LOL, you split those hairs. It is approved for all people over 16, which is a large portion of the population.

But you go right on spinning your threads of fools gold!

 

*sighs
FULLY APPROVED
EMERGENCY USE AUTHORIZATION

See the difference now?

 

Neil Young Urges Spotify Workers to Quit Their Jobs: ‘Get Out of That Place Before it Eats Up Your Soul’
By Kipp JonesFeb 7th, 2022, 6:23 pm
227 comments




Rocker Neil Young urged Spotify employees to quit their jobs on Monday, lest their “souls” be eaten by guilt, he said.

Two weeks after he demanded the company remove either podcaster Joe Rogan, or his music, Spotify is absent of the “Cinnamon Girl” singer’s catalogue.

Numerous other artists, including Joni Mitchell and India Arie, have ditched Spotify over claims Rogan routines spreads Covid vaccine disinformation on The Joe Rogan Experience.

Over the weekend, a super cut video of Rogan using the N-word over the years in various “contexts” went viral online — leading to an immense backlash against Spotify and an apology from Rogan. Still, CEO Daniel Ek made clear in a statement to his employees that, although he is “deeply sorry” for how the controversy has affected them, Spotify won’t be dropping the show. He also pledged to spend $100 million helping artists from “historically marginalized groups.”

That statement and gesture did not, however, assuage Young’s intense feelings about Spotify.

On Monday, the 76-year-old attacked “misinformation,” some of the country’s biggest banks and appealed to Spotify employees to quit, en masse in a lengthy letter he posted on his website:

In our communication age, misinformation is the problem. Ditch the misinformers. Find a good clean place to support with your monthly checks. You have the real power. Use it.

To the baby boomers, I say 70 percent of the country’s financial assets are in your hands compared with just about 5 percent for millennials. You and I need to lead.

Citing the age of “Climate Chaos,” Young asked his fans to boycott Chase, Citi, Bank of America, and Wells Fargo.

“Join me as I move my money away from the damage causers or you will unintentionally be one of them,” he added. “You have the power to change the world. We can do it together. Your grandchildren will thank you in history.”

Young urged all musicians to pull their songs from Spotify before he made an appeal to those whose jobs it is to keep the platform running:

To the workers at SPOTIFY, I say Daniel Ek is your big problem – not Joe Rogan. Ek pulls the strings. Get out of that place before it eats up your soul. The only goals stated by EK are about numbers – not art, not creativity.

Notice that EK never mentions the Medical Professionals who started this conversation. Look, one last time – at the statements EK has made.Then be free and take the good path.

The controversies surrounding Rogan and Spotify haven’t come close to dying down since the whole situation ignited. These latest remarks will be another round of debate, news, and of course, attention for Young.

https://www.mediaite.com/news/neil-...ut-of-that-place-before-it-eats-up-your-soul/

 

Hahaha - hee hee hee!

Like anybody gives a single fuck about what Neil Young thinks.

Oooooh - but that's such a BLISTERING post!!!

 

You keep telling yourself that...

 

Kansas GOP lawmaker convinces his colleagues to back 'dangerous' bill that provides him with legal cover

Sherman Smith, Kansas Reflector
February 08, 2022



(Sherman Smith/Kansas Reflector)


Sen. Mark Steffen succeeded Tuesday in persuading Republicans on a health panel to advance legislation that would clear him from punishment by state regulators for prescribing ivermectin to COVID-19 patients.

The Hutchinson Republican and anesthesiologist revealed last month he was under investigation by the Kansas Board of Healing Arts. He proposed legislation that would block the board from taking action against doctors who prescribe ivermectin or hydroxychloroquine for off-label uses.

Steffen amended and expanded the bill during committee action Tuesday to give doctors free range to use any drug for COVID-19 treatment and require pharmacists to fill the prescription, while removing protections for both doctors and pharmacists from civil liability if patients are harmed by the treatment. Lawmakers also added language from another of Steffen’s bills that would allow children to opt out of any kind of vaccine requirement at day care facilities and schools without being questioned.

The GOP-led panel then gutted a House bill that dealt with pharmacy regulations, inserted the Steffen bills and advanced it on a voice vote to the full Senate.

“We are moving a bill forward that decreases suffering and death,” Steffen told reporters after the hearing. “We’re moving a bill forward that allows the true standard of care in the early treatment of COVID to reign supreme. This notion that doing nothing is the standard of care is false, inappropriate and has led to crimes against humanity. The bottom line is we took a step forward in helping our Kansas citizens today and protecting our children.”

Steffen said he had not heard anything from the Board of Healing Arts since announcing Jan. 26 he had been under investigation for more than a year.

More than 40 people attended the standing-room-only hearing, in addition to journalists and legislative staff members. Many of the observers were affiliated with a prominent anti-vaccination group and held signs supporting Senate Bill 381.

Sen. Cindy Holscher, D-Overland Park, said the committee provided little notice to opponents of Steffen’s bill, then justified moving forward because there was little opposition. She presented a stack of pages that represented “nearly half” of the complaints about the bill she has received in recent days.

“This is a very dangerous bill,” Holscher said. “It was dangerous before. It’s even more dangerous now with what’s been done.”

Sen. Richard Hilderbrand, a Galena Republican who serves as chairman of the Senate Public Health and Welfare Committee, stopped Holscher from making further comments and accused her of misreading the bill.

“The crutch [sic] of the underlying bill was that the Board of Healing Arts were investigating doctors for prescribing off-label drugs, and the Board of Pharmacy was coming down on some pharmacists for filling off-label drugs in this case,” Hilderbrand said. “That is the crutch [sic]. There is nothing dubious or life-threatening in these bills.”

The two Democrats on the committee, Holscher and Sen. Pat Pettey, of Kansas City, and Republican Sen. Kristen O’Shea, of Topeka, objected to considering Senate Bill 398, dealing with vaccination requirements, before holding a hearing on the matter.

The bill applies language passed during a special session in November, when the Legislature responded to federal vaccine requirements for workers, to expand the application of religious exemptions. The proposal makes it illegal for a school or day care facility to question the sincerity of a child’s religious beliefs.

“This is not just COVID-19 vaccine — it’s all childhood vaccinations,” O’Shea said. “And for us to not even have time to fully read the bill and be asked to vote on it is bad policy.”

Hilderbrand defended the process of combining two bills and inserting them into House Bill 2280.

“For those of you listening online that are getting an impression that this is something unique in committees, it is not,” Hilderbrand said. “This is something done every session. This just happens to be on this certain bill. So I don’t want you to be misled that this is something unique.”

Sen. Mike Thompson, R-Shawnee, said the legislation simply reaffirms religious rights already enshrined in the state constitution. He then repeated his false claims that vaccines are harmful and that COVID-19 poses no threat to children.

“It gives parents discretion as to whether or not they want their kid to take a vaccine that is actually dangerous, and has been proven to be so,” Thompson said. “These kids are not at risk.”

The Kansas Department of Health and Environment’s latest summary of Kansas deaths attributed to COVID-19 included four fatalities among children 0-9 years of age and three fatalities among youth aged 10 to 17.

Thompson also said it was important to “get these people these medicines and give these doctors the latitude they need, because this is the final nail in the coffin.”

Federal regulators and the vast majority of physicians agree there is no benefit to treating COVID-19 with ivermectin or hydroxychloroquine, and that the drugs could be harmful in some cases.

Pettey said the discussion demonstrated a need to hold a hearing on the religious exemption component.

“We are talking about vaccinations of our children, and we’re talking about the safety of all, and we’re not talking about religion,” Pettey said. “So I think it’s important that we keep it in the right context.”



Kansas Reflector is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Kansas Reflector maintains editorial independence.


https://www.rawstory.com/kansas-gop...is-colleague-to-provide-him-with-legal-cover/

 

Trump never imposed a single Federal shot mandate, Brandon did this. Once they start referring to it as "The Trump Vaxx" though, it's officially over for them. And that day is getting closer. Their final trick will probably be to get some friendly doctor dump to magically implicate Trump in flawed vaccine development and reckless negligence. Pushing this next narrative is probably the only way the current crop of Brandon's fascist thugs hope to walk away without being charged with Crimes Against Humanity. Hopefully, there will be emails and signatures allowing us to understand who was really behind this at the very top.

As far as Psaki is concerned, her brazen attempts to lie, spin and mislead are truly stunning. Next, according to the CDC, I'm sure that we will learn that Fauci was actually antivaxx all along...

The White House Now Says It Never Really Wanted Lockdowns
by Tyler Durden
Tuesday, Feb 08, 2022 - 03:07 PM
Authored by Ryan McMaken via The Mises Institute,

Last Friday, a reporter asked White House press secretary Jen Psaki to respond to the Johns Hopkins covid study showing lockdowns provided no real benefit in terms of disease prevention. In response, Psaki dodged addressing the study directly, but then pivoted to claiming that the Biden administration had never pushed lockdowns.

“We are not pushing lockdowns,” she insisted.

“We’ve not been pro-lockdown - most of the lockdowns actually happened under the previous President.”

We have now reached the point in the media and political narrative where the party of lockdowns realizes lockdowns are increasingly unpopular and so now claims it never supported lockdowns at all.

But how can Psaki get away with saying this?

We all know that Joe Biden has always supported lockdowns. Well, that's not quite it, and she's not completely wrong. By the time Biden was actually sworn in as president, he had already stopped pushing for lockdowns as a continued anticovid option.

On the other hand, it is certainly true that as late as early November 2020, high-ranking Biden advisors were still holding up lockdowns as a possibility that fall and winter. For example, on November 11, 2020, Dr. Michael Osterholm, a member of Biden’s Covid-19 Advisory Board, suggested the country might require a “lockdown for 4 to 6 weeks” and recommended the US government spend additional trillions to “pay for a package right now to cover all of the lost wages for individual workers.”

Osterholm also referenced an August 2020 column he cowrote with Minneapolis Fed president Neel Kashkari in which the authors concluded, “To be effective, the lockdown has to be as comprehensive and strict as possible.”

For his part, Biden was keeping lockdowns very much on the table at least as late as August 2020.

Biden declared in a joint interview with Kamala Harris that if covid numbers increased again “I would shut it down. I would listen to the scientists…. We’re going to do whatever it takes to save lives.”



By November, however, the administration appears to have shifted to a policy of using lockdowns more as a threat than as a likely plan of action. This position was also reflected in the comments of Zeke Emanuel, a long-time supporter of draconian lockdowns who also remained a Biden advisor in November. Earlier in 2020, Emanuel had advocated for long-term lockdowns, suggesting lockdowns would need to last for eighteen months or more. Yet by November, he instead insisted that whether or not the additional lockdowns would take place would depend “on what we do now.”

In other words, if enough people wore masks and get vaccinated, then the administration wouldn’t be “forced” to push for full lockdowns again. This position was already stated quite clearly by Anthony Fauci in August, when he told an audience: I believe strongly and I’ll say it very clearly: We do not have to completely lock down if we do things right. And if we do these things right I believe we can open up the economy, get the employment back, get people out of the doldrums of being locked down—if we do it prudently, carefully, and the way the guidelines say.

For Fauci, you don’t need lockdowns if—and that’s a key “if”—everyone does exactly what Fauci tells them to. In any case, Fauci still wasn’t giving up on lockdowns into late November, stating it was “too early to say” if lockdowns could be ruled out.

In spite of this, by November 19—facing a tough election battle—the administration was openly saying it was not planning on trying to implement lockdowns again but with the subtext being that this was contingent on enough of the population getting vaccinated

Indeed, in her own disavowal of lockdowns this past Friday, Psaki pushes this very line of reasoning stating that the “president’s approach has been using the tools we have to prevent [lockdowns].” Translation: So long as vaccines and mask wearing work, lockdowns won’t be necessary. Nowhere in those words, however, is there an admission that lockdowns do more harm than good or that they are unacceptable.

No, it appears the administration can have it both ways. It will say it isn’t for lockdowns while simultaneously insisting that lockdowns could be triggered by not “using the tools” that “prevent” lockdowns.

So, Psaki is correct that once Biden had been inaugurated into the White House, there was no general drive from administration officials for lockdowns. The focus had shifted to masks and vaccines.

Today, this fact allows the administration to claim that lockdowns are mostly something that “happened under the previous president.”

Indeed, Donald Trump did little to prevent lockdowns and did much to provide political cover for state governors wishing to impose lockdowns. It was on Trump’s watch that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) pushed heavily for lockdowns. Trump gave a daily nationwide platform to prolockdown technocrats like Fauci and Deborah Birx. Trump claimed to disagree with these bureaucrats—whom he could have easily fired—but Trump was either too craven or too incompetent to intervene. Instead, dozens of state governors imposed lockdowns on their populations, helped by the fact they could simply say they were following guidelines put out by Trump’s CDC.

Thanks to Trump’s weakness, Psaki is right that lockdowns are something we can all remember from the Trump era.

Legally, of course, it’s unlikely any administration—whether Trump’s or Biden’s—could actually get away for long with directly imposing any sort of nationwide lockdown if it wanted to. The federal courts have already sent a pretty clear message that police actions like lockdowns are prerogatives of the states’ governments.

Moreover, with gubernatorial races in thirty-six states this November, only candidates in the absolutely bluest blue states would even consider telling the voters "as governor I am poised to impose new lockdowns at the first sign of crowded hospitals. Eight weeks to flatten the curve!" That might still work in Europe or China, but it's hard to see much support from American voters at this point.

But as we’ve seen, we shouldn’t expect those who supported lockdowns to admit states with lockdowns showed no better results than states that barely locked down at all.

Rather, the lockdown party will just split hairs to show they never really pushed lockdowns at all or that “the science changed.”

Instead, these people will move on to pushing their new version of lockdownism: vaccine passports and pariah status for the disobedient.

Whether they worked or not, lockdowns have clearly fallen out of favor so much that the Biden administration won’t even admit to supporting the idea. That’s a victory for friends of freedom and human rights. The next stop is to strike a similar blow against vaccine mandates.

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/white-house-now-says-it-never-really-wanted-lockdowns

 

CDC data reveals vaccines are killing far more children than China virus itself



https://www.oann.com/cdc-data-revea...ng-far-more-children-than-china-virus-itself/

OAN Newsroom
UPDATED 2:03 PM PT – Monday, February 7, 2022
The latest reports from the UK government and from the CDC reveal the vaccines for the Chinese virus are killing far more children than the virus itself. One America’s Pearson Sharp has more.

 

Sweden look at Sweden mostly natural immunity and it infections decreased but my data is three months old

 

3months old or not still proves that natural immunity exists and works...where's the link at?

 

I found this because I couldn’t understand why vaccinated people like me were getting Covid

https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/science/articles/needle-points-vaccinations-chapter-one

 

I’m going to say what I said at the beginning it’s a virus and we are built to fight infection while young healthy and stress free

 

We already know anti vaxxers are not smart. But now their hero makes it official.

Joe Rogan Says People Who Take Vaccine Advice From Him Are Not Smart
By Mediaite StaffFeb 9th, 2022, 10:50 am
1524 comments




Joe Rogan made his way back to the standup stage Tuesday night and addressed his various Spotify controversies.

According to The Hollywood Reporter, Rogan headlined a small show in Austin, Texas at the Vulcan Gas Company and talked about his controversies — specifically the viral video of him using the n-word on his podcast, The Joe Rogan Experience.

“I used to say it if [I was talking about] a Richard Pryor bit or something, I would say it in context,” Rogan said. “Somebody made a compilation of every time I said that word over 14 years and they put it on YouTube, and it turned out that was racist as fuck. Even to me! I’m me and I’m watching it saying, ‘Stop saying it!’ I put my cursor over the video and I’m like, ‘Four more minutes?!’”

“I haven’t used that word in years,” he added. “But it’s kind of weird people will get really mad if you use that weird and tweet about it on a phone that’s made by slaves.”

Rogan then tackled his other controversy — the anti-vax information that’s been discussed on his podcast. “I talk shit for a living — that’s why this is so baffling to me,” Rogan said. “If you’re taking vaccine advice from me, is that really my fault? What dumb shit were you about to do when my stupid idea sounded better? ‘You know that dude who made people people eat animal dicks on TV? How does he feel about medicine?’ If you want my advice, don’t take my advice.”

Rogan has previously said “dozens” of celebrities have contacted him for Covid advice including Aaron Rodgers and UFC President Dana White.

The podcaster wrapped the set up with a Q&A segment and was asked if he’s been tempted to leave Spotify for the $100 million offer he received from Rumble. “No, Spotify has hung in with me, inexplicably, let’s see what happens,” he said.

https://www.mediaite.com/podcasts/j...o-take-vaccine-advice-from-him-are-not-smart/