Basically the article is wrong because its Snopes?I didn't read it. That's just my impression from previous experiences.
Basically the article is wrong because its Snopes?I didn't read it. That's just my impression from previous experiences.
I'm seeing this "study" everywhere with "see? John Hopkins says. We should have just let Covid spread unnoposed. Only the fat and unhealthy would have gotten sick or died. The rest of us would have been shopping and going to crowded bars!"It's a very good analysis and said this about the author of the report:
Its always useful to look at the background of the person presenting the research.
And said this about the study in general:
The only organizations promoting this study are those whose audiences agree with the conclusions, such as Fox News.
Therefore it falls into a category of research done to advance a narrative rather than one done to find the truth. My feeling is we should be looking for truth. Don't you?
I'm seeing this "study" everywhere with "see? John Hopkins says. We should have just let Covid spread unnoposed. Only the fat and unhealthy would have gotten sick or died. The rest of us would have been shopping and going to crowded bars!"
So presumably we get rid of Amendments 13, 14 and 15 at minimum?What we hear every day in the conservative media is that there are doctors and lawyers who will tell you what you want to hear, rather than tell you the truth.
5
Dan Bongino and Mark Levin are two very successful hosts who selectively quote things in order to prove their point. Levin selectively quotes the constitution. But he leaves out certain lines he doesn't like. He leaves out amendments that he feels should be repealed. I'm hearing a lot of these hosts who say they love the constitution also say that it needs to be updated. Their idea is to delete all the stuff they don't like, and replace it with all the stuff they like. The founders made it very difficult to amend the constitution for that reason.
So presumably we get rid of Amendments 13, 14 and 15 at minimum?
Hmm the mind runs wild. Human life amendment, Bible as the National Book, states rights for everything elseWe have to remember that the 18th amendment, the one that instituted prohibition, was enacted in 1919, right after the 1918 epidemic. So beware of people who will attempt to amend the constitution in the next few years. There are a lot of people right now looking to institutionalize various types of morality, just as we had after the last epidemic.
TheBigA said:
And [Snopes] said this about the study in general:
The viral “Johns Hopkins study” about lockdowns was not the work of Johns Hopkins University, it was not peer-reviewed, and it was not written by epidemiologists. A number of researchers have also taken issue with the methods used in this study.
"We find no evidence that lockdowns, school closures, border closures and limiting gatherings have had a noticeable effect on COVID-19 mortality," said the authors of the study, which is not peer-reviewed and reflects the authors' views, not necessarily those of the university.
nation.foxnews.com
True and any Republican who wants to leave the party or criticize Trump will get censured for saying the Truth over the election will get cancelled. However Bongino don't see it though.Dan Bongino hosted a special documentary, available on the subscription Fox Nation channel, about people getting canceled for their opinion:
Watch Canceled in the USA: Season , Episode , "Streaming Now: Canceled in the USA Season 2" Online - Fox Nation
Canceled in the USA - Streaming Now: Canceled in the USA Season 2: Bongino tells the stories of Americans, from celebrities and politicians to educators to scientists and doctors, who were canceled over their opinions. Hear these cancel culture victims share their experiences of being targeted...nation.foxnews.com
He doesn't include Liz Chaney or Adam Kinzinger, who are also being canceled for their opinions.
Isn't it funny how every time Fox News gets the on-screen graphics wrong, it happens to make the Democrats/Blue states look bad? I remember a while back they put the scale of a graph upside-down, to make a decrease (in crime, poverty, or something like that) look like an increase.Apparently there was a production problem during last night's Unfiltered with Dan Bongino on Fox:
MSN
www.msn.com
He's saying the cities are the "ten unhealthiest places" while the source actually says they are the "ten healthiest places." Whoops.
Wonder how that translates to ratings for the respective radio shows?According to Edison Research, The Dan Bongino Show is number 18 in its Top 50 US Podcasts chart for the fourth quarter of 2021. Clay Travis and Buck Sexton, who are iHeartMedia's designated successors to Rush Limbaugh and Dan Bongino's direct radio competitors, didn't make the list.
Wonder how that translates to ratings for the respective radio shows?
How The Study Was Conducted: The Podcast Consumer Tracker Q1 2021-Q4 2021 Top 50 Ranker is based upon 8,000 online interviews with weekly podcast consumers in the United States, ages 18 and older. Interviews were conducted in English and Spanish from 1/7/2021 – 12/23/2021. Ranking based on listening over the full period. All respondents reported listening to podcasts in the last week. Data weighted using The Infinite Dial from Edison Research and Triton Digital.
Well, we get rid of the First and Second Amendments to start off with, as a lot of people seem to hate those. Then we can work on the 4th and the 5th, as they get in the way of Law and Order. The 3rd has been a non-starter since 1776 at least -- why is it even in there? The 10th has plenty of opposition. No one wants to repeal the 13th although it could be argued that some interests are trying to eliminate it in other ways through workarounds. The 14th is merely in there to "create law", so it has to go.So presumably we get rid of Amendments 13, 14 and 15 at minimum?
I'm sure people who think like Bongino want the second half of the Second Amendment to be enshrined on the top of Mount Rushmore, because unlimited guns for every man, woman and child. First---depends who's speaking and we'd have to get rid of the "no state religion" part. I worked in the same building as Alan Keyes, somewhat prominent black conservative. He was in the kitchen pontificating that the First Amendment only allows us to choose from "correct" Christian denominationsWell, we get rid of the First and Second Amendments to start off with, as a lot of people seem to hate those. Then we can work on the 4th and the 5th, as they get in the way of Law and Order. The 3rd has been a non-starter since 1776 at least -- why is it even in there? The 10th has plenty of opposition. No one wants to repeal the 13th although it could be argued that some interests are trying to eliminate it in other ways through workarounds. The 14th is merely in there to "create law", so it has to go.
The Constitution: the document every American claims to love and at the same time wants to change and/or eliminate.