Reason Roundup

How the CDC Bungled Testing of Early COVID-19 Quarantine Patients

Plus: Commemorating the first U.S. sex worker protest, why Parler is a success story for Section 230, and more...

|

CDC said no to COVID-19 testing for asymptomatic quarantine patients. Reuters explores how the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) "missed chances to spot COVID's silent spread," finding plenty of blame to go around.

Critics have widely asserted that the CDC fumbled key decisions during the coronavirus scourge because then-President Donald Trump and his administration meddled in the agency's operations and muzzled internal experts. The matter is now the subject of a congressional inquiry. Yet Reuters has found new evidence that the CDC's response to the pandemic also was marred by actions - or inaction - by the agency's career scientists and frontline staff.

At a crucial moment in the pandemic when Americans were quarantined after possible exposure to the virus abroad, the agency declined or resisted potentially valuable opportunities to study whether the disease could be spread by those without symptoms, according to previously undisclosed internal emails, other documents and interviews with key players.

The CDC first refused to test a group of Americans evacuated from Wuhan, China, in early February 2020.

"It is CDC's position that since the research is being proposed for a group of individuals who are detained under a federal quarantine order, the circumstances of voluntary participation would be extremely difficult to assure and therefore, CDC does not approve this study," the CDC told researchers at Camp Ashland, where those returning from Wuhan were being quarantined.

The CDC also resisted testing asymptomatic people evacuated from the Diamond Princess cruise ship later that month.

"It's difficult to know whether more aggressive early testing among asymptomatic people would have significantly altered the trajectory of the pandemic in the United States, which has infected 24 million people and killed more than 400,000," says Reuters.

But in reality, it would take months before the CDC and other government officials took asymptomatic spread seriouslywhile testing protocols, stay-at-home advisories, and other rules and precautions were developed around the premise that infected people would almost always have a fever, cough, loss of smell, and other common symptoms.

In those early months of the pandemic, a lot of people who were exposed to COVID-19 but hadn't yet developed symptoms struggled to get tests, thanks to CDC recommendations and state and local testing protocols that overlooked asymptomatic cases. Without symptoms or permission to be tested, many potentially infected people continued to work, see family, and more.

People making personal decisions about what activities to engage in also relied on that calculation, as did employers when setting worker absence policies. To this day, many people who are exposed to COVID-19 think that not developing symptoms within a few days is a sign they're in the clear.

Government guidance only goes so far, but it's not crazy to think that better, earlier CDC guidance on asymptomatic spread could have helped mitigate misinformation about COVID-19 and some of the spread.

Toward the end of last February, the CDC did begin to allow testing of asymptomatic quarantined people, finding at least 10 asymptomatic cruise ship passengers who tested positive for the COVID-19. Yet the agency still didn't update its testing guidance on asymptomatic infections.

It would be almost another month before the agency started publicly acknowledging it happened and almost two months until, on April 27, it expanded the recommendations to sometimes include "persons without symptoms." The change came 11 weeks after the first U.S. army base researcher had asked the CDC for permission to test asymptomatic quarantine patients who consented.


FREE MINDS

Art project stresses continuity between sex worker activism in early 1900s and today. "On Jan. 25, 1917, sex workers in San Francisco marched to the Central Methodist Church to meet with Rev. Paul Smith, who had organized a campaign to rid and protect the city from vice. This was the first sex worker-led protest in the U.S.," writes Kaytlin Bailey, founder of the Old Pro Project, at The Daily Beast.

Old Pro Project is commemorating the historic push for sex worker rights and decriminalization with a series of art advocacy projects created by sex workers in New Orleans, New York, Portland, San Francisco, and Seattle.


FREE MARKETS

Why the Parler case is a success story for Section 230. "Initially, civil liberties advocates (including us) were shocked at the speed and coordination with which Parler was taken down and Trump de-platformed," notes the Internet Governance Project. (Yep.)

But "now that the dust has settled, however, the charge of 'private sector censorship' looks overstated," suggests Milton Mueller. "Indeed, the overall functioning of the legal and policy regime governing US platforms ends up looking pretty good in this case – especially when compared to the alternatives."

Mueller finds three conclusions to be drawn from the Parler case, including "the major platforms are not 'the Internet'" and "international anarchy has its upside." Mueller also says the case demonstrates how Section 230 is working:

Social media are being simultaneously blamed for having too much control over speech and for letting speech be completely out of control. Both sides of this divide fail to appreciate the way immunities and distributed private actor responsibilities walked a fine line between control and freedom.

The Section 230-based legal regime is a way of reconciling free political expression with the need to limit or remove certain kinds of speech from the public sphere. A potential threat to public safety was addressed, but not in a rigid, permanent and coercive way, not through state action, but through contractual arrangements and private ordering. The response is distributed, flexible and ongoing, just as social media content is. And if the response was too harsh, as it inevitably will be in some cases, there were still spaces where the suppressed entity could regroup and try to grow again. A state actor-driven response is going to be a lot more binary and a lot less correctible in cases of excess. Passing a law would impose a single, uniform standard, which would inevitably be applied in a way that would serve the interests of those in power and marginalize challengers.


QUICK HITS

NEXT: Will New York Lead the Way in Screwing Up School Reopening?

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. CDC said no to COVID-19 testing for asymptomatic quarantine patients.

    The priority at the time was gun control and climate change. They only have so many resources.

    1. APPLY Online work from home USA online work details used this site……. TOP USA ONLINE JOB.

      1. Making money online more than 15$ just by doing simple work from home. I have received $18376 last month. Its an easy and simple job to do and its earnings are much better than THC regular office job and even a little child can do this and earns money. Everybody must try this job by just use the info
        on this page……..MORE READ

    2. Art project stresses continuity between sex worker activism in early 1900s and today. “On Jan. 25, 1917, sex workers in San Francisco marched to the Central Methodist Church to meet with Rev CLICK HERE…….MORE INFORMATION.

    3. Yeah, and testing equity, too.

      1. I am now making extra $19k or more every month from home by doing very simple and easy job online from home. I have received exactly $20845 last month from this home job. Join now this job and start making extra cash online Man by follow instruction on the given website……… Visit Here

    4. No it was it was intentional to spread covid just like
      “Inauguration was a superspreader event for U.S. National Guard members.” there was no need but they needed to get several people from all states in one place to catch covid so they could go home and spread it more. they will blame Trump for making it a necessity to bring in the troops. this is all intentional.

    5. It is important to know, there is a new variant of CoV2 in Brazil, and another new one in South Africa, they are extremely dangerous, but CDC is taking inadequate measures to prevent them from getting into the US.
      If you check on Manaus online you will see there was a huge outbreak in May/June 2020, and a huge drop in cases since then but now they are having a new huge outbreak due to a new variant which evades the immune response to the old type.
      We will be ruined if this gets here, I think, but CDC is not doing enough to stop it.

      1. Haha. Sweet. Let the sleepy joe death count begin! It will be all his fault!

        Right, tony?

    6. Do you wanna earn money without investing money? That’s how I started this job HYUY and Now I am making $200 to $300 per hour for doing online work from home.

      Apply Now here…….. Visit Here

    7. [ PART TIME JOB FOR USA ] Making money online more than 15$ just by doing simple works from home. I have received $18376 last month. Its an easy andUYT simple job to do and its earnings are much better than regular office job and even a little child can do this and earns money. Everybody must try this job by just use the info
      on this page…. Visit Here

  2. The House is set to deliver formal articles of impeachment to the Senate today.

    AGAINST THE PRESIDENT?

    1. RESIST!
      Not my president
      IMPEACH!

      1. You forgot:
        Fuck Biden

        1. If Trump is orange, what color is Biden?

          1. Corpse grey.

            1. White walker

    2. It’s “article” of impeachment, just one article for “inciting” an “insurrection.”

      Except he didn’t incite it (“protest peacefully and patriotically”) and it wasn’t an insurrection (just a mostly peaceful protest/riot). A judge would dismiss this with prejudice.

    3. Our week long national nightmare will soon be over. Hallelujah!

    4. So…he has not been impeached? So, can Congress just impeach random private individuals whenever they wish? So, they should impeach Michelle Obama to insure she cannot run for office?

      An impeachment occurs when the articles are submitted to the Senate.

  3. “More states are seeing pushes for concealed carry permits.”

    Ugh. Hopefully after Biden adds 4 or more Supreme Court justices we can overturn the decision that absurdly recognized an “individual right to own a gun.”

    #LibertariansForGunSense

    1. #LibertariansForGunSense What? You want to make guns self-aware?

      1. #GunSenseisbetterthanNonSense

        1. On this year 2021 start earning cash from your home and getting paid(500$ to 700$ / hour ) by this job these are the best online jobs I’ve made $84, 8254 so far this year working online and I’m a full time student Join it today here…..

          ========= Click here

    2. Real online home based work to make more than $14k. Last month i have made $15738 from this home job. Very simple and easy to do and GFRwsx earnings from this are just awesome for details. For more detail visit the given link……….Visit……….Home Profit System

  4. President Joe Biden signed 30 executive orders and actions in his first three days in office.

    Making people freer to make their own decisions?

    1. Only SleepyJoe knows what is best for everyone.

    2. Written in crayon.

  5. Inauguration was a superspreader event for U.S. National Guard members.

    DC needs garages with better ventilation.

    1. How many more Americans will SleepyJoe murder?

      1. This is why he needs more immigrants.

    2. I love that Reason is parroting the party line put out by that Masshole rep (D) who was offended that a soldier wasn’t wearing his mask in Dunkin Donuts, thus the guardsmen needed to be made to sleep in a parking garage.

    3. Seeing as they are the ones who passed a dnc loyalty test, shouldn’t we cheer for the virus

  6. More states are seeing pushes for concealed carry permits.

    All you need is a porch and a shotgun.

      1. Just be sure not to “brandish” it when the mob heads down your street.

  7. But “now that the dust has settled, however, the charge of ‘private sector censorship’ looks overstated,” suggests Milton Mueller.

    Yeah, put it in a report.

  8. Corona is big threat of the century which effect physically, mentally and financially To over come these difficulties and make full use of this hostage period and make online earning for more detail visit the given link………….Click here for more info.

    1. Is this from the DNC?

  9. Now that Biden has liberated Orange Hitler’s concentration camps, I’d like to see a long-form piece in Reason interviewing one or more of the survivors. What was it like to literally drink from a toilet? What are their plans going forward? Will they get a job with Koch Industries? These are other questions would make for some compelling journalism.

    1. Needs more boot licking.

    2. Also, when (if ever) will the babies snatched out of mammas’ arms, and thrown into wire cages, EVER be re-united with their mammas?

      1. Flag, refresh

      2. When they STOP committing crimes.

      3. Yeah, we need those cages for Orange Man deprogramming camps. Get the hell out!

    3. What the hell do you mean “survivors”? Jesus Christ, it’s like you don’t even understand the meaning of the word “genocide”. There were no survivors, they’re all dead.

      1. Wait, what? There has to be one survivor, that’s always the plot.

  10. Initially, civil liberties advocates (including us) were shocked at the speed and coordination with which Parler was taken down and Trump de-platformed…

    But then we remembered it was insurrectionists so we went back in our holes.

  11. A potential threat to public safety was addressed, but not in a rigid, permanent and coercive way, not through state action…

    Well, two – possibly three – out of four ain’t bad.

    1. And trust me, there are a lot more potential threats to public safety they are preparing to remove. Think how much safer we’ll be.

  12. And if the response was too harsh, as it inevitably will be in some cases, there were still spaces where the suppressed entity could regroup and try to grow again.

    At least until those spaces are purchased by Bezos.

    1. It’s good that you’re not easily triggered, this is going to be a hard, long four years for you it seems…Maybe take up something calming?

      1. 2 years. Max.

        1. Hi conspiracy theory nut!

          1. No, idiot. He’s saying that based on historical results of midterms the Republicans are very likely to take control of the House. Maybe the Senate too.

            But understanding what people you don’t agree with is hard. Better to just throw stupid insults.

            1. Yeah, there’s no meme in conservative land about how Biden will trigger the 25th by then.

              1. Hey look WK is using his Queen Amalthea sock again because he got banned

              2. I don’t know about memes in conservative land, and don’t care. You’re the one keeping up with that meaningless shit.

                Fact is that it’s virtually certain that the party in power loses seats in Congress during midterms. Almost everybody believes that it’s likely that the Republicans control the House after 2022. Senate too. And that’s what he was referring to.

                Memes. LOL. Like that shit matters to more than 50 people.

            2. Based on historical results, and consistency of data, only massive, targeted fraud gave Biden victory.
              But keep your faith in the system and belief in election integrity, bevis, I’m sure it makes your head more comfortable within the sand.

              1. Based on historical results, and consistency of data, only massive, targeted fraud gave Biden victory.

                Some day you’ll even find evidence of it!

                1. fuck off sarcasmic

      2. “Maybe take up something calming?”
        Should have taken your own advice over the last four years.

        1. Lol, what is contrast and nuance?

          1. fuck off White Knight

      3. If only your side had gotten a soothing knee to your necks during the previous four years.

        1. How non-crazy-angry you are!

          1. I promise it be nearly as bad as your side the previous four years.

            1. All evidence to the contrary.

              1. Sure, the bar you twats set was so high, King Kong couldn’t climb over it.

                1. I’m rooting for Godzilla

              2. Hey look WK is using his Queen Amalthea sock again because he got banned

        2. Lots of CACLLs exposing their true colors lately.

          1. “CACLLs”

            Drink!

            Also, you got banned, have some class and fuck off.

          2. Stop trying to make “fetch” a thing.

          3. We all know you’re Queen Amalthea

      4. Well, ‘legalization’ did pass in a lot of states; mostly disguised as ‘tax and regulate’ and still leave lots of the parts illegal.

  13. “It is CDC’s position that since the research is being proposed for a group of individuals who are detained under a federal quarantine order, the circumstances of voluntary participation would be extremely difficult to assure and therefore, CDC does not approve this study,” the CDC told researchers at Camp Ashland, where those returning from Wuhan were being quarantined.

    So they “bungled” their chance by adhering to standards of voluntariness in clinical testing. Nice blow you’re striking for individual liberty there, Ms. Brown. Maybe the Tuskegee experiments were heroic after all.

    1. Yeah, that’s what I was thinking. Personal freedom is such a quaint & faded notion isn’t it?

  14. book launch & artwork by NYC sex workers

    Just a bunch of crudely drawn dicks and frowny faces.

    1. But they have the right politics, so they got published.

  15. Government guidance only goes so far, but it’s not crazy to think that better, earlier CDC guidance on asymptomatic spread could have helped mitigate misinformation about COVID-19 and some of the spread.

    “There is no evidence of widespread asymptomatic spread that would have changed the outcome of the pandemic.”

    1. And yet SleepyJoe is on federal property with a crowd of people without a mask.

      1. Did you actually read the order? Perhaps there’s a Presidential Exception.

        1. That’s assumed in all orders/laws

        2. Yes, and no.

  16. Every month I am earning online more than $8650 by doing a very simply online job from my home. By doing this in my part time I was able to save enough to buy me a new car in just a few months. This is so freaking easy that everyone should try it… Start making some dollars online today by following instructions on this website…….Click here

  17. Every month I am earning online more than $8650 by doing a very simply online job from my home. By doing this in my part time I was able to save enough to buy me a new car in just a few months. This is so freaking easy that everyone should try it… Start making some dollars online today by following instructions on this website……. Click here

  18. Every month I am earning online more than $8650 by doing a very simply online job from my home. By doing this in my part time I was able to save enough to buy me a new car in just a few months. This is so freaking easy that everyone should try it… Start making some dollars online today by following instructions on this website…….Read More

  19. [FOR USA ] 
    Making money online more than $15k just by doing simple work from home. I have received $18376 last month. Its an easy and simple job to do and its earnings are much better than regular office job and even a little child can do this and earns money. Everybody must try this job by just use the info on this page Click this link For Full Detail……   OPEN TAP ON HERE

  20. President Joe Biden signed 30 executive orders and actions in his first three days in office.

    Ah, but who *composed* those, and when?

    1. “They” did; and months, possibly years ago.

      1. leftover orders Obama didn’t get to

    2. The same people who had a convoy ready to deploy in Syria on Day 1.

      It is becoming clear at this point that Joe only exists to rubber stamp the wish list of the DNC coalition that put him at the helm. Path to citizenship? Check! Men in women’s sports? Check! More war? Check and check!

      The real fun will be when something one subgroup wants goes directly against the interests of another – then we get to watch them turn on each other.

  21. How can you write this article without even mentioning that asymptomatic spread is pretty rare and trying to “track it down” is ridiculously time-consuming and expensive?

    The virus is going to go through the population. Everybody understood this 10 months ago. Trying to find people who have it but aren’t sick doesn’t do us any good.

    1. First it is true that we usually don’t expect the asymptomatic person to be a spreader. Lesson learned that this is not true and must be checked in the future.

      Second lesson is that we needed vastly more testing and contract tracing. Reason columnists hammered this idea for many months and it never broke through. Hopefully in the future it will be taken more seriously.

      1. The data in the real world disagrees. Asymptomatic spread is rare. Test and Trace was a stupid idea the minute that it was mentioned.

        The virus is going through the population. We’re spending trillions trying to hold back the tide.

        1. I thought it was the green new deal that is trying to hold back the tide – – – –

        2. “Test and Trace was a stupid idea the minute that it was mentioned.”

          Except that it worked well for countries like S.Korea and Taiwan that used it very effectively.

          1. Test and trace doesn’t work without isolation, and that last bit is the one that became completely infeasible in short order.

            I’m also not sure how effective T&T will be with the giant open border with another country with endemic COVID that we have in the South. Maybe Biden can open lines of communication with local coyote unions to enhance these efforts.

      2. “Second lesson is that we needed vastly […] contract tracing.”

        Up yours.

      3. First it is true that we usually don’t expect the asymptomatic person to be a spreader. Lesson learned that this is not true and must be checked in the future.

        Oh, fuck off. Coronaviruses have been spreading amongst the population since forever.

        I realize this pandemic has revealed what a bunch of soft-ass bitches most Americans really are, but this new insistence that everybody constantly be tested for the sniffles shows that we’re rapidly getting to the point where Skynet needs to just launch the nukes and do a real “Great Reset.” At least the people fighting the Terminators had something legitimate to complain about regarding their lives and personal safety.

        1. These people remind me more of Dr. Breen from the Half Life series.

    2. Who can remember 10 months ago?

      Whether or not you get the coof is now a judgement of God. Catching it is clearly a moral failure on your part because you didn’t carry your talisman with you and perform the correct rituals.

      Seriously – one of my acquaintances was talking about her daughter in CA and said ‘one of her colleagues was being stupid and caught COVID so now she has to quarantine.’

      1. Stay away from that person.

  22. The Section 230-based legal regime is a way of reconciling free political expression with the need to limit or remove certain kinds of speech from the public sphere. A potential threat to public safety was addressed, but not in a rigid, permanent and coercive way, not through state action, but through contractual arrangements and private ordering.

    Holy Fucking Shit. “We’re all for free speech, but….” means that you’re not for free speech. At all. How the fucking fuck do you reconcile libertarianism with suppression of speech you deem “dangerous”? You can’t, this is beyond parody, this is some evil, sick, twisted, fucked-up shit. And that’s me being polite.

    1. “How the fucking fuck do you reconcile libertarianism with suppression of speech you deem “dangerous”? ”

      Uhh, when it’s by a private party?

      Let me know when I get to speak in your living room this week. Don’t do some vil, sick, twisted, fucked-up shit, give me a date and time 🙂

      1. It’s not you living room. It was on the Amazon servers that were open to everyone. Twitter moved to Amazon and Amazon shut down twitters competitor on made up charges. The user agreements are straight out of Kafka.

        1. Ah, so you’re a ‘government please come in and regulate private ‘public accomodations’ guy?’ How very libertarian!

          1. Thanks for confirming that if you come on to my property uninvited, I get to shoot you and feed you to the local wildlife.

            1. No no, don’t be a baby. Don’t do something vile and twisted and such. When can I come to your house and speak? You don’t want to censor me, do you?

              1. You’ve already confirmed that if you step on my property without permission, I can shoot you and feed you to the local wildlife, so what’s the problem? You believe in private property rights, don’t you?

                1. No, you think I can step on your property as long as I have something to say. Otherwise I’m involved in the vile and twisted censorship you hate. You’re not a hypocrite I’m sure, so when can I come speak in your living room? Don’t puss out here.

                  1. I mean you’re involved. I mean, if it’s vile for Twitter to not allow someone to speech, it’s vile for you to do the same. What time can I speak? I think your wife will *really* life my talk 😉

                    1. What’s truly hilarious here is that the same people who argue that online platforms are the new public square, are the same ones who argue that censorship of non-left-liberal opinions is perfectly fine.

                      And then they use false analogies like someone’s home, which ISN’T the “new public square” they’ve stated that online platforms have become, to say that this censorship is perfectly acceptable.

                    2. I don’t think it’s a public square, it’s a private thing. Whoops for you!

                    3. I don’t think it’s a public square, it’s a private thing

                      Stop lying.

                    4. Hey look WK is using his Queen Amalthea sock again because he got banned

                    5. Why couldn’t Trump ban trolls from his Twitter account? Any reason since it was something Twitter allows EVERYBODY else to do but courts found an issue.

                  2. Thanks for confirming, again, that if you step on my property without permission, I can shoot you and feed you to the local wildlife.

                    1. You really, really want to shoot someone! I get it, impotent rage does that.

                      But I’m just pointing out that if you are so butt-hurt about someone being kicked off a private entities space then you should let me come speak in your living room. I think your wife and/or older daughter would *love* it, and I’m sure you’re not going to be a hypocrite and talk about private ownership here.

                    2. If you are so adamant that free speech doesn’t apply as a general principle, you should support me shooting you if you come on my property without permission.

              2. You can come into my living room and speak any time you want to, I’m a bleeding-heart free speech absolutist.

                Well, assuming you’re a straight white Christian male who worships Donald Trump. It’s silly to expect that I would extend free speech principles to filthy Jews or adherents of other gutter religions, members of the mongrel races, perverts, people whose only job is to shut up and make me a sandwich, or people who refuse to accept the divinity of Our Lord and Savior Donald J. Trump.

                Other than those few niggling caveats, I’m as pro-free speech as anybody you could ever hope to meet. I’m not insane though, I certainly don’t support the right to free speech for people who can’t be trusted to have the right to free speech.

                1. “…….niggling……”?

                  Dude. Not cool.

          2. No I’m saying actually apply 230. Once a company moderates content they loose immunity. But so far that only applies to non progressive entities

            1. Such as the federalist. They had 230 immunity, then Google said they would pull their links and ads if they didn’t stop their comment section. Google is acting as a moderator and no longer has section 230 to hide behind

        2. Amazon’s servers are not “open to everyone”. Amazon is a private business that reserves the right not to host someone.

          1. And when they kicked your sorry ass off, you found a work-around to make sure the rest of us get pestered by a TDS-addled shit.

          2. We all know you’re Queen Amalthea

      2. The whole fucking point of Section 230 is to make sure platforms aren’t held responsible for the content posted by their users. When you start assuming the responsibility of curating that content, you’re no longer a platform, you’re a publisher. You’re explicitly favoring one viewpoint, one opinion, one form of speech over another. And claiming you’re censoring free speech in the name of free speech is just insane.

        1. Censorship by private parties is still free speech because there is no government coercion.

          Seems to me that conservatives are asking the government to force private parties to post content that they like, in the name of free speech.

          Coercion is freedom, if you’re a conservative.

          1. Censorship by private parties is still free speech because there is no government coercion.

            That still doesn’t make them a platform, you Chinese cock-sucking dumbass.

            1. Anyone who doesn’t agree with your suggestion of government intervention to install more ‘fairness’ must be pro-China. Lol.

              If the rule you follow has led you to this, of what use is the rule?

              1. You’ve already made it clear–if you step on my property uninvited, I can shoot you. Don’t blame me, that’s the rule you put in place.

                1. No, no, you think every speaker must be allowed to speak at any private venue. When can I come and speak to your family? Don’t be such a vile, twisted coward. Let me know 🙂

                  1. No, no, you think if you step on my property uninvited, I’m permitted to shoot you and feed you to the local wildlife. You said so yourself.

                    1. No, you’ve invited me! Anything other would be vile and such.

                    2. Shitstains like Queen Commie never get invited anywhere. They don’t understand the concept that someone might feel violated under contract when they were invited by TwitBook, datamined and sold to the highest bidder, and then told to STFU when Big Tech has already gotten everything they wanted.

                    3. So, it’s about the “feels”?

                      If there is one thing I’ve learned from years of conversations with the conservatives here, it is that anyone who gives their “feels” as a reason they should be heartlessly mocked. Why is this different?

                    4. Nice try, WK. ‘ feel violated under contract’ and ‘feel angry’ are not objectively or subjectively the same. You are parsing the language to obfuscate the meaning.

                      Disingenuous Knight would be a much better moniker for you. I can see you now, riding past the Lady getting raped in the mud to go fight that dragon you can never quite locate.

                    5. You are the one who wrote about feelings. I’ll quote what you wrote: “might feel violated”. Your sentence went on to not mention a single argument about where any term of a contract was violated by Facebook or Twitter.

                    6. No, you’ve invited me! Anything other would be vile and such.

                      But my house is not a social media platform, I never permitted leftist trash to come there in the first place.

                    7. D-i-s-i-n-g-e-n-u-i-n-e.

                      O-b-f-u-s-c-a-t-i-o-n.

                      I have argued multiple times previously about the unconscionable, one-sided, everchanging nature of ToS contracts AND made reference to it in my comment above.

                      “datamined and sold to the highest bidder, and then told to STFU when Big Tech has already gotten everything they wanted.”

                      These services are not free. We pay for them with our clicks and data, which Big Tech continues to package and sell even after they unilaterally cancel the contract. The contract isn’t ‘if you violate the ToS, this contact is cancelled, take your content and leave’. It is ‘if we feel, in our opinion and without your consultation, that you have violated the ToS, at our discretion, you will be denied access, even to content you produced yourself, while we will keep all your information and continue monetize it, and we will even continue to gather your data in this application, through other applications and websites, without asking your permission or granting you any compensation whatsoever’. It goes against the history of contract law that such one-sided contracts are unenforceable.

                      You fail at pedantry as you do at logic, Brown Knight.

                    8. We all know you’re Queen Amalthea, White Knight

            2. That was one of the dumbest non sequitors I’ve ever seen in my entire life.

              1. Not nearly as dumb as your arbitrary support of freedom of speech.

                Guess all that alcohol finally pickled the remaining two brain cells of yours into oblivion.

                1. When you resort to acting like a schoolyard bully then you’ve lost the debate. Again, thank you for confirming your opposition to freedom of association. That bit of honesty must have been really painful.

                  1. So you’re going to call for the repeal of the Civil Rights Act now, correct? Because that’s the biggest violation of freedom of association in American history, if you’re reductive interpretation of such a phrase is to be believed.

                    Thanks for confirming that HOAs can enact a “no blacks” residency clause. True and Honest Libertarians gotta protect that freedom of association!

                    1. Thanks for confirming that HOAs can enact a “no blacks” residency clause.

                      They can enact a “no whites” clause for all I care.

                    2. They can enact a “no whites” clause for all I care.

                      Except they actually can’t. So your point doesn’t stand.

                    3. They can’t enact a “no blacks” clause either, so what’s your point?

                      Never mind. This conversation is giving me a headache.

                    4. “Never mind. This conversation is giving me a headache.”

                      The pattern that rears its head over and over with debates with Red Rocks, JesseAz, Ra’s, Mother’s, etc. is that they are not interested in getting at truth, or learning anything, or anything positive goal at all. They want to “win” the debate.

                      An adult conversation about Internet regulations, private censorship, the Civil Rights Act, gay wedding cakes, etc. would try to arrive at and clarify a workable, ethical solution to real world problems, so that we can all move on and enjoy life and prosper.

                      But that’s not what they want. It’s like their mail-in ballot complaints. They never wanted mail-in ballots to work, so they steer the definition of the problem in a direction that they never find themselves obligated to try to help make mail-in balloting work better.

                    5. Not only that, but they’re not arguing from principles. They’d cheer if leftists platforms were censored, but cry when it’s done to them.

                    6. They can’t enact a “no blacks” clause either, so what’s your point?

                      The point is that you’re not actually in favor of freedom of association because you don’t want to repeal the very thing that you said violates that.

                      Not only that, but they’re not arguing from principles. They’d cheer if leftists platforms were censored, but cry when it’s done to them.

                      No, I’ve gone on record repeatedly that no one should be censored for wrongthink or lose their job over it. I even said so in the Wil Wilkinson thread a couple days ago. So you and White Excrement are arguing with the strawman in your head there.

                    7. “So you and White Excrement are arguing with the strawman in your head there.”

                      Actually, I didn’t argue that you would cheer if leftist platforms were censored. sarcasmic said that. sarcasmic and I are different persons.

                    8. We all know you’re Queen Amalthea, White Knight

                    9. LOL. WK comes in here and still doesn’t understand my whole thing with 230 is contractual because like Sarcasmic and the others here, they are dishonest people.

                    10. That’s weird. I thought I was debating with Red Rocks White Privilege.

                      You, JesseAz, were not even present in this comments thread, yet somehow I was misunderstanding your 230 position.

                    11. I flag and refresh when I see JesseAz. All he does is try to get you to defend things you never said, in a trolling effort to get you to explain, but it’s all in bad faith. He’s not worth anything except flag, F5. That’s it.

                    12. Same with ‘a libertarian’, Sevo, and now Red Rocks. Which kinda sucks because he wasn’t always a dick. But TDS has rotted his brain.

                    13. Actually, I didn’t argue that you would cheer if leftist platforms were censored. sarcasmic said that. sarcasmic and I are different persons.

                      And actually, I never argued about mail-in ballots, either, so you’re still arguing with a strawman.

                    14. Same with ‘a libertarian’, Sevo, and now Red Rocks. Which kinda sucks because he wasn’t always a dick.

                      No, I’ve always been an asshole, ever since I started commenting here ten years ago. You just overlooked it because you thought we were on the same team.

                    15. Didn’t sat that you, specifically, did argue about mail-in ballots. I listed four different user handles in my comment.

                    16. Ahhh, so you’ve always been a conservative asshole, and I stupidly thought you were libertarian. And now that I have been critical of God King Trump I must be a leftist scum in your TDS addled brain, because you’re either with Trump or you’re a commie. Got it.

                    17. Ahhh, so you’ve always been a conservative asshole, and I stupidly thought you were libertarian. And now that I have been critical of God King Trump I must be a leftist scum in your TDS addled brain, because you’re either with Trump or you’re a commie. Got it.

                      Are you drunk again? You’re the only one bringing up Trump in this thread.

                    18. It’s quite telling how often Trump fan boys tacitly concede that they have lost a debate by shifting to insults or calling people sock puppets. Anything to try to divert attention from their not having any reply to the debate point that was just made.

                    19. It’s quite telling how often Trump fan boys tacitly concede that they have lost a debate by shifting to insults or calling people sock puppets. Anything to try to divert attention from their not having any reply to the debate point that was just made.

                      It’s even more telling when White Excrement resorts to his usual passive-aggressive deflection.

                      Go cry some more about “an insurrection at the Capitol,” you lazy bitch.

                    20. To be passive-aggressive I’d have to be exhibiting passivity. I’m being plainly aggressive in my opposition to the Trump worshipers who have infected the Reason commentariat.

                    21. I’m being plainly aggressive in my opposition to the Trump worshipers who have infected the Reason commentariat.

                      The reason it’s called TDS is you’re the only ones bringing him up in a thread that isn’t even about him.

                    22. The White Knight II: The White Knight Rises!
                      January.25.2021 at 11:30 am
                      “Never mind. This conversation is giving me a headache.”

                      The pattern that rears its head over and over with debates with Red Rocks, JesseAz, Ra’s, Mother’s, etc. is that they are not interested in getting at truth,

                      You and sarcasmic are fucking retarded lefty cucks.

                    23. Lol

                      sarcasmic
                      January.25.2021 at 3:01 pm
                      I flag and refresh when I see JesseAz.

                      Because you’re a hypocrite and cry whenever someone shows you what you are.

          2. Censorship is censorship, regardless of who does it.

            Censorship by private parties may not violate the First Amendment, but it does violate the cultural values and principles of Freedom of Expression, which we used to hold dear as a society.

            1. You’re not forced to do business with private parties, so they can discriminate all day long. Not so much with government.

              1. Yes, they can, it’s not illegal.

                That doesn’t mean that we can’t call it illiberal and antithetical to our societal values when they do such a thing.

                We are still allowed to criticize them for it.

              2. And you ignore the collusion in the markets which becomes an anti-trust legality. Way to go sarcasmic, continue down the path of simplified argumentation so you can one day become your idol jeff.

                WK is in stiff competition with you there.

            2. Baloney, there is a vast difference between private censorship and the full weight and power of government engaging in censorship.

              1. Yes, that’s why one is illegal and the other isn’t.

                Not all censorship violates the First Amendment.

                All censorship is censorship.

                1. Fair enough.

                  1. We all know you’re Queen Amalthea, White Knight

            3. Yeah it’s not complicated.

      3. Let me know when I get to speak in your living room this week. Don’t do some vil, sick, twisted, fucked-up shit, give me a date and time ????

        You’ll have the date and the time as soon as you can produce the contract stating I’ve agreed to provide those things and you’ve paid the fee for the space. You’re welcome.

    2. ” How the fucking fuck do you reconcile….”

      You can’t. Because there is no libertarianism there to reconcile with.

      Same goes for QA.

    3. Do you understand what coercion is?

      1. Of course. Coercion is when a private entity doesn’t give me a platform, forcing me to go somewhere else!

        1. When a beggar asks for spare change, and you refuse, you’re coercing him into robbing a liquor store! You bastard!

          1. “HURRR MAKE YOUR OWN BANKS, INTERNET, ONLINE PLATFORM, AND GOVERNMENT-FUNDED INVESTMENT HERPITY DERPITY DOO!”

            1. Lol, do you really think you’re *oppressed* if a particular social media outlet doesn’t allow you? I’ve never had a Facebook, Instagram or Twitter account in my life. I’ve never been a big enough bitch to complain that I’m silenced or oppressed. I guess YMMV

              1. Yes, you only support freedom of speech when you think you’re being shut up. That means you don’t actually support it.

                1. Every accusation is a confession.

                  1. Yes, we understand that your side projects more than a 24-screen movie theater.

                    1. When can I come to your house? Do you not respect freedom of speech? Are you projecting a false idea of that?

                    2. Unlike social media, I never allowed you in my house in the first place, so you can’t even get your analogies right.

                      It’s like open-borders libertarians who argue that national borders are “arbitrary lines,” yet still expect others to respect their “private property.”

                    3. Hey White Knight, We all know you’re Queen Amalthea

              2. I can assure you, you are not missing anything of value by not having a Twitter account.

                1. Hey White Knight, We all know you’re Queen Amalthea

            2. Freedom of association means freedom to say no. Thanks for confirming that conservatives are in full opposition to freedom of association.

              1. So the Civil Rights Act is going to be repealed now, right, dumbass?

                1. The CRA did two things. It prohibited the government from using legislation to force private parties to discriminate, and that was a good thing. Very libertarian. Then it prohibited private parties from discriminating. That’s not very libertarian. Liberty means being free to be a bigoted asshole.

                  1. So you’re going to be calling for its repeal, correct?

                    1. What purpose would that serve? Most people feel that opposition to criminalizing discrimination by private parties equals an endorsement of discrimination. As in if you allow it then you’re encouraging it. That which is not prohibited is mandatory, or something. It’s not worth the effort.

                    2. What purpose would that serve? Most people feel that opposition to criminalizing discrimination by private parties equals an endorsement of discrimination.

                      Oh, so you’re all for “freedom of association,” except for when you actually have to put your supposed principles on the line? It shouldn’t be about “feelings,” right? It should be about principles!

                      What good are your supposed principles if you won’t argue to get rid of the very thing that’s violating them?

                    3. That means you must support the war on drugs because you can’t do anything about it, right?

                    4. Are you for freedom of association? I’d like to exercise that and come speak in your living room. I think your wife and daughters would really like it. Let me know when and where, you defender of association and freedom you!

                    5. Go tu quoque someone else. I’m tired of your bullshit. Good day.

                    6. That means you must support the war on drugs because you can’t do anything about it, right?

                      I’m not the one who said that freedom of association is a sacrosanct right, and then throws up his hands and says “sure, the Civil Rights Act violates that, but what can I do about it?” You either believe it’s valid as a specific principle, and argue to remove things which violate that principle, or you don’t actually believe it and support using a definition of “private property” as an arbitrary bludgeon against those you don’t like.

                      The irony is that you complain up above that I would support this shit it if was harming left-wing speech, when I’ve stated repeatedly that I don’t support cancel culture in any way whatsoever, yet here you are arguing for that very thing, only from the other direction.

                    7. Are you for freedom of association? I’d like to exercise that and come speak in your living room.

                      Unlike social media, I never allowed you in my house in the first place, so you can’t even get your analogies right.

                    8. You either believe it’s valid as a specific principle, and argue to remove things which violate that principle, or you don’t actually believe it and support using a definition of “private property” as an arbitrary bludgeon against those you don’t like.

                      Talk about a false dichotomy. I don’t go around demanding Title II of the CRA be repealed because it would turn into an argument about me being racist.

                      Anyway, it doesn’t matter. You’re not arguing the point. You’re arguing the person. You’re saying my point is wrong because I’m not writing letters to the editor demanding the repeal of the CRA.

                      So there’s no point in having a conversation with you because it isn’t a conversation. It’s just you looking for something to attack.

                      You’re disingenuous, dishonest, and willfully ignorant. Have fun in your FOX bubble.

                    9. “You’re disingenuous, dishonest, and willfully ignorant. Have fun in your FOX bubble.”

                      Aaahahaha Queen Amalthea is maaaaaaad!

                    10. I don’t go around demanding Title II of the CRA be repealed because it would turn into an argument about me being racist.

                      So? Do you believe in principle of freedom of association or not? Does the Masterpiece Cakes case change your motivation because you don’t want it to turn into an argument about you being homophobic? Who gives a shit if they call you racist or not?

                      You’re disingenuous, dishonest, and willfully ignorant. Have fun in your FOX bubble.

                      No, the one being disingenuous here is you, because you’re blatantly admitting that you don’t support the repeal of the CRA despite it violating the principle of freedom of association, solely because you’re afraid of being called a racist. Yet, you’re all for this shit when

                      And really, you ought to be more clever than to try that lame-ass “FAUX NEWS!” nonsense on me. 2005 called, and it wants it’s meme back.

                    11. *Yet, you’re all for this shit when it harms people you don’t like. How ironic.

                    12. No, the one being disingenuous here is you, because you’re blatantly admitting that you don’t support the repeal of the CRA despite it violating the principle of freedom of association, solely because you’re afraid of being called a racist.

                      Um, no. I just said it violates freedom of association. Must I spell out the words? I oppose Title II of the CRA and would like to see it repealed. Happy? Now you say you oppose freedom of association because you want to use government force on private parties who censor you, and coerce them into doing what you want them to do.

                      Oh, but you won’t say that. That would be honest. Fuck off, troll.

                    13. Now you say you oppose freedom of association because you want to use government force on private parties who censor you, and coerce them into doing what you want them to do.

                      No, I oppose social media platforms that became global megacorps through government sponsorship exercising a double standard when it comes to the nature of their platforms. They are either a publisher, or a platform, and when they collude to suppress speech they don’t like, then I support them being redefined from a platform to a publisher.

                      None of that alters Section 230, nor involves government “forcing” them to do anything. Now fuck off yourself, you corporatist dick-sucker.

            3. You say that like you are making a great point, but Parler has now found hosting on Epik, and nobody is telling Epik they cannot do business. Also, Parler is suing AWS, and if their lawsuit has merit, they will get their AWS hosting back, as per terms of their contract.

              1. Hey White Knight, We all know you’re Queen Amalthea

    4. There’s basically two choices: let private actors make choices about what content they want to host, or get the government involved. Do we really have to explain, in the comments section on a libertarian blog, what the potential problems with getting the government involved are? Especially, when the people crying out about “private censorship” are conservatives and the current in-power government is liberal/progressive?

      1. The government IS involved. That’s why is messed up.

        1. If you are referring to Section 230, Twitter and Facebook would have the right to accounts regardless of its existing or not. AWS would have the right not to provide hosting for Parler regardless of its existing or not.

          Section 230 is a well-written, lightweight, uniformly-applied bit of regulation that makes it possible for social media sites to post user-provided content at massive scale without having to pre-screen all posts for objectionable content. This very comments section would be doomed without Section 230.

          1. All comment sections are doomed. It’s just a matter of time.

            1. You might be right about that.

              1. Hey White Knight, We all know you’re Queen Amalthea

          2. WK believes freedom of association allows companies to change contracts on the whims of their choosing. Hilarious.

  23. What’s the narrative on the “National Guard in the Parking Garage” this morning? Last I heard, we were supposed to believe that the Guard’s officers blithely took verbal orders from some lowly unknown patrolman on Pelosi’s Praetorian Guard Capitol Police to move to the parking garage. Sounds like a coverup instead of an opportunity for lots of firings and courts martial.

    1. I had dinner with some friends this weekend. Eventually the conversation got around to politics. One is now Army Reserve the other is retired Army and current USO director. Both of them were laughing at the stupidity of the complaint. In their minds it was a dry place with decent protection from the elements. To them it seemed like someone had found a good location for the guard.

      1. Had a Marine friend say the same thing and its true a garage is better than outdoors but they are missing the point. the point is that someone a democrat clearly doesn’t like military around and had them moved out of site just like Hillary used to do.

    2. Last I heard, the narrative is that it is being investigated who is responsible for giving the orders. But it looks like it is already falling out of the news cycle, which is kind of the lazy man’s approach to doing a coverup.

      1. We all know you’re Queen Amalthea.

        You’re not fooling anyone.

        1. We also know he’s not a libertarian.

  24. Yeah immunity only applies to Amazon Twitter and Facebook. They blew through the 230 part years ago. Now they have compleate immunity.

    1. Immunity?

      Amazon and Parler had a contract. Their dispute over the contract is going to court. That doesn’t sound like immunity.

      What did Twitter or Facebook do that wasn’t something they claimed the power to do in the end user agreement at the time the users signed up for an account?

      1. We all know you’re Queen Amalthea.

        You’re not fooling anyone.

  25. https://thefreethoughtproject.com/facebook-private-company-messages-users-fbi/

    This week, Facebook began furnishing the Federal Bureau of Investigation with data on Trump supporters who discussed the events at the capitol on their platform – up to and including their private messages. Through this action the social media giant is acting as a de facto intelligence collecting arm of the US government.

    In contrast, when Syed Farook, otherwise known as the San Bernardino mass shooter, wouldn’t unlock his iPhone for the feds, Apple refused to create a backdoor for them to access it acting as an actual private company supporting the privacy rights of its customers. But Facebook is more than willing to open up its data mining services for their friends in the federal government — because, as we have stated numerous times, Facebook is not private.

    As TFTP reported in 2018, Facebook announced that it partnered with the arm of the government-funded Atlantic Council, known as the Digital Forensic Research Lab that was brought on to help the social media behemoth with “real-time insights and updates on emerging threats and disinformation campaigns from around the world.”

    1. Anyone using bookface is a fool.

    2. As TFTP reported in 2018, Facebook announced that it partnered with the arm of the government-funded Atlantic Council, known as the Digital Forensic Research Lab that was brought on to help the social media behemoth with “real-time insights and updates on emerging threats and disinformation campaigns from around the world.”

      I’m sure sarcasmic will be along any second now to tell us that social media platforms collaborating with the government to monitor online speech and engage in arbitrary definitions of “threats” and “disinformation” isn’t coercion, and they still deserve to be considered a platform even though they’re openly working with the government now, China-style.

      Good thing L’Affaire Woodchipper happened in 2015, or he’d be arguing that everyone who made a sideways joke about woodchippers deserved prison time, because “freedom of speech doesn’t mean freedom from consequences.”

      1. That depends on if the “partnership” came with an “or else” clause.

        1. No, it doesn’t.

          1. If it’s all voluntary, then what’s the problem? Is anyone forcing you to use Facebook?

            1. That you really don’t see the problem with a social media platform collaborating with the government to root out wrongthink shows how reductive and simplistic your worldview actually is.

              1. Show me on the doll where Facebook touched you.

                1. sarcasmic loves government/private sector collusion.

                  1. Fuck off, dude. You’re now on my troll list with Jesse and Sevo and others who have no interest in debate or exchange of ideas, who instead only care about scoring points and calling people names. So seriously, go fuck yourself.

                    1. UH OH WK IS MAAAAAD don’t get yourself banned again White Knight lolololl

                    2. Fuck off yourself, twat. Your whole schtick here for fucking YEARS was making highly reductive one-liners, not “debate or exchange of ideas.” Save the face-fanning about that for a forum where you actually bring that to bear.

                    3. He’s on the troll list for easily breaking down your own argument? LOL.

                    4. Your whole schtick here for fucking YEARS was making highly reductive one-liners, not “debate or exchange of ideas.”

                      Oh come on. I do both. The problem is that your TDS infected brain has caused you to see the world as Those Who Support Dear Leader and Leftist Scum. You are One or The Other. I pity you and your fellow Trumpistas. Trump is a con man. You bought the con. Hook, line and sinker. You’re a dupe, but you’re too proud to admit it. Sad. So very sad.

                    5. Oh come on. I do both

                      No, not really.

                      The funniest thing about the rest of your rant is that I didn’t even vote for Trump. You’re far more obsessed with him than I’ll ever be, but that’s your cross to bear, not mine.

                    6. You are so delusional sarcasmic. You need more introspection than even jeff. Youre honestly a lefty who refuses to admit his bias.

            2. Nobody is forcing me to use an iPhone, Facebook or Twitter. Just making sure there are no alternatives.

              1. As far as secure communications, use Signal. Or Apple’s Message app, which is just as secure (on Apple’s end at least).

                There are alternatives.

                1. What’s the alternative to Twitter? It was Parler.

                  1. And it will be Parler, again.

                    But there is also Substack, Snapchat, Instagram, reddit, Quora, and on and on. Or host your own website.

                    Now, explain exactly why anyone in this world needs to be able to post 280-character-at-a-time messages.

                    1. We all know you’re Queen Amalthea.

                      You’re not fooling anyone.

                    2. Tell that to John Matze

            3. So a government paying industry to implement regulations that are against the law or not permitted as a government power would be okay with you.

              You’ve actually gotten dumber under Biden.

        2. The partnership probably came with a”Our boss doesn’t like the people you want to check on, so it’s okay this time.”

    3. Facebook collecting information on private citizens? Their known associates, political leanings, activities, memberships, etc.? Who could have predicted that?

      The CIA used to have do a lot of legwork to collect all that info in one place. Now people put it online themselves.

  26. I am making 10 Dollars at home own laptop .Just do work online 2 to 4 hour proparly . so i make my family happy and u can do Check it out whaat i do……………._ READ MORE

    1. Seems that the Biden administration has somehow lowered the earning potential of bots –

      1. Equity.

  27. “The Section 230-based legal regime is a way of reconciling free political expression with the need to limit or remove certain kinds of speech from the public sphere. A potential threat to public safety was addressed, but not in a rigid, permanent and coercive way, not through state action, but through contractual arrangements and private ordering.”

    I maintain my full support for Section 230, but this rationalization for it, on the backs of all the anti-libertarian and anti-capitalist actions against Parler is garbage for three main reasons.

    1) Collusion

    A handful of companies colluding to exclude a huge chunk of the American people from a market isn’t what Adam Smith or I mean by wanting free markets. In a free and capitalist society, the government still has a legitimate role in protecting our rights from private parties, and that can and does sometimes include collusion.

    2) Antitrust

    The government and the Democratic party are now one in the same, and the Democrats have repeatedly threatened to use the antitrust cases pending against Facebook and Google to break those companies up–if they don’t crack down on speech.

    Pretending that recent actions against conservatives on various platforms is completely unrelated to those threats, the pending antitrust cases, and the Democrats taking control of the both the White House and the senate is to be willfully blind.

    Again, a former president being banished from the public square and an entire platform being relegated to the waste bin by companies that are working under the threat of the government breaking them up shouldn’t be any libertarian capitalist’s idea of private enterprise and markets at work without government interference.

    3) Government action.

    The Biden administration repeatedly made statement and issued order last week indicating that they were using the FBI and other intelligence services to monitor the online activity of what they’re calling extremists. It isn’t clear, yet, whether anyone at the FBI, the Justice Department, or from within the Biden administration contacted the Big Tech companies in question and told them to deplatform Trump and Parler.

    At the very least, however, it is absurd to think that Google would exclude an app like Parler from being downloaded–in the very same way that the antitrust case accuses them of using monopolistic tactics with their app store–unless Google checked with the government prosecutors in the antitrust case against to see whether banning Parler from their app store would be used against them by the government.

    1. That what you assert is true only make ENB more happy.

      1. This is the way people gain and lose credibility.

        Orwell criticized communism because he was a principled socialist = +1 credibility.

        Because some journalists were pro-communist at the time, they downplayed starvation in the Ukraine under Stalin = -1 credibility.

        Credibility comes from acknowledging and accounting for facts that people would use against you. Credibility is lost by pretending that every argument against you should be completely ignored.

        Because you believe in the Sermon on the Mount doesn’t necessarily mean you need to defend the six day creation story in Genesis 1. If you’re an Objectivist, acknowledge whatever legitimate flaws Ayn Rand had, and tell people all the things she was right about anyway. I was happy to tell people how wrong Trump was on immigration and trade–especially as a precursor to all the reasons libertarian capitalists should have voted for him in 2020. Because I would have hated Stalin for good reasons doesn’t mean I would have needed to pretend that allying ourselves with him to defeat the Nazis and Imperial Japan was a bad idea.

        Principled libertarians don’t pick a side in an issue first and then defend it using any and every fucked up rationalization that comes along. Government coercion and collusion don’t suddenly become acceptable if we defend them in terms of private enterprise and free association, and if we wanted to trash the reputation of private enterprise and free association, using them to defend government coercion and collusion might be the very best way.

        1. Here’s another one that doesn’t automatically mean you are a Christian.

          By their fruit you will recognize them

    2. ” the government still has a legitimate role in protecting our rights from private parties, and that can and does sometimes include collusion.”

      I love government intervention when my partisan side perceives a disadvantage! This is exactly how Noam Chomsky talks.

      1. “I love government intervention when my partisan side perceives a disadvantage! ”

        The government has no business telling Woolworth who can and cannot eat at their lunch counter. Discuss.

        1. You know you lose either way here, right?

          1. Go for it. Your track record says otherwise.

            1. The government has no business telling Twitter who can publish comments on their site.

              Now, ask yourself, any difference between today social media site and NC city 1960’s diner?

              1. You sure botched that job.

                Tell me about that lunch counter thing again?

                1. …Government has no business telling a lunch counter operator…

                  1. Public accommodations are only public accommodations when they are not accommodating the right kind of public.

                    QA keeps bleating. All I hear is “Four legs good, two legs bad!”

                2. Nope, landed it.

                  1. Why don’t you want to eat in the same restaurant as black people?

                  2. We all know you’re White Knight and you’re using that sock because you got banned.

                    You’re not fooling anyone.

          2. I also would like to hear about this, include accommodations for the handicapped as well.

      2. “I love government intervention when my partisan side perceives a disadvantage! This is exactly how Noam Chomsky talks.”

        That isn’t what I said.

        The legitimate purpose of government is to protect our rights.

        The Second Amendment doesn’t give us the freedom to arbitrarily shoot people. It just protects our right to own and carry a gun. If you use your gun to arbitrarily hurt people, the government has a legitimate duty to protect our rights from you (a private party) and your gun.

        The First Amendment protects our right to freedom of association. It does not protect our freedom to violate other people’s rights. If you use your association to collude and violate other people’s association rights, then the government may have a legitimate obligation to protect our rights from you–in a libertarian and capitalist society.

        In some murder cases, there can be and are legitimate questions about whether someone shot in self-defense or whether it was murder. Because there can be and are legitimate questions about that, of course, the existence of Second Amendment doesn’t mean that the government doesn’t have a legitimate libertarian responsibility to protect our rights from murderers who use a gun–even if they’re private parties!

        There may be legitimate questions as to whether what the Big Tech companies did to Donald Trump or Parler was a legitimate use of association rights or collusion, too, but the existence of association rights by itself does not mean that the government has no libertarian obligation to protect our rights from collusion–regardless of whether the Big Tech companies are private parties.

        1. I butchered part of that.

          Anyway, yeah, the legitimate purpose of government in a libertarian and capitalist society is to protect our rights–and that includes protecting our rights from private parties, too.

          And there isn’t anything about having association rights or being a private party that gives you the freedom to violate other people’s rights. If you want to argue that these people’s rights aren’t being violated, that’s a different argument.

        2. “That isn’t what I said.”

          We all know that Ken.

          But QA cannot plausibly argue what you said, at least not without admitting he’s an oppressive statist, so instead we get the usual display of intellectual dishonesty, misdirection, and strawmen.

          1. There is an interesting argument to be had about how people’s rights are being violated, say, when all the social media platforms decide to ban a former president or when all the app stores decide to refuse to let people download Parler.

            It often seems to be necessary to make these people’s arguments for them. When they can’t make a decent argument themselves, it’s often . . . disappointing. It’s like going fishing just to have your limit of trout jump into the boat.

            In that case, you didn’t even really get to go fishing.

          2. Pointing out oppressive statist makes one an oppressive statist.

            thomas just wants statism that is for his side.

            1. The government has a legitimate obligation to protect our rights in a libertarian and capitalist society regardless of what Thomas wants.

              Talking about personal aspects of Thomas is another way of saying that you can’t seem counter some eminently sensible arguments.

              How disappointing.

              “People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices…. But though the law cannot hinder people of the same trade from sometimes assembling together, it ought to do nothing to facilitate such assemblies, much less to render them necessary.”

              —-Adam Smith, The Wealth Of Nations [1776]

              https://lpmaryland.org/liberty-quotation-adam-smith-collusion/

              Is Adam Smith wrong about that because of some personal aspect of his personality that only you seem to know about, too?

              Intellectually, your fly is open.

      3. Section 230 IS government intervention

        1. This is the biggest thing, we are acting as if 230 isn’t a government gift to a favored industry. That’s what it is. Yet idiots here argue as if it is sacrosanct.

    3. Except a libertarian should want to throw out antitrust and collusion laws. Companies in the market should be free to cooperate whenever they agree to.

      The only role for government should be in enforcing contracts, to make sure that Amazon doesn’t pull the rug out from under Parler except under the terms both parties previously agreed to.

      And really, why trust government courts? A case like this should go to private arbitration, or a common law court.

      1. That is not true. A libertarian is not an anarchist. In examples of extreme collusions bearing market failures, a libertarian would want intervention at that point. Some idealists argue differently, but they are wrong. Libertarianism is making people freer. Allowing massive collusion by limited entities does not make people more free.

        1. Shorter: Libertarian principles do not stop at the door of government. They should rightly point out any and every threat to liberty.

  28. https://twitter.com/TulsiGabbard/status/1353674981570301954?s=19

    President @JoeBiden, have you declared martial law? Because that is what it’s starting to look and feel like. Let our troops get back home to their families.

    1. Poor Tulsi. She was a decent politician who had to be destroyed because she’s actually anti-war.

  29. APPLY Online work from home USA online work details used this site…… Click here for more info.

  30. https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1353698351208923139?s=19

    DC will stay under military occupation while the opposition leader is put on trial

    1. Yeah, you think the opposition leader’s (sic) supporters recent activities might have let to that?

      1. No.
        Still claiming a guy who died of a stroke was “killed” by the protesters, you TDS-addled piece of shit?

        1. No, claiming a bunch of yahoos storming the capital to overturn the election based upon silly fairy tales concocted to sooth the fragile ego of loser Dear Leader is going to lead to increased security. But, hey, you’ve obviously got another wacky fringe view. You do you.

          1. Justifying paranoia based on TDS seems to fit you just fine.

            1. You just repeated your pathetic conclusory statement. Your Dear Leader would rightfully say : SAD

              1. We all know you’re White Knight and you’re using that sock because you got banned.

                You’re not fooling anyone.

        2. This attempt at brushing off the killing of a police officer by pro-MAGA rioters is absolutely reprehensible.

          Officer Sicknick died of a stroke,burst blood vessels in the brain, after a rioter threw a big metal, fire extinguisher at his head. We even have video of the act.

          1. We all know you’re Queen Amalthea.

            You’re not fooling anyone. You were banned. Respect Reason’s property and leave.

          2. Keyword After. Missing words: due to. The doctors have not said so, only your beloved leftist media. The family has not said they were related either.

            1. It would be really weird if it had happened Before. Common sense says that the stroke was a direct consequence of being bashed on the head, you disingenuous person.

      2. Authoritarian paranoia.

        1. Yeah, when the Capitol of the nation is violently stormed for the first time in our history the reaction is surely authoritarian paranoia…

          Or, as a matter of inductive logic, is your position paranoid?

          Haha, don’t ask dude, just reaffirm!

          1. “Yeah, when the Capitol of the nation is violently stormed for the first time in our history…”

            TDS is common among those who never got past 6th grade history classes.

            1. Hey she sounds like a 14 year old. She’s probably not old enough to remember all the way back to 2019, or 2018 or 2016 when it happened before

            2. Yeah, Capitol storming is a common historical event!

              You’re deranged.

              1. Goalpost moved in under 25 minutes!

                That’s impressive.

                Almost as quickly as you change your socks.

              2. It is, but you refuse to accept the examples while insisting on exaggerating what happened Jan 6. It is impossible to converse with you.

                Flag. Refresh.

                1. Lefty shits do not argue in good faith, and Ken makes the point that they are simply not mentally equipped to understand that objective reality exists.
                  IOWs, it’s not that they are dishonest, which they are, it’s that they are too stupid to grasp the concept of honesty.
                  Probably Tony and turd are the most blatant examples, but whoever this is is giving them a run.

                  1. Probably a teacher. They have plenty of time to troll the internet these days.

                  2. Right, because calling people “lefty shits” is arguing in good faith.

                  3. Claiming that anyone who says anything critical about Donald J. Trump has TDS. That’s arguing in good faith! Yessiree!

                    1. We all know you’re Queen Amalthea.

                      You’re not fooling anyone. You were banned. Respect Reason’s property and leave.

                    2. Making false strawman arguments is definitely a sign of being a LS.

                      The odd thing is that you and all your socks are the same, including sarcasmic. Almost everyone here has criticized Trump. You can’t even criticize the BLM riots.

                    3. Wow, right in the same comment:
                      “Making false strawman arguments”
                      “you and all your socks”

                    4. I hereby criticize any riots where people who were sympathetic to police reform destroyed property, stole things, or hurt people. They were not “BLM riots”, however.

                    5. So you refuse to say the blm riots. Got it. Yet you even tried to implicate me in the d.c. riots yesterday. Lol.

              3. First time in history? The violent storming of the Capitol in 1814 was a bit more violent.

          2. Is it a coincidence that your screen name is QA?

            1. Yes! I’m Q’s secret helper. We’ve worked in intelligence so long fighting the Satanic Democrat conspiracy. We need a higher level approach to this and he’s promoted me to dropping secret messages to nuts, I mean PATRIOTS, in the comments sections here and otherwise…Stay tuned for more important messages Don’t look at me!, we’re going to do big things!

              1. “Yes! I’m Q’s secret helper…”

                No, you’re a TDS-addled lefty shit.

                1. It’s White Knight.

                2. He’s an errand boy, sent by grocery clerks to collect a bill.

          3. Yeah, when the Capitol of the nation is violently stormed for the first time in our history the reaction is surely authoritarian paranoia…

            No, princess, that wasn’t the first time. It happened as recently as 2018.

            1. I’m not good at distinctions…

              Are these pants, or socks?

              1. There apparently isn’t a lot you’re good at, other than constructing ill-considered arguments.

    2. Everything that Reason has been warning about that Trump would do is coming to pass.

      1. Surprise!

        It’s not like we have had a whole year of Corona-mania to show us the true colors of the politicians.

        The fact is they don’t give a shit about anything but power.

  31. “$19 million price tag for guarding California Capitol from protests that didn’t happen”
    https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/19-million-price-tag-for-guarding-California-15891295.php?cmpid=gsa-sfgate-result

    Besides making people look like raving idiots, TDS costs money.

    1. How much money did the riot that actually occurred, stirred up by Donald Trump cost? Funny that you aren’t posting that info.

      1. $0. Trump didn’t start a riot

        1. CACCL: If there is a Black Lives Matter rally in the afternoon, and there is a riot somewhere else in the same city later that evening, Black Lives Matter is responsible for the riot. They are “BLM rioters”.

          CACCL: If Donald Trump tells the crowd at his MAGA rally, let’s march together to the Capitol now! And immediately, a crowd of protestors starts marching on the Capitol — Trump had nothing to do with that.

          1. White Excrement: Black Lives Matter isn’t responsible for people rioting at a Black Lives Matter riot.

            White Excrement: Donald Trump blew a dog whistle that told the Capitol protesters to riot.

            1. “White Excrement: Black Lives Matter isn’t responsible for people rioting at a Black Lives Matter riot.”

              Give one example of people rioting AT a Black Lives Matter event. Not much later that evening in the same city, but AT or immediately departing from a Black Lives Matter event.

              1. We all know you’re Queen Amalthea.

                You’re not fooling anyone. You were banned. Respect Reason’s property and leave.

              2. Give one example of people rioting AT a Black Lives Matter event. Not much later that evening in the same city, but AT or immediately departing from a Black Lives Matter event.

                White Excrement: Black Lives Matter events are what I say they are, not the people who actually attended them.

                1. So, you’ve got nothin’.

                    1. Ah, if “The Federalist” says so. “Linked to” is one of those big political weasel words.

                    2. So you can’t refute it. Lol.

                  1. Consider it an in-kind contribution, White Virus.

          2. It is amazing watching you lie constantly.

            BLM was blamed as they continued to protest and stop cops from arriving on scene to arson and destruction. They were concurrently at the scene. Their leaders were leading the actions.

            You are such a dishonest person.

  32. “Why the Parler case is a success story for Section 230.”

    And 2+2=5, comrade. I love Big Tech!

    1. She makes the statement but never actually mentions why… unless she meant a success for political parties coordinating their associate “independent” corporations to silence political adversaries, e.g. literal textbook fascism.

      Then heck yah, a huge success.

  33. Although the CDC stated yesterday that 25 million Americans have tested positive for covid so far, studies have found 3 – 10 times more Americans were infected with covid than have tested positive. With increased testing, that ratio now appears 3 – 7 times (depending upon location), indicating that 100 – 150 million Americans have already been infected with covid.

    Herd immunity occurs after two thirds of people (in families, workplaces, communities, counties and/or states) have been infected or vaccinated, and the risk of infection declines by half when/after half of people have been infected or vaccinated.

    Despite NO news stories, the herd immunity process has been occurring in thousands of communities, hundreds of counties, and more than a dozen states, led by the Dakotas. By the time 10% of Americans receive covid vaccines, herd immunity will have already protected most Americans from covid.

    But Big Pharma, Democrats and lamestream media propagandists continue to deceive Americans to believe that herd immunity can/will only be attained via mass vaccinations. Recent news stories indicate that Big Pharma (and likely Biden’s CDC and FDA) plans to make/sell enough vaccines for all Americans (including everyone who is already immune due to a past infection).

    107 US counties have surpassed a 13% covid rate (i.e. positive tests), and are very close to achieving herd immunity (data as of 1/22/2021).

    Crowley, CO – 29.8%
    Dewey, SD – 23.2%
    Lincoln, AR – 22.2%
    Chattahoochee, GA – 21.8%
    Norton, KS – 21.8%
    Bent, CO – 21.6%
    Bon Homme, SD – 21.5%
    Lake, TN – 21.1%
    Trousdale, TN – 20.8%
    Buffalo, SD – 20.4%
    Buena Vista, IA – 19.8%
    Ellsworth, KS – 18.5%
    Alfalfa, OK – 18.2%
    Eddy, ND – 18.2%
    Dakota, NE – 18.0%
    Jackson, AR – 18.0%
    Childress, TX – 17.8%
    Lee, AR – 17.4%
    Lafayette, FL – 17.2%
    Nobles, MN – 17.0%
    Lassen, CA – 16.9%
    Hale, TX – 16.9%
    Foster, ND – 16.9%
    Big Horn, MT – 16.8%
    Seward, KS – 16.8%
    Menominee, WI – 16.7%
    Pawnee, KS – 16.5%
    Sheridan, KS – 16.4%
    Logan, CO – 16.3%
    Walsh, ND – 16.1%
    Ford, KS – 16.0%
    Wayne, TN – 16.0%
    Texas, OK – 15.9%
    Finney, KS – 15.9%
    Yuma, AZ – 15.8%
    Lee, KY – 15.8%
    Aurora, SD – 15.7%
    Morton, ND – 15.4%
    Stutsman, ND – 15.4%
    Potter, SD – 15.4%
    Santa Cruz, AZ – 15.3%
    Nelson, ND – 15.2%
    McKinley, NM – 15.2%
    Lyman, SD – 15.0%
    Lincoln, CO – 14.9%
    East Carroll, LA – 14.9%
    Lubbock, TX – 14.9%
    Burleigh, ND – 14.8%
    Benson, ND – 14.6%
    Dickey, ND – 14.6%
    Sioux, ND – 14.6%
    Chicot, AR – 14.5%
    Madison, ID – 14.5%
    Maverick, TX – 14.4%
    Cass, IL – 14.4%
    Davison, SD – 14.4%
    Rolette, ND – 14.2%
    Toole, MT – 14.1%
    East Feliciana, LA – 14.1%
    Woodward, OK – 14.1%
    Faulk, SD – 14.0%
    Oglala Lakota, SD – 14.0%
    Plymouth, IA – 14.0%
    Lawrence, IL – 13.9%
    Douglas, SD – 13.9%
    Haywood, TN – 13.9%
    Nemaha, KS – 13.9%
    Griggs, ND – 13.8%
    Colfax, NE – 13.8%
    Beadle, SD – 13.7%
    Minnehaha, SD – 13.7%
    Lamb, TX – 13.7%
    Gove, KS – 13.7%
    Scurry, TX – 13.7%
    Crocket, TX – 13.6%
    Stark, ND – 13.6%
    Fayette, IL – 13.6%
    Kearny, KS – 13.6%
    Golden Valley, ND – 13.6%
    Whitfield, GA – 13.6%
    Wilbarger, TX – 13.5%
    Grand Forks, ND – 13.5%
    Crawford, IA – 13.5%
    Clinton, IL – 13.5%
    Pickett, TN – 13.5%
    Republic, KS – 13.5%
    Ramsey, ND – 13.4%
    Potter, TX – 13.4%
    Culberson, TX – 13.4%
    Towner, ND – 13.3%
    Sanborn, SD – 13.3%
    Madison, LA – 13.3%
    Sevier, AR – 13.3%
    Obion, TN – 13.3%
    Henry, IA – 13.2%
    Dodge, WI – 13.2%
    Coddington, SD – 13.2%
    Jones, TX – 13.2%
    Okfuskee, OK – 13.2%
    Sioux, IA – 13.1%
    Jones, IA – 13.1%
    Ward, ND – 13.0%
    Jerauld, SD – 13.0%
    Rush, KS – 13.0%
    Webster, IA – 13.0%
    Wright, IA – 13.0%

    1. 20 states with the highest covid case rate (i.e. positive tests) are
      https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2020/09/01/816707182/map-tracking-the-spread-of-the-coronavirus-in-the-u-s#curves

      ND – 12.7%
      SD – 12.1%
      UT – 10.4%
      RI – 10.4%
      TN – 10.3%
      WI – 10.0%
      IA – 9.9%
      AZ – 9.8%
      NE – 9.7%
      AR – 9.4%
      OK – 9.4%
      KS – 9.2%
      IN – 9.0%
      AL – 9.0%
      ID – 8.9%
      MS – 8.8%
      NV – 8.8%
      WY – 8.7%
      IL – 8.7%
      MT – 8.6%

      So far, 7.78% of Americans (25 million) have tested positive for covid.

      1. The graphs showing new covid cases in every state at
        https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/data/new-cases-50-states
        clearly document that herd immunity appears to be occurring in many northern Midwest and Plains states, led by North Dakota, South Dakota, where the number/rate of new covid cases has plummeted during the past ten weeks.

        So why the news media blackout about natural herd immunity?

        The correct answer is that any truthful acknowledgement of “natural herd immunity” is not permitted by the left wing lockdown and mask mandate control freaks at CDC, NIH, FDA, US SG, virtually all Democrats (including Biden, Pelosi, Schumer) and their left wing media propagandists.

    2. As one who has compiled/maintained this list of US counties with the highest covid case rates (i.e. those who tested positive) during the past two months (since nobody else has done so), I’ve noticed the rate of increase has slowed down significantly in many of the highest ranked counties (indicating herd immunity is occurring).

      1. Or people have realized that testing doesn’t really do anything for them.

      2. Yep. Over and over around the world we see the same thing – the virus gets to roughly 20% prevalence and then starts falling. IIRC ND is at 24% cumulative positive tests, and have tests just under half the population.

        1. According to data at
          https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus-data-explorer?zoomToSelection=true&time=2020-07-27..latest&country=USA~CZE~GBR~ISR~PRT~ESP~SWE&region=World&casesMetric=true&interval=smoothed&perCapita=true&smoothing=7&pickerMetric=total_cases_per_million&pickerSort=desc
          countries with the highest covid case rates (i.e. who have tested positive) are:
          Andorra – 12.4%
          Montenegro – 9.3%
          Czechia – 8.8%
          San Marino – 8.5%
          Luxembourg – 7.9%
          USA – 7.6%
          Slovenia – 7.6%
          Panama – 7.2%
          Israel – 6.9%

          And yet, virtually all (and perhaps all) of the one hundred counties in the US with the highest covid case rates are rural.

          1. Because the urban counties were hit by COVID-19 first, before testing was available. Back in March you had to be in the ICU and just returned from a trip to China to get a test.

      3. SleepyJoe will get the credit for stopping the virus.

        1. He learned how to vote present from the best.

    3. Husband was saying the other day that Fauci was claiming 90%+ immunization needed for herd immunity. Haven’t been following this closely, is that true? Sounds like an argument to make sure Big Pharma gets it’s money even if real herd immunity is achieved.

      Although, sounds like this new strain is going to play F all with that narrative.

      1. Fauci is lying (er misleading) again. He knows that herd immunity for corona viruses typically occurs when/after two thirds of people have been either infected or vaccinated, and he knows that 4 – 6 times more Americans have been infected with covid than have tested positive.

        It also appears Fauci is promoting Big Pharma’s “lets vaccinate everyone” narrative and strategy even though he knows 100 – 150 million Americans are already immune due to a past covid infection.

        The reason why Big Pharma, CDC, FDA and Fauci haven’t been promoting antigen testing (to determine if Americans have been previously infected with covid, and thus don’t need a vaccine) is because they want to vaccinate everyone (as that’s where the $$$$$$$$$$$$$ is).

  34. . A potential threat to public safety was addressed,

    No, that’s not what happened.

    1. Powerful refutation there.

      1. Disprove it.

      2. We all know you’re Queen Amalthea.

        You’re not fooling anyone. You were banned. Respect Reason’s property and leave.

      3. It actually is in a way.

  35. Passing a law would impose a single, uniform standard, which would inevitably be applied in a way that would serve the interests of those in power and marginalize challengers.

    Very well said in the article. Keep Government legislation AWAY from the PRESS… The last thing this nation needs is government censorship;; IT’S already got too much of that…

    MORE is not the solution. LESS is. De-fund federal ‘special’ grants and cut-out domestic military psy-op programs (Enabled by The Patriot Act). Of course all that is hopeless with Democratic National Socialists in charge; it’s been their biggest weapon against the USA and it’s patriots.

    1. It was already hopeless.

  36. “People making personal decisions about what activities to engage in also relied on that calculation, as did employers when setting worker absence policies. To this day, many people who are exposed to COVID-19 think that not developing symptoms within a few days is a sign they’re in the clear.”

    At my company, our COVID policies are dictated to us by the county government. One of the dictates of the county is that we follow ALL CDC COVID guidelines regarding social distancing, masks, quarantines, etc. If you are found to be in violation of the county policies, you may be forced to close. There are a couple of businesses in our area that apparently won’t be allowed to re-open until 2022. They are quite serious about this.

    One of the CDC guidelines, which has not changed since March, when they were recommending against testing asymptomatic people, is that if you are awaiting the results of a COVID test, you are not allowed to ender the workplace and must self-quarantine.

    So when the county called me up a couple of months ago and asked me if I would like to take part in their random COVID testing program, I told them I would have to decline. I reiterated their own policy back to them, and asked how long the results would take.

    Seven to twelve days is a lot of work to be missing for no reason. My understanding is that ‘asymptomatic’ samples are generally in the back of the line, too.

  37. STAY HOME AND WORK AT HOME, AND START EARNING FROM HOME EASILY BY JUST FOLLOW THESE STEPS…ReadMore.

  38. Are asymptomatic people really a thing? WHO now says that PCR tests that are weak positives but the person presents no symptoms should be tested again. In other words, if somebody presents no symptoms, we should be very suspicious that they even have it. There must be some asymptomatic people but it could be that it’s so exceedingly rare that there’s no need to even be factoring it in. More likely they have very mild symptoms rather than none.

    Fauci in January 2020: “The one thing historically that people need to realize is that even if there is some asymptomatic transmission, in all the history of respiratory borne viruses of any type, asymptomatic transmission has never been the driver of outbreaks.”

    1. A huge JAMA metastudy of actual data showed asymptomatics have a roughly 0.7% chance to pass along the virus TO A HOUSEHOLD MEMBER.

      Obviously passing encounters are much lower.

      This destroys the need for masks. If you’re sick, stay home.

    2. Are asymptomatic people really a thing?

      No, they aren’t.

    3. Should be suspicious because the number of amplification cycles used in the Pcr test is absurdly high producing 50-90% false positive. WHO and CDC have known this from the beginning but have not mentioned it until now because there was an orange man to remove and a world to control.

  39. The House is set to deliver formal articles of impeachment to the Senate today.

    “there will be blood in the streets”Loretta Lynch

    “Who says protests have to be peaceful“Chris Cuomo

    “There needs to be unrest in the streets”Ayanna Pressley

    “Protesters should not give up”Kamala Harris

    “I just don’t know why they aren’t uprising all over this country“Nancy Pelosi

    “You get out and create a crowd and you push back on them, tell them they are not welcome“Maxine W

    “Go home with love and peace, remember this day forever“Donald J Trump

    One of these statements was extreme incitement and the speaker deserves to be impeached and unpersoned.
    Don’t know who?
    Ask White Knight/Queen Analgea. It knows.

    1. I’m fine with it if someone wants to impeach Cuomo, Harris, Pelosi. Go for it!

      (Not as familiar with the other people you list.)

      1. WK is cool with government crackdowns on speech.

        1. Can you explain more about why impeaching Cuomo, Harris, or Pelosi would be a crackdown on speech. Maybe I should reconsider and be more opposed to their impeachments if there is a First Amendment angle that I wasn’t aware of.

          1. We all know you’re Queen Amalthea.

            You’re not fooling anyone.

      2. I’m not actually fine with any of them facing any sort of action, on any of that. Because unlike you, I’m a libertarian.

        This is posted solely for the purposes of illustrating the rank dishonesty and hypocrisy of their impeachment attempt.

        “(Not as familiar with the other people you list.)”

        Lol, the hell you don’t know who Maxine Waters is.

        1. Oh, Maxine W. was Maxine Waters. Of course.

          I haven’t seen much about her in the news, lately.

          Why would it be anti-libertarian to impeach someone, Pelosi say, if they have made impeachable offenses?

          1. Bro, I’m not water and you got banned

          2. Good. I was hoping you would go there.

            What impeachable offenses did Trump commit on the sixth?

            1. Incited a crowd of people to invade the Capitol building.

              1. And what was the statement that you feel was incitement?

                Was it this?

                “Now it is up to Congress to confront this egregious assault on our democracy. After this, we’re going to walk down and I’ll be there with you. We’re going to walk down. We’re going to walk down any one you want, but I think right here. We’re going walk down to the Capitol, and we’re going to cheer on our brave senators, and congressmen and women. We’re probably not going to be cheering so much for some of them because you’ll never take back our country with weakness. You have to show strength, and you have to be strong.”

                Or was it this?

                Our brightest days are before us, our greatest achievements still wait. I think one of our great achievements will be election security because nobody, until I came along, had any idea how corrupt our elections were. And again, most people would stand there at 9:00 in the evening and say, ‘I want to thank you very much,’ and they go off to some other life, but I said, ‘Something’s wrong here. Something’s really wrong. Can’t have happened.’ And we fight. We fight like Hell and if you don’t fight like Hell, you’re not going to have a country any more.

                Our exciting adventures and boldest endeavours have not yet begun. My fellow Americans for our movement, for our children and for our beloved country and I say this, despite all that’s happened, the best is yet to come.

                So we’re going to, we’re going to walk down Pennsylvania Avenue, I love Pennsylvania Avenue, and we’re going to the Capitol and we’re going to try and give … The Democrats are hopeless. They’re never voting for anything, not even one vote. But we’re going to try and give our Republicans, the weak ones, because the strong ones don’t need any of our help, we’re going to try and give them the kind of pride and boldness that they need to take back our country.
                Here’s the
                So let’s walk down Pennsylvania Avenue. I want to thank you all. God bless you and God bless America. Thank you all for being here, this is incredible. Thank you very much. Thank you.

                You pick, White Knight. Here’s the entire speech:
                https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/1/11/full-transcript-donald-trump-january-6-incendiary-speech

                1. This is the same extreme literal interpretation that CACLLs retreated to in the debates over Trump’s phone call to the Ukraine. If Don Corleone or Tony Soprano doesn’t come right out and say, “I want you to violently invade the building” there was no incitement.

                  Yet, the very same CACLLs are all over labeling people as “BLM rioters” if they riot on the same evening that there was a BLM rally.

                  1. Quoting someone’s exact words is “extreme literalism” and White Excrement can hear the dog whistles loud and clear, but BLM rioters who riot at BLM protests aren’t a part of BLM.

                    1. Again, give one example of rioting AT or immediately following a Black Lives Matter protest.

                    2. All of the ones that happened in 2020.

                    3. “give one example”

                      Every single one of them… Just how retarded are you?

                  2. Where’s the incitement in the speech you dishonest shill?!
                    You claimed incitement, stop your weaseling and back up your own fucking statement.

                    Also:
                    The White Knight
                    October.22.2020 at 3:18 pm

                    It means conservative and conservative-leaning libertarian, and I coined it.

                2. The dude organized the rally on the same day that the electoral college was meeting, accused the Vice President of being a coward because he wouldn’t do something he had no power to do, led up to it with months of talk about the election being stolen, had Rudy Giuliani get up and tell the crowd it was time for “trial by combat”, used dog whistles like “we’ll never take back our country with weakness”, “you have to show strength and be strong”, “fight like Hell”.

                  1. If you know what a dog whistle sounds like, that makes you a dog.

                    1. If you don’t know what a metaphor is, that makes you — wait, you do know that “dog whistle” is a metaphor; you are just being disingenuous.

                    2. You seem to be the only one who knows what these dog whistles sound like, White Excrement. I shouldn’t be surprised that a meme used unironically by the left for the last four years is your go-to complaint.

                    3. In this case the phrase “dog whistle” is doing all the work, allowing White Knight to describe somebody as advocating a position at odds with what they actually proposed. Basically “dog whistle” is enabling White Knight to lie about their position. This is the epitome of a bad faith argument.

  40. > President Joe Biden signed 30 executive orders and actions in his first three days in office.

    Trump: “Where did you learn to smoke doobies rolled in executive orders?”

    Biden: “I learned it from you Dad! I learned it from you!”

    1. I dunno. Biden had his bitchen Camaro long before Trump was ever president.

      1. Yeah, he would stick his leg out the window when he drove down the street so he could see the leg hair flutter. Of course, he pulled it back in when he came to a stoplight – too many black people ruffling his leg hair if he didn’t.

        1. He is a party animal.

          1. Bro, I’m not water and you got banned

  41. All I want to know is why Pfizer was working on a coronavirus vaccine last January, as soon as the DNA profile of the virus was available. At the time, the official word was that this was a new virus that had been sourced to a wet market in Wuhan, that it had affected a handful of people and that it wasn’t yet known if the virus could even be transmitted by human-to-human contact. So why the urgency to develop a vaccine for this obscure little virus that posed little threat to anybody other than perhaps Ozzie Osborne?

    Somebody knew something. A lot of somebodies knew a lot of things. They knew damn well this wasn’t a new virus, it had been studied for years. They knew damn well this virus didn’t come from a wet market, it came from a lab. They knew damn well there was no question on whether or not the virus could be spread by human-to-human contact, that’s what it was made for. And they also knew damn well it wasn’t just the Chinese lying about what they knew and when they knew it, the US had been funding the gain-of-function studies done by the lab, shitloads of international scientists had been making a lot of money supplying the Chinese government with the fruits of their own research. It’s why all these governments have been freaking out about the pandemic – they know damn well where it came from and what a threat it is. And mostly it’s a threat to their position if the general public finds out they’re the ones responsible for this shit.

    1. It’s not some big secret. From wikipedia:

      Before COVID vaccines, a vaccine for an infectious disease had never before been produced in less than several years, and no vaccine existed for preventing a coronavirus infection in humans.[33] After the coronavirus was detected in December 2019,[34] the development of BNT162b2 was initiated on 10 January 2020, when the SARS-CoV-2 genetic sequences were released by the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention via GISAID,[35][36][37] triggering an urgent international response to prepare for an outbreak and hasten development of preventive vaccines.[38][39]

      1. It’s kinda what he said.

        1. I guess. If you drop all the insinuation of something sinister going on.

          1. Bro, I’m not water and you got banned.

    2. They knew they were going to use it to “fundamentally transform America” and oust Trump.
      But ousting Trump just dictated timing. The larger issue, worldwide, is that Global Socialists had been on a 5-10 year losing streak, and Trump threatened their grasp on absolute power.
      They needed something to destroy the middle and working class, and using a virus to do so had been long ago decided.

    3. Ozzy should be protected at all costs.

  42. So is Biden a racist now for blocking travel from S Africa or does that only apply to Trump

    1. Are we talking about Trump’s travel bans related to COVID-19, or his travel bans that pre-dated COVID-19?

      1. Why would it matter?

        1. Because Biden’s travel ban from South Africa is for disease control purposes. Trump’s pre-COVID-19 travel bans were not for disease control purposes, so they had some other purpose.

          1. Oh? And what was the nefarious “other purpose” of the South African travel ban?

            1. Enlighten me. What was the nefarious other purpose of the South African travel ban? I’m not aware of any other purpose but disease control, but maybe you have information I don’t have, eh.

              1. The Trump administration blocked travel between South Africa on March 13 and lifted it August 6. You said that it was done for reasons other than Covid.
                I’m asking what.

                1. “You said that it was done for reasons other than Covid.”

                  I did not.

                  1. There was no other South African travel ban since apartheid ended???

                    1. What statement of mine above are you referring to? Where did I say anything about Trump’s South African travel ban?

            2. https://travel.gc.ca/destinations/south-africa

              “Exercise a high degree of caution in South Africa due to the significant level of serious crime.”

              Is the other purpose to avoid crime?

              1. Go away bro, I’m not water and you got banned.

              2. That’s traveling TO South Africa, and it’s not a ban, just advice.

                Could you be less honest with your arguments?

                1. “That’s traveling TO South Africa, and it’s not a ban, just advice.”

                  I didn’t say otherwise.

                  1. “What was the nefarious other purpose of the South African travel ban?”

                    That was from you, in this very thread. I almost feel bad for how compulsive your lying is, must make having real relationships with people very difficult.

                    1. “That was from you”

                      Wow, now you are accusing Mother’s Lament of being my sock puppet.

          2. A ban is a ban.

            1. Having been banned himself recently, he is a little thalty about them.

            2. True, but Ron brought up questions about the motivation behind the bans.

              1. YES i did bring up motivations about the ban because When Trump banned flights from China for covid he was accused of racism. Now think about that for a minute

                1. And he shouldn’t have been.

  43. The Section 230-based legal regime is a way of reconciling free political expression with the need to limit or remove certain kinds of speech from the public sphere.

    WHAT THE FUCK!!!!!!!!

    You agreed with this hot garbage? Are you fucking insane ENB!?

    How the hell can a libertarian say that there’s a need to limit or remove constitutionally protected speech from the public sphere?!
    If someone is doing something illegal like calling for violence or posting kiddie porn you hide the post and call the cops.

    There’s no spot in the libertarian worldview for someone who thinks that persons questioning an election, or the efficacy of masks in virion transmission, should be banned from public discourse.

    A potential threat to public safety was addressed, but not in a rigid, permanent and coercive way, not through state action, but through contractual arrangements and private ordering.

    Who gives a fuck whether it was rigid and coercive, or easy and breezy.
    The fact of the matter is that Parler didn’t play any real role in the protest but Facebook sure as hell did, but the weasels targeted Parler anyway. They lied about an independent company, ironically dedicated to free speech, and yanked it from the internet. Meanwhile they deliberately ignored the accidental but actual culprit, because they spent half a billion getting their political masters elected.

    The commercial assets of a political party coordinated an attack on a largely innocent platform solely for the benefit of elected officials, and you’re fucking celebrating it like it was some sort of free speech victory.

    1. It’s a brave new world.

    2. As Glenn Greenwald said yesterday:

      “was clearly driven by these dynamics. It is inconceivable that Tim Cook, Jeff Bezos and Google executives believe that Parler is some neo-Nazi site that played anywhere near the role in planning and advocating for the Capitol riot as Facebook and YouTube did.
      But they know that significant chunks of liberal elite culture believe this (or at least claim to), and they thus calculate — not irrationally, even if cowardly — that they will have to endure a large social and reputational hit for refusing mob demands to destroy Parler. Like the Niskanen and Times bosses with Wilkinson, they had to decide how much pain they were willing to accept to defend Parler, and — as is usually the case — it turned out the answer was not much.
      Thus was Parler destroyed, with nowhere near the number of important liberal friends that Wilkinson has.”

      1. This is the other warning shot here as well:

        Neither Wilkinson nor his tweet are particularly interesting. What merits attention here is the now-pervasive climate that fostered this tawdry episode, and which has unjustly destroyed countless reputations and careers with no sign of slowing down.

        What the Tech Trust only seem to vaguely realize is that they got as big as they did largely through government sponsorship. The minute some politician gets in power who has a serious beef with their operations, they’re going to be back on their heels and see their empires get broken up. It happened in the early 20th century, and it’s going to happen again because these guys think they can act with impunity, with no consequences for their decisions.

        If they had kept their platform in the 2007 era of moderation, they wouldn’t be under this kind of scrutiny right now.

        1. This is another good point:

          All that matters to these decision-makers is societal scorn and ostracization. That is why the only thing that can save Wilkinson is that he has enough powerful friends to defend him, enabling them to reverse the cost-benefit calculus: make it so that there is more social scorn from firing Wilkinson than keeping him. Without the powerful media friends he has assembled over the years, he would have no chance to salvage his reputation and career no matter how obvious it was that the complaints against him are baseless.

          This shift to cancel culture as a status-chasing exercise has potentially disastrous implications for holding society together, because the people who support it don’t think that it will boomerang back on them. And unfortunately, when it does–like with Naomi Wolf’s firing, or Wilkinson, or that dumbshit Des Moines Register reporter–they aren’t taking the lesson that cancel culture in itself is bad. Their motto is, “No bad tactics, only bad targets.” Unfortunately, it’s Orwell-type, old-school liberals like Greenwald, Matt Taibbi, and Thomas Frank who are the only commenters I’ve seen making that connection.

      2. How long until Greenwald is deplatformed as a Russian sympathizer? There’s nothing more embarrassing to a progressive than an actual principled liberal.

    3. ENB writes “certain kinds of speech”. Probably referring to speech inciting violence, but who knows because she literally wrote, “certain kinds”.

      Mother’s Lament: Changes “certain kinds” to “constitutionally protected” and argues against that, even though that’s not what ENB wrote.

      1. Don’t be so utterly fucking dishonest. Speech not protected by the constitution is illegal and law enforcement takes care of it.

        1. I’m not the one who changed ENBs words, instead of arguing about what she actually wrote. You were solidly in JesseAz’s wheelhouse there.

          1. Do you understand quotes you dishonest fuck? I left ENB’s quote unchanged. It’s right there at the fucking top of the post.

            When I wrote “constitutionally protected” I was saying that. Didn’t you notice that there were no italics or quotes, you fucking retard? That’s MY statement.

            This isn’t the first time you haven’t understood quotes.

            You’re really too stupid to be here. Isn’t there some children’s version of the internet you can go play on?

            1. This isn’t the first time you haven’t understood quotes.

              He thinks I’m water.

            2. How the fuck can you even pretend that you’re not just a troll at this point, White Knight.

            3. B.S. You were clearly spinning what she literally said.

              “How the hell can a libertarian say that there’s a need to limit or remove constitutionally protected speech from the public sphere?!”

              That is a clear attempt to claim that ENB made a statement about “constitutionally protected speech”.

              1. Stop trying to weasel your way out. I very clearly indicated what was ENB and Milton’s statement and what was my own (which I stand behind.

                As usual, you’re trying to lawyer and pettifog you’re way out of your own stupidity, but you don’t have the brains to do so.

      2. Eat a bullet

        1. Ah, there’s the Nardz we know and love, showing his true colors.

          1. fuck off Queen Amalthea

            1. Open position for everybody! Work from solace of your home, on your PC And you can work with your own working hours. You can work this work As low maintenance or As A regular work. You can procure from 65$ An hour to 1000$ A day! There is no impediments, everything depends from you And the amount you need to acquire every day.. Detail Of Work

  44. I’m shocked, shocked; that Trumpy malfeasance and incompetence compounded with routine government inefficiency and ineptness was even more septic.

    Trading DC swamp rats for NYC sewer rats got us, only, even more septic rats.

  45. “Social media are being simultaneously blamed for having too much control over speech and for letting speech be completely out of control. Both sides of this divide fail to appreciate the way immunities and distributed private actor responsibilities walked a fine line between control and freedom.”

    No. The left is complaining that social media doesn’t censor the right enough. The right is complaining that social media is censoring them too much.

    It’s like setting the temperature of the kitchen faucet. The hot water is turned on 100%. You want the cold water to also be 100%. Your spouse wants the cold water to be 0%. The only thing that is changing is how much cold water is being allowed. The hot water is not being regulated(censored) at all.

  46. Jack . I see what you mean… Betty `s st0rry is something, last monday I got themselves a Jaguar E-type when I got m y check for $9206 this past month and would you believe, $10 thousand last munth . it’s definitly the most-comfortable work I have ever had . I actually started 6 months ago and immediately started to make over $71, per-hr .visit this site… Click here

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.