What's new
US Message Board 🦅 Political Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

My take on the Politicization of the Jab

OP
Votto

Votto

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2012
Messages
33,392
Reaction score
19,812
Points
1,905
Today everything is about politics.
The very same people who said they will not get the "Trump vaccine"... are the exact same people pushing for mandates on THE VERY SAME VACCINE.
Also - these same people insist on people with natural immunity get vaccinated, despite 16 studies showing natural immunity is at least equal to protection of vaccines... if not superior. Why???
It is not uncommon for the Left to jump around on issues. For example, when Trump was in office they used the Filibuster a myriad of times, but when they have power it now is Jim Crow

But as you rightly see, the shift on issues happens magically around whether they are in or out of power because power is the only issue they are not hypocrites about. They want it at any cost and have nor moral safeguards on how to attain it.

They are very sick people. They are sociopaths.
 

Dadoalex

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2021
Messages
3,833
Reaction score
1,607
Points
178
Let me give you a perspective on the situation that you may have not thought of before. I'm not saying I'm right, but I think it worthwhile to consider.

My take on the Jab is that those who oppose it are simply being trolled. Those pushing the Jab know that those who hate Biden and the democrats will naturally begin to resist them the more they try to force it down their throats.

Let me explain

We saw the politicization of the Jab begin long before the vaccine hit the markets. Trump was being blamed for every single Covid death as both Biden and Kamala said they would not take the Jab because Trump singed off on it. Then once Trump lost, Pfiezer, whose CEO wanted Biden to win, let the vaccine hit the market a week after Trump had lost the election. That way Trump could not get credit for it as Biden questioned if there would ever be a vaccine. Biden then took the Jab which probably saved his elderly arse. As funny as it seems, Trump may have saved the life of Biden.

And now that Biden was in charge, naturally all the Covid deaths were not his fault like it was Trumps. Instead, it was the fault of Trump supporters who would not get the Jab. In addition to this, Biden broke his promise that the Jab would not be mandated as he began his own mandates and pretty much bullied corporations to do the same.

Now those who opposed Biden, will not only lose their job, they may have a higher rate of death than those not taking the Jab. The issue will also continually be raised as an election issue to try and show how the political opponents of the DNC are against science, even though it was Trump who used the science to bring us the vaccine. So not only would those who oppose Biden be poorer, they would also lose more elections because of the radicalness of those against the vaccine would be exploited to offend voters.

I realize many think that the Jab is death, and it is true that there are those who have died from it, as have others from other vaccines, so it behooves you to know the statistics of risk/reward to see if it is worth it. For example, it makes the least sense to vaccinate the young and healthy, etc. As for the long term effects, who the hell knows? Does the government care? No, not really, they have their own agendas for pushing the vaccine, such as vanquishing their political foes and trying to resume normalcy as much as possible now that they are in charge, at least in the near term. And if it is shown that their are long range issues, everyone knows Trump will be blamed anyway and they will be long gone.

So what is the alternative view? The alternative view is that they are giving the Jab to everyone to kill them off so that the only people left are really pissed off conservatives who are armed to the teeth! That does not seem right to me.

Again, just another point of view I had thought of, not saying I'm right. But as I see conservatives get trolled every day with this crap, like the Governor of New York actually walking into a church, something she probably had never done before, and telling people it was God's will for them to take the Jab and to join her holy army, you know she is just trolling conservatives, right? After all, the flesh of those on the Left begins to burn uncontrollably if they so much as get within 50 feet of a church, so the message was directed at people she knew did not like her and did not trust her and would be appalled at such words and not listen to her.

Just food for thought. But the best part of all, is the way this Jab crap divides average citizens. I am personally outrage people are being made to take it, and would stand by anyone refusing to do so. It is not only Unconstitutional, it is immoral.
The only people politicizing the vaccine are people just like you.

Just like you politicized masks and social distancing

Just like you politicized global warming and so many other faux issues.

You listen to Fox and parrot what those morons tell you.

Like your "War on Christmas"...
How are you harmed if I say "happy holidays?"
There are several holidays surrounding Christmas and Christmas is only 1 day.
But have some clerk say "happy holidays" on Nov 28th and you fools are ready for war.
The only war on Christmas is you people screaming like a bunch of raped apes over nothing.
There is nothing on this planet you Querdeken won't politicize if it gives you a single chance to "own the libs."
Thus, your whining is the origin of the Querdeken Butthurt of the Day
to which we will gladly add your post.
 

Dadoalex

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2021
Messages
3,833
Reaction score
1,607
Points
178
OP
Votto

Votto

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2012
Messages
33,392
Reaction score
19,812
Points
1,905
So, when you said... "But the best part of all, is the way this Jab crap divides average citizens." you were talking about the best thing for those wanting to divide us, not that best thing in your own opinion?

Ok, I can see that.

One other question, why do you think it is the job of politicians to divide and conquer?
Dividing and conquering is the job of a politician. After all, if you really believed that it mattered little who you would vote for, that you would be treated the same either way, would you give them your money? Would you even bother to vote? No.

The key is creating groups that form against each other, with people in each group thinking they will gain something over the other group. You support your group and win, and each person in the group will win a cookie. But if you support your group they will all lose, a cookie.

Without this, the whole system collapses.
 

Dadoalex

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2021
Messages
3,833
Reaction score
1,607
Points
178
It's not politics for me, I just don't take meds. If the virus posed a bigger threat I would take it. Or perhaps if I was older/unhealthy.
So why tell others they shouldn't take the vaccine unless, of course, it is to politicize the vaccine?
 

Golfing Gator

Diamond Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2017
Messages
55,493
Reaction score
9,375
Points
2,070
Location
Midwest of America
Dividing and conquering is the job of a politician. After all, if you really believed that it mattered little who you would vote for, that you would be treated the same either way, would you give them your money? Would you even bother to vote? No.

The key is creating groups that form against each other, with people in each group thinking they will gain something over the other group. You support your group and win, and you win a cookie. But if you support your group and lose, you will lose a cookie.

Without this, the whole system collapses.

I could not disagree more, in fact I would say because of this the whole system is collapsing. The country is going down the toilet faster and faster because of this.
 
OP
Votto

Votto

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2012
Messages
33,392
Reaction score
19,812
Points
1,905
The only people politicizing the vaccine are people just like you.

Just like you politicized masks and social distancing

Just like you politicized global warming and so many other faux issues.

You listen to Fox and parrot what those morons tell you.

Like your "War on Christmas"...
How are you harmed if I say "happy holidays?"
There are several holidays surrounding Christmas and Christmas is only 1 day.
But have some clerk say "happy holidays" on Nov 28th and you fools are ready for war.
The only war on Christmas is you people screaming like a bunch of raped apes over nothing.
There is nothing on this planet you Querdeken won't politicize if it gives you a single chance to "own the libs."
Thus, your whining is the origin of the Querdeken Butthurt of the Day
to which we will gladly add your post.
I see, so people asking questions about what they are made to do certain things by politicians are the ones who are politicizing this stuff?

Do you even hear yourself speak?

If politicians were not ramming this down our throats, it would not be a political issue moron.

And what the hell more harm does saying Merry Christmas have than saying Happy Holidays, or did I just make your brain explode by my previous comment?
 

colfax_m

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2019
Messages
34,755
Reaction score
13,058
Points
1,465
Put the damn kool-aid down.

If your precious vaccine worked my choice would be irrelevant to all but me and others who CHOOSE not to get it.
That’s never been the case. Don’t you guys remember talking about herd immunity? Many people don’t respond to the vaccine and depend on the rest of the community to be immunized.
 

Dadoalex

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2021
Messages
3,833
Reaction score
1,607
Points
178
The vast majority of political stooges in office are stupid as rocks.

The better question is, with the advent of such things as AI and the Deep State, who is steering the Left? Think about it, computers collect information about everything and everyone 24/7. It never stops and it will find ways to control you. For example, it is used on cell phones to do nothing but find ways to keep you on your phone. All the information it collects about you is geared towards that. This much we know, but what else is AI geared towards that we don't know, such as steering voters a certain way.

As for conservatives, who gives a damn about them or ever has?

Power does not make you right, in fact, historically those in power are often on the wrong side of things.
Conspiracy theories.

How the managers of the Querdeken politicize every topic.
 

Dadoalex

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2021
Messages
3,833
Reaction score
1,607
Points
178
Yes, it is all Trump's fault and the fault of his followers

In fact, if it were not for Trump we would not even have a Pandemic moron
Everything you said there is correct.
 

colfax_m

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2019
Messages
34,755
Reaction score
13,058
Points
1,465
The natural reaction to being forced to do something is to resist. Humans have an innate inner desire for freedom.

Anyone with any brain power knows this, which is why the Federal government chooses manipulation instead of outright demands for various other things, to bypass this direct opposition. That way the frog in the pan does not jump out as the heat is turned up slowly.

But the Jab is different. It is do as I say or to hell with ya. They know what kind of effect this will have, and who it will have an effect on the most.
We spent many months trying to be nice about it.

It only became more coercive when people still refused and the country began paying the price for their childishness.
 
OP
Votto

Votto

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2012
Messages
33,392
Reaction score
19,812
Points
1,905
I could not disagree more, in fact I would say because of this the whole system is collapsing. The country is going down the toilet faster and faster because of this.
Fair enough, but may I suggest you are falsely glorifying our past? We all do it, but let's look at the history of all the political fighting, shall we because the media is all behind it?

Most have no idea what the history of the press is in the US. They really believe that the media at one time, was a wholesome group whose job it was to provide the truth to the American people in order to persevere the democracy which depends upon it. But as with most things presented to us by the Left, this is but a myth.

In 1810, Isaiah Thomas, a printer, newspaper publisher, and witness to the American Revolution, published a book called, "The History of the Printing in America". It was one of a very few works that helped preserve the records of printers during the Revolutionary war period.

A printing press was first established in 1638 at Cambridge, Massachusetts. And as it turns out, the earliest printing press in America mostly debated about religion, and later, promoting the gospel and other books to Native Americans. However, these works were censored. Thomas wrote, "The fathers of Massachusetts kept a watchful eye on the press; and in neither a religious nor civil point of view, were they disposed to give it much liberty. Both the civil and ecclesiastical rulers were fearful that if it were not under wholesome restraints, contentions and heresies would arise among the people"

In 1662, the government of Massachusetts appointed licensers of the press, and afterward, in 1664, passed a law that 'no printing should be allowed in any town with the jurisdiction, except in Cambridge; nor should anything be printed there but what the government permitted through the agency of those persons who were empowered for the purpose. No printing was free from legal constraints until about the year 1755. Thomas wrote, "no pressers were set up in the colonies till near the close of the 17th century." Before 1775, printing was confined to the capitals of the colonies, and the press no longer focused on spreading the gospel, rather, their focus shifted towards spreading revolution. Thomas gives praise to the early printing press for the success of the Revolution, saying that without it, the revolution would probably have never come to be. Perhaps Thomas Pain's Common Sense was the most effective work to gain support for the Revolution. In fact, by the last half of the 1760's, the press had become mostly a partisan tool for the Revolution. Writers regularly proclaimed the virtues of a free press that was needed to have a free society; however, those same writers did their best to silence their opposition, that is, those who were loyal to the King of England.

So was there a free press in the colonies if most, if not all, of the press was controlled by those promoting Revolution against the King of England? And if the press is needed for such political endeavors, does this mean that whoever is best able to use the press as a partisan mouthpiece will be the victorious party?

Exactly how much does the press control us? And is this concerning since there are no unbiased news sources, since there are no unbiased human beings? The printed word takes a great deal of time and money to provide people, so only those with a great deal of time and money can provide it. So what money is funding it, and what are their political views? These are the only questions we should ask and investigate.

After the Revolution, historians write of the “party-press era”, that is, from the 1780’s to the 1860’s. It was a time when most newspapers aligned themselves with a politician, campaign, or party, and did so openly. Charles L. Ponce De Leon, an associate professor at California State University said, “Sparked by divergent plans for the future of the new republic, competing factions emerged within George Washington’s administration and Congress, and by the mid-1790’s, each faction had established partisan newspapers championing its point of view. These publications were subsidized through patronage, and, though they had a limited circulation, the material they published was widely reprinted and discussed, and contributed to the establishment of the nation’s first political parties, the Federalists and the Democratic Republicans. And it did not take them long to learn how best to steer public views”. De Leon continues, “Newspapers like Philip Freneau’s National Gazette, writes the most prominent Democratic Republican organ, crafted distinctly partisan lenses through which readers were encouraged to view the world. Specializing in gossip, innuendo, and ad hominem attacks, these newspapers sought to make readers fearful about the intentions of their opponents. The strategy was quite effective at arousing support and mobilizing voters to go to the polls, after all, the fate of the Republic was a stake.” Thomas Jefferson was attacked by a Federalist newspaper as being a godless Jacobin who would unleash the forces of bloody terror upon the land. There would be murder, robbery, rape, adultery, and incest that will be openly taught and practiced. The air will be rent with the cries of the distressed, the soil will be soaked with blood, and the nation black with crimes.

It is noteworthy to mention that the history of the US took a dark turn at this time. The Federalists lead by John Adams did not like men like Thomas Jefferson and his Democrat Republicans creating news stories that attacked them politically. As a result, the Alien and Sedition Acts were created by the Federalist party, which among other things, made criticizing the government openly punishable by such things as imprisonment. Despite the Founding Fathers just having fought a bloody war to be free, and to make others free and risking their lives to do so, they inexplicably turned right around and imposed a far more oppressive law on the freedom of speech than King George had ever thought about doing. But such is the role of the corrupting power of human nature. But as with most other things, there is more to the story.

While France was embroiled in its continuing domestic social and political revolution, England continued to war with France in the Caribbean and along the French coast. America remained neutral, but both England and France preyed upon American ships engaged in overseas trade.

George Washington was concerned that the continued warfare between England and France would lead to insurrection in the US. There was widespread belief that the French were trying to manipulate the American government. The Jay Treaty in 1795 brought further controversy and mistrust and a year later James Monroe was recalled as minister to France and John Adams was elected President.

Two years later, it became public knowledge that the French had tried to bribe an American diplomatic delegation in the notorious XYZ affair. Elements in Congress believed that French influence had infiltrated Republicans and they were trying to separate America into factions. There was also fear of invasion by France for several years, a state of “quasi-war” existed.

Congress responded by setting restrictions on aliens and defining seditious conduct. In what came to be called the Alien and Sedition acts, Congress required a residence of 14 years for nationalization, and gave the president the power to deport aliens. Subversive conspiracies were defined, and written publications against the legislature or the president could be punished. 20 Republican editors were jailed. The laws were grounded in the belief that opposition to the government and its policies amounted to a division of the people, which would collapse the union.

To make a long story shorter, Jefferson was elected President in 1800 and overturned most of the Alien and Sedition acts he ran to overturn. Interestingly, what was left of the Alien and Sedition act was used by FDR to lock up innocent Japanese Americans during WW2. But where the laws all bad? Concerns seemed valid which was foreign attacks, insurrection within the Republic, disunity and untruth being spread, etc. At the same time, the freedom of the press was crushed as the Republic would have had a much darker future than what it did had liberty not been restored. So, the press was restored.

But today instead of the government censoring speech, we have corporations doing it for them. And now our courts tell us that this is 100% Constitutional. Now the government need not play the bad guy, the despot that destroys our free speech. Now corporate America does it for them.

The government/corporate relationship is a symbiotic one. The corporations lavish government with money and praise and censors speech for them, while the government turns it's head and looks the other way while they violate our First Amendment rights, among other things. Just so long as corporate American gives them their money and allegiance, government will let them do as they please. A pretty good deal if you ask me.

Why nationalize industry when you can nationalize the people?

The real change seems to have occurred after the Revolution though.


Newspapers emerged as a driving force in American life and had little to do with objective news. The press became even more corrupt under President Jackson. Editors of newspapers owed their jobs directly to Jackson as he appointed numerous ones to do his bidding. He also appointed numerous editors to salaried political positions, including many postmasters, while nationally it is estimated that 50 to 60 editors had been given plum political jobs. But rewarding political friends was nothing new in politics, as the Federalists appointed nearly 1000 editors to postmaster positions over a 12-year period, but Jackson transformed the hap hazard approach into more of an organized strategic plan to try and obtain votes.

A Historian by the name of Harold Holzer describes the impact of the power of partisan journalism on voters in the years leading to the Civil War. “By the 1850’s, almost no independent voters were left in America, only Democrats and Whigs, and nearly all of them avid readers of newspapers. They were kept in a perpetual state of political arousal by journalism, and further stimulated by election cycles that drew voters to the polls several times each year, not just on the first Tuesday of November, the overwhelming majority regarded politics with a fervor that approached religious awakening, evoking interest characteristic of modern sports or entertainment. With only a few notable exceptions, few unaligned newspapers prospered.”
 

Crepitus

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2018
Messages
57,446
Reaction score
19,225
Points
2,260

Crepitus

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2018
Messages
57,446
Reaction score
19,225
Points
2,260

iamwhatiseem

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2010
Messages
29,841
Reaction score
12,649
Points
1,090
Location
On a hill
The only people politicizing the vaccine are people just like you.

Just like you politicized masks and social distancing

Just like you politicized global warming and so many other faux issues.

You listen to Fox and parrot what those morons tell you.

Like your "War on Christmas"...
How are you harmed if I say "happy holidays?"
There are several holidays surrounding Christmas and Christmas is only 1 day.
But have some clerk say "happy holidays" on Nov 28th and you fools are ready for war.
The only war on Christmas is you people screaming like a bunch of raped apes over nothing.
There is nothing on this planet you Querdeken won't politicize if it gives you a single chance to "own the libs."
Thus, your whining is the origin of the Querdeken Butthurt of the Day
to which we will gladly add your post.
Haha... nothing wrong with saying Happy Holidays, people been saying that very thing for decades.
However... not as a substitute for Merry Christmas.
Happy Holidays is like saying "Howdy" instead of "Hello"... same thing.
HOWEVER... saying it and NOT saying Merry Christmas is a different thing.
And that thing.... is virtue signaling.
A Jew or a Muslim not saying it is expected. A white, non Christian not saying it is culture appropriation and virtue signaling.
 
OP
Votto

Votto

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2012
Messages
33,392
Reaction score
19,812
Points
1,905
We spent many months trying to be nice about it.

It only became more coercive when people still refused and the country began paying the price for their childishness.
There are lots of nice people, in fact, probably a majority.

But each day as citizens have a gun pointed to their collective heads, there are fewer and fewer nice people.

Soon all opposition may become like the Taliban. Just hardened mountain fighters hiding in caves which becomes their life.
 

Crepitus

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2018
Messages
57,446
Reaction score
19,225
Points
2,260

22lcidw

Platinum Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2018
Messages
24,220
Reaction score
9,156
Points
895
We spent many months trying to be nice about it.

It only became more coercive when people still refused and the country began paying the price for their childishness.
You are so nice and all knowing.
 
OP
Votto

Votto

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2012
Messages
33,392
Reaction score
19,812
Points
1,905
Haha... nothing wrong with saying Happy Holidays, people been saying that very thing for decades.
However... not as a substitute for Merry Christmas.
Happy Holidays is like saying "Howdy" instead of "Hello"... same thing.
HOWEVER... saying it and NOT saying Merry Christmas is a different thing.
And that thing.... is virtue signaling.
A Jew or a Muslim not saying it is expected. A white, non Christian not saying it is culture appropriation and virtue signaling.
I personally wish people a happy Jesus day just to see if they burst into flames.
 

Crepitus

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2018
Messages
57,446
Reaction score
19,225
Points
2,260

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$295.00
Goal
$350.00

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top