July 08, 2021

"Shame on you," a finger-pointing Chuck Todd scolds Americans who don't want to take an experimental unapproved vaccine.

Don't make Chuck Todd angry. You wouldn't like him when he's angry, mainly because he'll probably need some tissues and hugs as he can barely control his sobs of fury. Think beta-male Hulk.

"That's my secret. I'm always empathetic."

After that it just gets awkward.

Here he is last Thursday no longer even trying to hold back the contempt for which he holds the great unwashed, otherwise known as healthy people who don't want to take an experimental unapproved vaccine.

This is a a slightly longer clip for a little more context. It's from the MSNBC site. They don't consider this an embarrassing flub. They want to promote it.

A choked up Chuck Todd (say that three times fast) points out that,

"The country is moving once again in the wrong direction on this virus."

As he says this, they display this chart.

Chuck Todd Vax Meltdown 2

Pro tip: When you're trying to make a dramatic point, it helps if your graphic does not completely undermine your dramatic point.

"There has been a 10% increase in cases since last week."

Since just last week!


Yes, he said it twice for emphasis.

Let's dig into these extremely terrifying numbers a bit.

In the two weeks preceding his meltdown (data through July 1), The 7-day moving average of Coronavirus cases bounced around between 15,000 and 6,700. That's not a 10% variation. That's a 100% variation just in the last week. In fact, as of June 14 there were around 15,000 cases, meaning using Chuck Todd's 12,471 number, the one he's using to sow alarm, cases are down about 20%.

Here are the 7-day moving averages of cases also through July 1.

Chuck Todd Vax Meltdown 4

I'm having difficulty ginning up panic over this.

Great, now I want gin.

Okay, fine, let's go back a full month, get a real sense of the trend.

Chuck Todd Vax Meltdown 5

Okay, that's not helpful to his case.

Wait, what about deaths?! He's talking about deaths!! How about those numbers? I'll bet they're downright terri...

Chuck Todd Vax Meltdown 6

Pay no attention to that data behind the curtain.

Todd went on to note that CDC director Rochelle Walensky said that the very scary Delta variant is "hyper transmissible" and "its spread is being fueled by communities with low vaccination rates."

As Todd puts it,

"Literally the only people dying are the unvaccinated."

That's not true.


It's actually much more complicated than that.

(Worth a read.)

Second, the vast majority of deaths are among the clinically obese.

That does not make it okay, but it does strongly suggest that trying to shame young (sub-40), fit, healthy people into taking an experimental pharmaceutical they don't need is where the real shame should lie.

Chuck Todd, who has a natural immunity against self-awareness, doesn't care.

"For those of you spreading misinformation,...

And by misinformation, he means CDC data.

"...shame on you."

Does he say it twice again for emphasis?

Of course he does. Of course he does.

"Shame on you."

It's around this time he gets deeply into the finger pointing, even adding a little eye twitch for effect.

Chuck Todd Vax Meltdown 7

"Think about it."

In the early days of people yelling at each other on the Internet, "think about it" became a punchline of sorts. It was the phrase that simpletons typically used after having said something wholly vacant of meaning. Intelligent people picked up on it, and started using "think about it" as a form of ridicule.

I'm guessing Chuck Todd doesn't know that.

"I don't know how some of you sleep at night."

This is not how you motivate people to take the vaccine. I got the vaccine, but this kind of behavior makes me want to untake it just to annoy Chuck Todd. This is about Chuck Todd wanting to luxuriate in his own sense of superiority.

Chuck Todd Vax Meltdown 1

Never go full smug. It's not a good look.

July 8, 2021 at 08:46 AM in Covid-19/Coronavirus, Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (3)

June 18, 2021

Study proves that wearing a mask in the classroom ensures a safe and secure environment! Not for your kids, for pneumonia-causing bacteria.

Pathogens on Masks Cover


Masks may be ineffective, but at least they make things worse!

A group of parents in Gainesville, FL, concerned about potential harms from masks, submitted six face masks to a lab for analysis. The resulting report found that five masks were contaminated with bacteria, parasites, and fungi, including three with dangerous pathogenic and pneumonia-causing bacteria.

Do you know what the mortality rate is for the elderly admitted to a hospital with Covid?


Want to know what it is for pneumonia?


Out: Wear a mask or you hate grandma.

In: Wear a mask because you hate grandma.

The study was a very small one, consisting of six masks in total. Four were the surgical type and two were cloth with one being worn by an adult. Brand new unworn masks were tested as a control along with a T-shirt one of the children had worn.

The face masks studied were new or freshly-laundered before wearing and had been worn for 5 to 8 hours, most during in-person schooling by children aged 6 through 11. One was worn by an adult. A t-shirt worn by one of the children to school and unworn masks were tested as controls. No pathogens were found on the controls; samples from the front top and bottom of the t-shirt found proteins that are commonly found in skin and hair, along with some commonly found in soil.

Although small, it appears to have been well done and the tests were performed by a credible lab. (Report here.)

It also confirms pretty much what everyone who still retains critical thinking skills has known from the beginning.

Not only that, but the results weren't even close.

Pathogens on Masks 5

Half of the masks were contaminated with one or more strains of pneumonia-causing bacteria. One-third were contaminated with one or more strains of meningitis-causing bacteria. One-third were contaminated with dangerous, antibiotic-resistant bacterial pathogens. In addition, less dangerous pathogens were identified, including pathogens that can cause fever, ulcers, acne, yeast infections, strep throat, periodontal disease, Rocky Mountain Spotted Fever, and more.


Keep in mind, these kids weren't touring the Wuhan Institute of Virology, or visiting Hunter Biden for the weekend. They were in school.

This is what was found in the masks:

Pathogens on Masks 6

Some commenters have pointed out that this is no big deal as many of these pathogens were likely harbored by the wearers themselves in the first place.

Nothing to see here, we truly are all awash in a sea of bacteria, and fungi. The only difference is that we're collecting all those organism and concentrating them in a warm and moist medium in which they can flourish and reproduce unabated while held in close proximity to our noses and mouths.

Why, is that a problem?

These results were tested on fresh masks worn for just one day. Can you imagine the results if tested on the typical mask as actually used? You know, the cloth mask you forgot to wash the night before, or week before, or perhaps never and you don't recall it being green when you bought it?

Or how about the "disposable" mask that you use day after day until the ear loops disintegrate or you notice the bacteria flourishing in the folds has advanced to the point of having developed a written language and and is engaging in a primitive form of agriculture.

That's why real-world results never live up to the ideal, because the real world is never ideal. In the real world, masks don't slow the spread of COVID.

Speaking of COVID, care to take a guess as to what they didn't find on the masks?

Although the test is capable of detecting viruses, including SARS-CoV-2, only one virus was found on one mask (alcelaphine herpesvirus 1).

So, to recap: In order for children to be in the classroom, we are having them wrap their faces in paper and fabric Petri dishes soaked in pathogens in order to protect them from a virus that isn't in the classroom, or if it is in the classroom, isn't being stopped by the masks anyway.


June 18, 2021 at 08:44 AM in Covid-19/Coronavirus, Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (3)

June 15, 2021

Nothing to see here, just the CDC holding an emergency meeting over higher-than-expected reports of heart inflammation in young people receiving the Covid vaccine.

What are you? Some kind of anti-vaxxer?!?!?!?

It should be noted that this "emergency meeting" on a potentially fatal heart condition among the young being caused by a vaccine that is being administered by the thousands every day is set for... Friday.

How serious an issue is this?

You can usually tell by the lengths to which the Vax-Everybody-Right-Now-Reeeeeeeeee! mainstream media is trying to downplay it.

Overall, 226 cases of myocarditis or pericarditis after vaccination in people younger than age 30 have been confirmed... Further investigation is needed, however, to confirm whether the vaccination was the cause of the heart problem.

Fair enough: Correlation doesn't prove causation and 226 cases out of many millions of doses ("under age 30" is a broad range) isn't statistically a lot.

Wait, "younger than age 30?" Isn't this about teenagers and younger?

Yes, yes it is, and they later reveal this.

Teenagers and people in their early 20s accounted for more than half of the myocarditis cases reported to the CDC's safety monitoring systems following Covid-19 vaccination, despite representing a fraction of people who have received the shots.

"We clearly have an imbalance there," Shimabukuro said.

Do we now.

How imbalanced?

Alex Berenson took a look at the VAERS data (Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System). Keep in mind that VAERS is purely a reporting system and not the end word on anything; however, it has been used for decades as an early-warning system of sorts. (It has only recently been criticized because it was interfering with the preferred narrative).

While care should be taken in putting too much faith in the raw numbers, you can certainly compare results within the system itself – that is, VAERS reports for one age bracket vs. another. Same system, same vaccine, just different demographics.

The results?

Let's focus on this one:

Heart Inflamation Covid 1

There are several things to note here.

First, in the upper age ranges, the incidents of this heart inflammation, or myocarditis/pericarditis, are within or even below what you'd expect to see in the population, or the number of people who would come down with it anyway. This establishes that VAERS isn't systematically over-counting incidents of heart inflammation.

Second, there is very little data for the lowest age range given the vaccine was only recently approved for that demographic.

So far, so good, the VAERS is not reporting anything out of the ordinary for older age groups, with the numbers well within (and in one instance below) what would be expected in that population absent getting the vaccine, and there is just too little data to draw any conclusion regarding the youngest age group.

That leaves the younger people for whom we have sufficient data, and that's where it gets um, "troubling."

Heart Inflamation Covid 5

Reported incidents of myocarditis/pericarditis among the younger age groups for which there is sufficient data are multiples of what would be expected.

Further, note that the while these younger age groups represent only 8.8% of all those who have been vaccinated, they account for over half of all incidents of myocarditis/pericarditis.

Heart Inflamation Covid 4 (1)

Perhaps even more troubling is just how consistently the elevated incidents of myocarditis/pericarditis grows relative to what would be expected for a given age group as you move down in age. I plugged the numbers into a spreadsheet and did a quick calculation: There is a clear correlation between age and the higher-than-expected incidents of heart inflammation, the younger the age, the worse it gets. There is no variation. The younger you go, the greater the ratio gets.

Heart Inflamation Covid 10

If that holds upon closer examination, what does that portend for the babies they want to vaccinate this September?

I found the PDF Berenson was using and discovered this slide towards the end.

Note the difference in "rate per million" between the first and second doses.

Heart Inflamation Covid 2

You'd think they could have skipped the BBQs and last weekend and looked into this...


Their summary, thus far:

Heart Inflamation Covid 6

Initial safety findings from Pfizer-BioNTechCOVID-19 vaccination of 12-15-year-olds from v-safe and VAERS surveillance are consistent with results from pre-authorization clinical trials.

In other words, they expected some collateral damage, that "collateral" being your kids.

In fairness, they are balancing risks, and argue that the risk of the vaccine is less than the risk of contracting Covid.  The lingering question is, is that true?

Analysis of VAERS preliminary reports of myocarditis/pericarditis is in progress, including follow-up to obtain medical records, complete reviews, apply CDC working case definition, and adjudicate cases.

They're on the case! Well, later this week anyway.

Preliminary findings suggest: Median age of reported patients is younger and median time to symptom onset is shorter among those who developed symptoms after dose 2 vs. dose 1

Yep! Might want to look at that one closely.

Predominance of male patients in younger age groups, especially after dose 2‒Observed reports > expected cases after dose 2 (16–24 years of age)

It's worse for boys and young men. Potentially much worse.

Limited outcome data suggest most patients (at least 81%) had full recovery of symptoms

"Most" patients. So stop getting so excited. Take the jab or your kids don't get an education!

As I write this, the CDC has not changed its recommendation.

CDC continues to recommend COVID-19 vaccination for everyone 12 years of age and older given the greater risk of other serious complications related to COVID-19, such as hospitalization, multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C), or death.

The fact is, they don't know that, they can't know that. It's too early to know that. This feels like it has less to do with science, and more to do with institutional inertia.

Naturally, Big Tech has their back:

Only the anointed priests of high media may speak the forbidden words.

Interestingly, the "if-it-will-save-just-one-life" media has suddenly decided that a few losses here and there are sort of "meh."

The vast majority of the cases were sent home following a visit to a hospital as of the end of May. It's unclear how many patients were admitted to the hospital, or, for example, were discharged following a visit to the emergency room. Fifteen patients remain hospitalized, with three in intensive care units. Two of the patients in the ICU had other health problems.

This isn't even long-term data, because we have none, this is short-term data. Very short term.

All medications have risks, and the trick is to balance those risks against the benefits.

We have been told about the benefits ad nauseam, but their approach to the risks has been largely along the lines of "shut up, anti-vaxxer."

There is not a single pharmaceutical product advertisement that does not include, by law, a lengthy recitation of possible side effects, often comical. This one is for Cymbalta, a popular anti-depressant.

CONTACT YOUR DOCTOR IMMEDIATELY if you experience bizarre behavior; confusion; excessive sweating; dark urine; fainting; fast or irregular heartbeat; fever or chills; hallucinations; loss of coordination; new or worsening agitation, anxiety, panic attacks, aggressiveness, impulsiveness, irritability, hostility, restlessness, or inability to sit still; red, swollen, blistered, or peeling skin."

Contrast this to the CDC's own marketing efforts among which is a "Community-Based Organizations COVID-19 Vaccine Toolkit" that includes material that can be used to promote adoption of the vaccine.

For our purposes let's focus on their "fact sheet" for preteens and teens:

Heart Inflamation Covid 7

The full PDF can be found here.

This is what they have to say about safety:

Heart Inflamation Covid 8

"Are COVID-19 vaccines safe for my child?"

It's the most important question a parent has. Their answer, an unequivocal "Yes!"

The whole document is like this.

Heart Inflamation Covid 9

Okay, then. I guess that settles that. Shut up and take the jab.

There are some very minor side effects, of course, but nothing to worry about really. In fact, side effects are good!

What are the side effects?

Your child may have some side effects, which are normal signs that their body is building protection. These side effects may affect your child's ability to do daily activities, but they should go away in a few days. Some people have no side effects. Side effects from the second shot may be more intense than after the first shot.

See? No big deal.

Heart Inflamation Covid 0

We are being instructed to believe that a brand new vaccine developed in record time using cutting edge mRNA technology and still under Emergency Use Authorization (and therefore literally "unapproved") is PERFECTLY SAFE.

Unlike, say, Advil.

NSAIDs, except aspirin, increase the risk of heart attack, heart failure, and stroke. These can be fatal.

The CDC is advertising these vaccines in a manner that would have a private company prosecuted.

Pharmaceutical companies are required to disclose long lists of possible side effects, no matter now rare. And yes, even in the limited trials performed, Covid vaccines have been found to have side effects.

Somehow, that didn't make it into the CDC's "Community-based Toolkit."

This is not about being anti-science or anti-vaxxer (I got the vaccine myself after weighing the pros and cons) or being a conspiracy theorist, or any of the other slurs the powers that be want to throw at you. This is about being an informed citizen entitled to know all the facts.

This is about being treated like an adult and not a child, like a citizen and not a subject.

But they don't seem very interested in that.

I mean, you love your children?

Don't you?

June 15, 2021 at 10:09 AM in Covid-19/Coronavirus, Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (2)

May 12, 2021

The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) that has been used for decades by public health experts is suddenly totally useless we are told. Weird.

VAERS  Politifact Cover (2)

Something odd caught my eye in the "What's Happening" sidebar on Twitter last week:


The systems are open to anyone, and are intended to provide an "early warning for any previously unknown effects" of COVID-19 vaccines, according to PolitiFact and Full Fact. Adverse effects and deaths reported on these systems are not necessarily caused by COVID-19 vaccines and may be unrelated coincidences, according to the CDC.

Okay, interesting, by why the sudden interest in such arcane matters all of a sudden? Why is this news now?

As it turns out, information in the wrong hands can be dangerous. Who's hands are "wrong?"

Those would be yours.

The thread related to the Twitter piece consisted of our various self-appointed Overseers of Truth being quite concerned that you are being exposed to some very inconvenient data.

They claim that the Covid vaccine is killing people is "mostly false."


I don't think that's as comforting as they had intended it to be.

The "anti-vaccine group" that is being fact checked is called, "Learn the Risk," and is a non-profit based in the United States. It's more than anti-vaccine, though, it appears to be generally anti-big pharma.

The Facebook post being fact-checked can be found here (an archived file) and a portion is screen captured below:


It goes on like that for a while, simply re-posting data straight from the VAERS system.

That's the entirety of the post, just a recitation of federal data.

Here is what Poltificact had to say about it:

Learn the Risk, an anti-vaccine group, recently published a post on Facebook with a list of people who died after receiving COVID-19 vaccines.

"AGE 25. MALE. Vaccinated 12/22/2020. Found unresponsive and subsequently expired at home on 1/11/2021. Moderna vaccine," reads the first of almost 30 entries featured in the Feb. 9 post.

These entries are copied from the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System, a national vaccine safety surveillance program set up by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Food and Drug Administration that records health issues that arise after vaccinations in the U.S.

So far, so nothing.

This was the next section, emphasis mine.

The implication: That the reports show that COVID-19 vaccines contributed to the deaths of dozens of people, as young as 24.

"The implication."

Whose implication?

All "Learn the Risk" did was copy and paste government data, and it's the data making the implication. They didn't even editorialize on it that I can find, not in the post linked to by Politifact in support of its FaCT chECk.

"Learn the Risk" didn't claim the data "proves" anything (the word Politifact used in its tweet) or "shows" anything, (the word Politifact used in its headline for the story) they just laid it out there. Their only crime was to alert you to data that the feds have been routinely collecting since 1990.

According to the VAERS website,

VAERS is not designed to determine if a vaccine caused a health problem, but is especially useful for detecting unusual or unexpected patterns of adverse event reporting that might indicate a possible safety problem with a vaccine.

"Especially useful."

That is so 2019. 

Re-posting government data specifically designed to indicate a possible safety problem with a vaccine, by an organization set up to question possible safety problems with vaccines is... wait for it...

"False news and misinformation!"

The post was flagged as part of Facebook's efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed.

And so naturally it got tagged with this.


Politifact then goes on pointing out the various limitations of VAERS (really, we get it, it's not verified and not proof of causality) and even attempts to add a dollop of ridicule just for good measure.

To illustrate the shortcomings of the database, one physician reported that a vaccine had turned him into the Incredible Hulk, the comic-book character. Both the CDC and the physician confirmed to PolitiFact that his report was initially accepted and entered into the system as an adverse event.

Ha ha! The Incredible Hulk! He's not real. This VAERS system that has been used by public health authorities for decades to flag potential problems is a complete joke!

Please stop paying attention to it.

Politifact's final summary:

A Facebook post from an anti-vaccine group shows a list of people who died after receiving COVID-19 vaccines, implying that the vaccine caused or contributed to those deaths.

Let me play "the definition game" that professional fact checkers find so endearing when it comports with their preferred narrative.

Here is one of the definitions for "implication."

A possible significance.

Keep that in mind.

The claim relies on reports from a federal tracking system of adverse events occurring after vaccinations. The agencies that maintain that system warn that the reports should not be used to draw conclusions about whether a vaccine causes a particular adverse event. To establish causation, experts look beyond isolated data points to studies of large groups of people to see if a negative symptom is more prominent in vaccinated people than in non-vaccinated ones.

To pause for a moment:

"Learn the Risk" is suggesting "a possible significance" using federal data specifically designed to be "especially useful for detecting... possible safety problem with a vaccine."

On to Politifact's big finish!

The COVID-19 vaccines have been proven to be safe and effective in tens of thousands of people.

True. But for thousands of others, it is possible that it has not according to government data.


We rate this statement Mostly False. ​

Even though "this statement," absent whatever ideological baggage you might want to bring to the subject, is objectively "mostly true."

I like context, and would have added it myself to the Facebook post, but that's me. Regardless, what "Learn the Risk" said is not only factually true, insofar as it goes, but it highlights something very real:

This system, which again has decades of use behind it, is recording orders of magnitude more adverse events than any vaccine in history. That is just true, and seems to have "detected" an "unusual or unexpected pattern" which is what VAERS was designed to do.

It could mean a lot of things, many perfectly benign, but could also include the possibility that the Covid vaccine, using new technology, developed in an unprecedentedly short period of time, and being administered under an Emergency Use Authorization, might have greater risks associated with it than others.

That sounds like something worth looking into. We have a right to know the benefits AND the risks so we can make more informed decisions. What are our media betters doing rather than providing us information so that we may make more informed decisions?

Parroting the corporate line, using the same arguments and the same language, in lock-step conformity. Pretty much every single one of them.

Don't forget the obligatory straw-men attacks on anyone who suggests that we should treat people like adults. I watched this segment. Carlson was very careful with his words. He thought it was newsworthy and people had a right to know.

I'm not "anti-vax" but I'm also not an "anti-fact." I actually got the Covid vaccine, having weighed the risks and rewards and making a decision that made sense for me and my family. Every citizen should be afforded that opportunity. 

So why are the authorities and their media enablers so fearful of information? Why are they so manic about forcing everyone to shut up and take the vaccine? It doesn't exactly inspire confidence. They would get much better compliance if they were just honest rather than giving people cause to question them.

I'm sorry, more cause to question them.

May 12, 2021 at 10:06 AM in Covid-19/Coronavirus, Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (2)

May 07, 2021

Yet another study confirms what we already knew: Lockdowns don't work. Let's take a look at how this fiction was maintained in the face of mounting evidence to the contrary.


Out: Stay Home. Stay Safe. Save Lives.

In: Stay Home. Die.

Last November, long after it was obvious that they were wrong, our "fact" checker overlords were still defending the autocrats and their unconstitutional home imprisonment orders.

As many states enter a new wave of more stringent measures to limit the spread of COVID-19, users on social media have been sharing posts that question the purpose of so called "lockdowns".

"So called."

Before we get to the kicker, it's important you fully appreciate the disdain with which they hold anyone who questions authority.

Which is interesting considering that's kind of their job.

An example of a lockdown-sceptic post circulating on social media (here) features the screenshot of an entry in the Merriam-Webster Dictionary on the word "lockdown", which includes a definition that reads: "the confinement of prisoners to their cells for all or most of the day as a temporary security measure". The image has an overlaid text that reads: "Never forget where the word LOCKDOWN comes from… A loving government isn't trying to save you from COVID…it is using COVID to justify MARTIAL LAW"

They then go on to patiently explain to the mouth breathers why they are wrong.

While this definition is indeed included in the Merriam-Webster Dictionary entry here , the screenshot fails to show two further definitions. According to Merriam Webster, the term also stands for a "temporary condition" imposed by authorities, for example, during the outbreak of an epidemic disease, "in which people are require to stay in their homes and refrain from limit activities outside the home involving public contact (such as dining out or attending large gatherings)".

Well, then, I guess that settles that. It appears that the word "lockdown" has always been understood to mean a "temporary condition" to deal with an "outbreak of an epidemic disease." Nothing to see here, move along.

Unless, of course, you're not a child and find that to be oddly... convenient.

Here is a screen shot of Merriam-Websters' current definition of "lockdown."

Lockdowns Don't Work 1

Sure enough, the fact checkers got it right. I guess there's nothing to see here after all...

Wait a second.

I am suspicious by nature, and thought I'd do a little basic fact checking myself. I mean, I'm no professional Reuters fact checker or anything but I do have an Internet connection and a browser so...

This is the definition of "lockdown" as of May 20 of last year.

Lockdowns Don't Work 2

That's it. That's the entire definition. Nothing about epidemics or large gatherings or dining out.

The new definition was added some time between May 20 and May 24, 2020. Reuters' professional fact checkers used a definition that had been fabricated to support the prevailing authoritarian assertion that the lockdowns were no big deal and discredit anyone who suggested otherwise.

That's not fact checking. It's either rank incompetence, or a deliberate attempt to silence political opponents.

It should therefore come as no surprise that Reuters then affirmed the prevailing orthodoxy.

Some posts falsely claim that these measures "don't save lives".

Some statements age like a fine wine kept in a dark climate-controlled cellar.

Some age like a chicken salad sandwich left in a hot Buick in the Arizona sun.

Not only is the Reuters proclamation of falsehood wrong, it was wrong at the time they made the statement. They reference all the usual suspects, everyone with a vested interest in maintaining the lockdowns, the WHO, the IMF and the like, and they mention and then largely dismiss, a handful of counterarguments.

But we knew a year ago that something wasn't right, and anyone who actually believes in data and "science" could credibly argue back then that lockdowns were counterproductive.

The first evidence came from numbers coming out of New York which found far more virus transmission among those sheltering in place vs. those going to work.

I and others have been writing about this since.

This is 20/20 sight. This is Sunday morning quarterbacking. We knew there was a problem with the lockdowns.

During the course of last year, about three dozen additional studies from around the world came out saying various versions of the same thing. Lockdowns were a bad idea.

The consequences of the suppression or dismissal of this data has been deadly.

The latest study is just another in a long line making it clear that universal lockdowns have been an abysmal failure. A failure of science, a failure of leadership, and a failure of morality.

At the moment, restrictions are for the most part slowly being eased across the country.

Too bad it's a year late.

May 7, 2021 at 11:22 AM in Covid-19/Coronavirus, Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (3)

October 21, 2020

The Only Thing We Have To Fear,... Is Everything.

As if things weren’t bad enough, a mysterious new illness that has the potential to kill tens of thousands of Americans including hundreds of children has started circulating throughout the United States.

Scientists have dubbed it “the flu.”

This strange and highly contagious virus is causing panic throughout the United States, particularly among parents concerned about their children’s susceptibility to the infection.

While a vaccine has been developed to help control this so-called “flu” it is at best, 50% to 60% effective, calling into question the motives behind the administration’s push for wide distribution. Why are they so intent on having everyone take a vaccine that still leaves your odds of contracting this deadly virus barely as good as what you’d get playing roulette?

Do we really want to gamble the lives of our children on the spin of a wheel?

That is why it is absolutely necessary that we shut down our economy.

Not the entire economy, of course. That would be reckless. Just the small parts that are not well-organized and lack political influence such as restaurants, independent retailers, other small businesses, and really anything that doesn’t rhyme with “Amazon,” or “Wal-Mart.”

This invisible enemy, this “flu,” can and will be defeated, but only if we all work together by wrapping our faces in scraps of cloth and staying home, doors closed and blinds pulled.

Further instructions will be forthcoming.

We thank you your obedience.

Cooperation. We meant to say cooperation.


Spread the word. While you still can! Click here for the entire collection or the pics below.


Mockup-of-a-woman-wearing-a-hoodie-featuring-a-collage-background-42538 Tank-top-mockup-of-a-young-woman-hiking-32231


October 21, 2020 at 01:01 PM in Covid-19/Coronavirus, Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (0)

October 16, 2020

Graham-Feinstein Hug Sparks Outrage Because Of Course It Does

In a genuine moment of comity, two political rivals, Lindsay Graham and Diane Feinstein, shared a brief hug following the conclusion of the Amy Coney Barrett hearings sending a message that while we may have differences, in the end, we are all part of the same human family.

That is why it must be condemned.

Feinstein even had the gall to say kind words about Graham.  Naturally, calls for her resignation followed with one activist organization issuing a statement that read:

“If Senate Democrats are going to get their act together on the courts going forward, they cannot be led by someone who treats Sunrise activists with contempt and the Republican theft of a Supreme Court seat with kid gloves.”

We should note that this theft was organized by a group of notorious traitors known as “The Founding Fathers,” and set in motion 233 years ago with a diabolical plan that came to be known as “The Constitution” laying out in detail the specific conditions under which a Supreme Court vacancy is to be filled.

As bad as Feinstein’s ill-advised display of humanity might have been, her transgression goes beyond simply being courteous and following the law of the land, that hug she shared, maskless no less, was too much for some to take.

Quick, cover the children's eyes!

Some believed Feinstein deserves to “get a little Covid” for her wanton violation of Covid guidelines. This week's, anyway:

Indeed, don’t we all wish we could “turn back time and donut all over.”


Many others went further, wishing she would die.

Interestingly, wishing the death of a United States Senator does not violate Twitter’s terms of service, but reporting on a potential financial scandal is totally beyond the pale.

Will we ever return to a time when political adversaries were simply people with whom we have policy disagreements and not evil enemies unworthy of being treated with any decency or respect?

Call us, “cautiously pessimistic.”


October 16, 2020 at 08:53 AM in Covid-19/Coronavirus, Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (2)

October 10, 2020

We’re Guessing Bobbing For Apples Is Right Out

As you know, we are in the midst of a deadly pandemic with an overall mortality rate fast approaching that of the seasonal flu and to which children are all but immune.

That is why it is essential that we ruin Halloween for them.

AdobeStock_175283721It’s for the chil… okay, that won’t work this time.

Regardless, shut up because science.

To that end, the CDC has come out with a list of “lower risk activities can be safe alternatives” for celebrating Halloween starting with:

“Carving or decorating pumpkins with members of your household and displaying them.”

Okay, maybe not the most imaginative idea given that close to 150 million Americans already carve Halloween pumpkins every year. Plus, it’s not clear how you make a holiday special by spending it with people you already Shutterstock_734744623spend nearly every waking moment with.

Leaving aside the wisdom arming people with knives who are probably at each other’s throats already, what about the hazards that already exist? Doesn’t the CDC understand how very very dangerous pumpkin carving is? In 2017:

“… pumpkin carving accounted for nearly 3,200 of the 16,706 Halloween-related injuries treated in U.S. emergency departments, doctors' offices and clinics, according to the Consumer Product Safety Commission.”

It’s almost as if there are risks in life.


Another suggestion:

“Carving or decorating pumpkins outside, at a safe distance, with neighbors or friends.”

Kind of like how you mow your lawn “with” neighbors and friends, at a safe distance.  Think of all the togetherness and camaraderie that fosters.

Oh, and again with the pumpkin carving. It’s like it’s okay to die of anything other than Covid.

“Having a virtual Halloween costume contest.”

Because you don’t spend enough time in Zoom meetings already.

“Having a Halloween movie night with people you live with.”

Yet more time with those people. This is actually starting to sound genuinely scary. Maybe these are good Halloween activities.

“Having a scavenger hunt-style trick-or-treat search with your household members in or around your home rather than going house to house.”


If you’re more of the daredevil type, the kind of adrenaline junkie who doesn’t feel truly alive unless faced with imminent danger, you can try some of the CDCs “Moderate Risk Activities.”

“Participating in one-way trick-or-treating where individually wrapped goodie bags are lined up for families to grab and go while continuing to social distance. (such as at the end of a driveway or at the edge of a yard).”

It’s like looking into the jaws of death itself and prevailing.

“If you are preparing goodie bags, wash your hands with soap and water for at least 20 seconds before and after preparing the bags.”

Has the air ever tasted sweeter than after a young child takes a thoroughly disinfected goodie back from the end of your driveway and yet you remain standing, unbowed?

Shutterstock_1794243364Incidentally, by ensuring your goodie bags approach the sterility of an operating theater, you are protecting the least vulnerable by eliminating the most improbable path of infection.

A couple of additional precautions. First, not wearing a cloth mask can be dangerous:

“A costume mask (such as for Halloween) is not a substitute for a cloth mask. A costume mask should not be used unless it is made of two or more layers of breathable fabric that covers the mouth and nose and doesn’t leave gaps around the face.”

Second, wearing a cloth mask can be dangerous:

“Do not wear a costume mask over a protective cloth mask because it can be dangerous if the costume mask makes it hard to breathe. Instead, consider using a Halloween-themed cloth mask.”

You know what, forget about it. Halloween is way too risky. Stay indoors, get underneath your covers, and the government will let you know when it’s completely safe and risk-free to come back out.

Be patient, it might be a while.


Spread the word. While you still can! Click here for the entire collection or the pics below.


Mockup-of-a-woman-wearing-a-hoodie-featuring-a-collage-background-42538 Tank-top-mockup-of-a-young-woman-hiking-32231


October 10, 2020 at 03:27 PM in Covid-19/Coronavirus, Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (2)

September 29, 2020

Bringing The Unmasked Bandit To Justice

Alecia Kitts, aka "The Unmasked Bandit," has finally been brought to justice.

It’s hard to watch, the wanton sitting, the flagrant and repeated breathing, and yet there she was:

Sitting outside, all but alone, watching a middle school football game.


Words really can’t quite capture the horror. You may want to skip the video if you are easily upset at the sight of someone’s face:

We know we’re not supposed to judge people by their appearance, but let’s face it, she fit the profile: A petite woman, early middle aged, a mom, had asthma.

She should have just tased herself and called it a day.

Yes, you could argue that forcing people to wear masks outside while socially distanced is contrary to everything we know about this virus but then again shut up.

Besides, as the Logan Police patiently point out, she was not arrested for not wearing a mask.

That would be ridiculous and a complete overreach of state authority.

She was arrested for trespassing on school property because she refused to vacate the area because she was not wearing a mask.

How that equates to being arrested for not wearing a mask we’ll never understand.

As Governor Mike DeWine explained, they just wanted the “kids to play,” and if that means tasering their parents, then so be it.

It won’t stop here unless we stop it now. Already three people were arrested in Idaho, possibly inspired by the Unmasked Bandit in Ohio, for not wearing masks while singing gospel hymns.

We can’t allow this to go on. We must preserve order, no matter what the cost.

In other news, widespread rioting continues unabated.


Want to let your feelings be known without getting arrested? For now, anyway. We have these and more available here or just click the pictures. Hey, it's still a feel country.(But you might want to hurry.)

Its Called Freedom Mockup PlaceItT-shirt-mockup-featuring-a-bearded-man-with-sunglasses-posing-in-front-of-some-plants-2248-el1

T-shirt-mockup-featuring-a-biker-carrying-his-helmet-31785 (1)

September 29, 2020 at 02:18 PM in Covid-19/Coronavirus, Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (0)

September 23, 2020

What If You Wear A Mask But You Still Hate Your Grandma?

Like many people, you are probably sick and tired of hearing that if you don't wear a face mask, you must hate your grandma.

But what if you do wear a face mask, even if only on occasion, and yet STILL hate your grandma?

We'll tell you what:

You'd be living a lie!

Every time people see you, they're just going to naturally assume you actually love your grandma. Here at Planet Moron, we understand that not all our readers have the capacity to maintain any kind of close personal relationship, and that's okay.

Well, actually, it isn't. You should probably seek some help for that.

But in the meantime, it's important you be true to yourself, and your natural animosity towards older living relatives.

I Still Hate Grandma

Yes, now you can tell the world, I'm a responsible citizen and yet I still hate grandma.

We see this as a win-win.

Available here.

No, really, you can buy this.


Also Available:


Its Called Freedom Mockup PlaceIt

September 23, 2020 at 03:13 PM in Covid-19/Coronavirus, Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (2)