was adopted by a vote of 154 - 5 - 8.

Canada, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, and the U.S. voted 'No'
https://t.co/xDAeS9K1kW