A few NR readers think like I do. Here's two Reader Comments I copied that make good points imo. (It seems these comments got about an equal number of up-votes and down-votes):
JackKempfan:
When did NR become National Pharmaceutical Council Review?
Cdog1776:
What exactly is the point of this article? So... You're for the food pyramid? You believe red and yellow and pink dye should remain in our foods? You believe processed foods and see oils are good for you and that high fructose corn syrup saves lives? You think the COVID Vaccine WAS effective for children under 18 or men under 34? Heck, you think the COVID Vaccine prevents COVID-19 or COVID transmission? You think masks work or that the 20 vaccines on the schedule for children versus the 5 back in 1976 are making our kids healthier? Well, if so, then you are crazier than RFK Jr....
Here's the link to the National Review article by Mr. Schneider. It worked earlier today but it was acting funny when I tried to add a link in the body of this story. The story was published January 30 and had 569 Reader Comments. I'll add a few of my favorites later.
Also, thanks to my friend and long-time generous subscriber Mr. Rex Powell for emailing me a copy of this "tripe." Some of my readers might remember Rex as the man who paid for a full-page ad in the newspaper in the backyard of the Mayo Clinic.
That ad challenged the "settled science" used by the experts at the world's most famous hospital and supported RFK, Jr.
Absolutely bizarre (shameful, really) that they used the example of the polluted river Thames to try to besmirch a man whose most well known achievement has been to clean up the… Hudson River.
According to the traditional definition of Vaccine, the clotshots aren't a vaccine. A true vaccine takes the least lethal form of a virus and injects it into your body so you can produce antibodies.
Smallpox victims got the cowpox variety as vaccines.
There was no least lethal strain for the mRNA gene therapies. They took the payload and injected the whole damn thing in your arm and watched while your loved ones died.
The CDC backed up this nonsense, as did the FDA and the congress, which weaseled out of having to take it.
Shared this about government statistical claims on another of your Stacks awhile back. Fits here again. In 2009 the Obama administration conjured up a statistic even more phony than "job creation" statistics that all politicians had used before. Kind of like with vaccine safety and efficacy, what a vaccine is, "lives saved" empty assertions. ARA's measure was intended as a metric to rate the success of the new administration's "stimulus" (another fictional concept) American Recovery Act passed in early 2009. "Jobs Saved or Created":
A meaningless measurement that had never been used before 2009 in any government unemployment statistical measure. Deceit. As if counting a job "saved" is even possible. Meant to convey an authoritative finding of economists asserting there was a return on the investment of $800 billion of taxpayers money. When there was none, or it was nominal, and a net negative return.
Taxpayer money did make corporate and Democratic party constituencies like labor unions and environment profiteers very happy, some jobs were created for them, maybe even saved. But not for the rest of America. But by 2010 even the Associated Press called the measurement bullshite:
The slightest tug at the veil of deceit to look inside revealed the "jobs saved or created" metric to be false, unprovable.
Just. Like. "Vaccines saved(s) "x" lives." Bullshite. Same exact bullshite as phony ARA statistics. Only difference it only took legacy media about a year or two to admit the stats were bullshite.
I dropped my NR subscription when their “Against Trump” issue showed up in my mailbox. They revealed their renunciation of their founder’s principles on that issue.
I made an error I've now fixed. In my caption I said RFK, Jr. was being opposed as he tries to get confirmed as secretary of HHR. The Agency, of course, is the HHS.
I think I know why I made this error. My car is a Chevy HHR!
I subscribed to the National Review for many years. And several years ago I stopped. I do not remember what particular article set me off, but I remember my reaction to it: “These guys have forgotten who is reading and paying.”
My take on those guys over at the National Review: Wow, that worm-eaten ship's sinking fast. I only wonder how many clot-shots the writer and editorial board have taken. My guess, they're probably all five plussers.
"Five plussers"— I'm not joking, sad as this is to say. The people who have gone all in on the shots, and taken 5 plus, I just do not think they are going to reconsider their quasi-religious beliefs about jabs, and, anyway, sadly, they will not be with us much longer. If dementia, cancer or kidney failure or whatever (it's a long list) doesn't take them down, the clots will— whether microclots, big clots, white clots.
For anyone reading this who has had that many shots, I would suggest looking at the FLCCC protocols. There are ways to mitigate some of the damage from the shots, and with these and other protocols, many of even the very badly injured have managed to heal to a significant degree.
Yep. The magazine became full neo-con as well ... And embraced the mission of the Censorship Industrial Complex. NR certainly didn't devote many column inches developing any of Kennedy's great points about the Captured Vaccine Industrial Complex.
This article proves the editors think Kennedy is spouting "nonsense." When they write about him, it's too make the same points the NY Times does.
William F. Buckley died on 2/28/08, almost 17 years ago. The founder of The National Review would be appalled at some of the writing coming out of that rag today. I was a NR subscriber for many years, but dropped them after it became apparent that the "new" NR was not going to adhere to the standards of their founder.
On the flip side, great article Bill. While admitting some ambivalence with Kennedy, I believe we have moved into Revolution territory with the country now, and only radical, decisive changes can turn things around.
Mister Schneider would seem to be caught in the Scneid. Great response by you, here, Mister Rice, representing. …I’m heading over to NR now to read the comments, see if you’re mentioned.
I went back and checked to see whether NR had left the link in place, and it is still there. One addled TDS'r gave a thumbs down and one reader indicated that he or she had used the link to read your post, of which he or she provided his or her praise and also thanked me for having provided the link. ...If I had been able to get the link in there in a timelier manner, I expect it would have sent many readers your way.
I should have noted in this rebuttal article that one "work-around" for conservative magazines like National Review "going wobbly" was the creation and rapid popularity of The Brownstone Institute, created by Jeffrey Tucker as a REBUTTAL to such trends.
Full disclosure: I'm flattered and grateful to be a Brownstone fellow.
Every chance I get, I try to promote the Brownstone website and mission and appreciate everyone who is able to support this vital organization with a donation. IMO Brownstone is one of the key generals in this existential battle to slay bogus and harmful narratives.
(Looks like Brownstone has some more great articles today):
While I too am endlessly grateful for Brownstone, it is a big ideological tent, its leader Jeffry Tucker is from a libertarian background, and a number of its fellows are best described as "old-school liberals" left politically homeless by 2020-2024. Tucker has had some interesting re-thinkings of certain libertarian dogmas since he underwent the exp. of seeing virtually none of his "fellow" "libertarians" oppose the lockdowns, so I'm not even sure if he calls himself a libertarian anymore. Still, from my academic conservative background, pledged to social and constitutional conservativism generally, and in my case wedded to a particular school (Lawler-ian, or faith-based-Straussian, aka "PostModernConservatism") of conservative thought, it is clear to me that Brownstone could only problematically be called "conservative." I like it just fine for what it is, a crossroads of thinking about the top crisis of our time, and I'd be happy to grant it a general conservative character, but it's necessary to say that. Root ideological differences can matter, and must not be waved away.
Frankly, Covid-dissidents who are conservative have yet to find their publication or rallying point. All of the older leaders and publications have betrayed them, with Sen. Johnson, Bannon, Emerald Robinson, and a handful of others being about the only exceptions to the rule. There is seldom much difference b/t Trump-supporting conservative leaders/publications and the dwindling number of anti-Trump ones on this point, so I wish my fellow dissident conservatives would stop framing things around that increasingly irrelevant feud, which the anti-Trumpers just outright LOST.
2025 may be the year, given that a MAGA betrayal of MAHA still sickeningly looks quite possible, that dissident conservatives actually have to take radical actions against the conservative/GOP leadership. See my recent writings "Dissident Mutiny?" and "2025, Supservatives, 2025." In other words, 2025 could see the end of conservativism as we have known it.
Thanks for adding this Carl. You make a good point that "conservative" probably isn't the best label for the Brownstone "tent." Jeffrey has written many times about his disillussionment with many of his former "libertarian" allies. I've been to one Brownstone "retreat." At that conclave I was struck by the number of ex-liberals who were now on "our team." In fact, that was one of of the main points made by many speakers.
We need a new movement of genuine conservatives. I've written a little about how the so-called conservatives (RINOs) captured the authentic "Tea Party Movement," which was really led by Ron Paul and his supporters in 2012.
I didn’t die. I also definitely had COVID in January 2020 after visiting NYC and spending a few days 2 blocks away from China Town, so…
I did lose 3 friends to turbo cancer and blood clots within 5 months of the vaccine rolling out. …But I’ve been told that is ‘normal’ for healthy 37 year olds with no prior medical history.
A few NR readers think like I do. Here's two Reader Comments I copied that make good points imo. (It seems these comments got about an equal number of up-votes and down-votes):
JackKempfan:
When did NR become National Pharmaceutical Council Review?
Cdog1776:
What exactly is the point of this article? So... You're for the food pyramid? You believe red and yellow and pink dye should remain in our foods? You believe processed foods and see oils are good for you and that high fructose corn syrup saves lives? You think the COVID Vaccine WAS effective for children under 18 or men under 34? Heck, you think the COVID Vaccine prevents COVID-19 or COVID transmission? You think masks work or that the 20 vaccines on the schedule for children versus the 5 back in 1976 are making our kids healthier? Well, if so, then you are crazier than RFK Jr....
Bravo Cdog1776 - and Bill Rice Jr, for alerting us to the garbage the deaf, dumb and blind are still reading, writing and PAYING for?!
You did a great rebuttal of a filthy piece by this poor deluded man, thank you.
They are well paid wordsmiths dishing out BS!
Here's the link to the National Review article by Mr. Schneider. It worked earlier today but it was acting funny when I tried to add a link in the body of this story. The story was published January 30 and had 569 Reader Comments. I'll add a few of my favorites later.
Also, thanks to my friend and long-time generous subscriber Mr. Rex Powell for emailing me a copy of this "tripe." Some of my readers might remember Rex as the man who paid for a full-page ad in the newspaper in the backyard of the Mayo Clinic.
That ad challenged the "settled science" used by the experts at the world's most famous hospital and supported RFK, Jr.
https://www.nationalreview.com/2025/01/americas-dangerous-flirtation-with-rfk-jr/
Absolutely bizarre (shameful, really) that they used the example of the polluted river Thames to try to besmirch a man whose most well known achievement has been to clean up the… Hudson River.
Good point, Samwise.
According to the traditional definition of Vaccine, the clotshots aren't a vaccine. A true vaccine takes the least lethal form of a virus and injects it into your body so you can produce antibodies.
Smallpox victims got the cowpox variety as vaccines.
There was no least lethal strain for the mRNA gene therapies. They took the payload and injected the whole damn thing in your arm and watched while your loved ones died.
The CDC backed up this nonsense, as did the FDA and the congress, which weaseled out of having to take it.
Early smallpox inoculation method was variolation, which is pretty bizarre overall, yet more straightforward(!)
I keep thinking mad scientists inverted and lethalized homeopathy for profit and power.
Shared this about government statistical claims on another of your Stacks awhile back. Fits here again. In 2009 the Obama administration conjured up a statistic even more phony than "job creation" statistics that all politicians had used before. Kind of like with vaccine safety and efficacy, what a vaccine is, "lives saved" empty assertions. ARA's measure was intended as a metric to rate the success of the new administration's "stimulus" (another fictional concept) American Recovery Act passed in early 2009. "Jobs Saved or Created":
https://web.archive.org/web/20100712225301/http://www.businessandmedia.org:80/articles/2009/20090512100953.aspx
https://web.archive.org/web/20100221014007/http://www.heritage.org:80/research/economy/bg2305.cfm
A meaningless measurement that had never been used before 2009 in any government unemployment statistical measure. Deceit. As if counting a job "saved" is even possible. Meant to convey an authoritative finding of economists asserting there was a return on the investment of $800 billion of taxpayers money. When there was none, or it was nominal, and a net negative return.
Taxpayer money did make corporate and Democratic party constituencies like labor unions and environment profiteers very happy, some jobs were created for them, maybe even saved. But not for the rest of America. But by 2010 even the Associated Press called the measurement bullshite:
https://web.archive.org/web/20100115104550/http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100113/ap_on_bi_ge/us_stimulus_counting_jobs
The slightest tug at the veil of deceit to look inside revealed the "jobs saved or created" metric to be false, unprovable.
Just. Like. "Vaccines saved(s) "x" lives." Bullshite. Same exact bullshite as phony ARA statistics. Only difference it only took legacy media about a year or two to admit the stats were bullshite.
Lies, damn lies and statistics.
Thanks for these great links and additions, Freedom Fox.
To sum up Obama's legacy, as he would have you believe: "Just think of how much worse it would have been if not for me."
I dropped my NR subscription when their “Against Trump” issue showed up in my mailbox. They revealed their renunciation of their founder’s principles on that issue.
Children’s schedule is like 72 and counting.
72 virgins, 72 vaccines. Similar ideology.
Correction:
I made an error I've now fixed. In my caption I said RFK, Jr. was being opposed as he tries to get confirmed as secretary of HHR. The Agency, of course, is the HHS.
I think I know why I made this error. My car is a Chevy HHR!
I subscribed to the National Review for many years. And several years ago I stopped. I do not remember what particular article set me off, but I remember my reaction to it: “These guys have forgotten who is reading and paying.”
Excellent post, Bill.
My take on those guys over at the National Review: Wow, that worm-eaten ship's sinking fast. I only wonder how many clot-shots the writer and editorial board have taken. My guess, they're probably all five plussers.
"Five plussers"— I'm not joking, sad as this is to say. The people who have gone all in on the shots, and taken 5 plus, I just do not think they are going to reconsider their quasi-religious beliefs about jabs, and, anyway, sadly, they will not be with us much longer. If dementia, cancer or kidney failure or whatever (it's a long list) doesn't take them down, the clots will— whether microclots, big clots, white clots.
For anyone reading this who has had that many shots, I would suggest looking at the FLCCC protocols. There are ways to mitigate some of the damage from the shots, and with these and other protocols, many of even the very badly injured have managed to heal to a significant degree.
Isn't National Review where all the RINO and anti-Trumpists sprouted out to join the warmongering Democrat Leftists?
Yep. The magazine became full neo-con as well ... And embraced the mission of the Censorship Industrial Complex. NR certainly didn't devote many column inches developing any of Kennedy's great points about the Captured Vaccine Industrial Complex.
This article proves the editors think Kennedy is spouting "nonsense." When they write about him, it's too make the same points the NY Times does.
William F. Buckley died on 2/28/08, almost 17 years ago. The founder of The National Review would be appalled at some of the writing coming out of that rag today. I was a NR subscriber for many years, but dropped them after it became apparent that the "new" NR was not going to adhere to the standards of their founder.
On the flip side, great article Bill. While admitting some ambivalence with Kennedy, I believe we have moved into Revolution territory with the country now, and only radical, decisive changes can turn things around.
Mister Schneider would seem to be caught in the Scneid. Great response by you, here, Mister Rice, representing. …I’m heading over to NR now to read the comments, see if you’re mentioned.
I don't know if their Comment Section allow links to other articles, but if they do, please add a link to this article!
I went back and checked to see whether NR had left the link in place, and it is still there. One addled TDS'r gave a thumbs down and one reader indicated that he or she had used the link to read your post, of which he or she provided his or her praise and also thanked me for having provided the link. ...If I had been able to get the link in there in a timelier manner, I expect it would have sent many readers your way.
I posted it so we shall see what happens.
I should have noted in this rebuttal article that one "work-around" for conservative magazines like National Review "going wobbly" was the creation and rapid popularity of The Brownstone Institute, created by Jeffrey Tucker as a REBUTTAL to such trends.
Full disclosure: I'm flattered and grateful to be a Brownstone fellow.
Every chance I get, I try to promote the Brownstone website and mission and appreciate everyone who is able to support this vital organization with a donation. IMO Brownstone is one of the key generals in this existential battle to slay bogus and harmful narratives.
(Looks like Brownstone has some more great articles today):
https://brownstone.org/
While I too am endlessly grateful for Brownstone, it is a big ideological tent, its leader Jeffry Tucker is from a libertarian background, and a number of its fellows are best described as "old-school liberals" left politically homeless by 2020-2024. Tucker has had some interesting re-thinkings of certain libertarian dogmas since he underwent the exp. of seeing virtually none of his "fellow" "libertarians" oppose the lockdowns, so I'm not even sure if he calls himself a libertarian anymore. Still, from my academic conservative background, pledged to social and constitutional conservativism generally, and in my case wedded to a particular school (Lawler-ian, or faith-based-Straussian, aka "PostModernConservatism") of conservative thought, it is clear to me that Brownstone could only problematically be called "conservative." I like it just fine for what it is, a crossroads of thinking about the top crisis of our time, and I'd be happy to grant it a general conservative character, but it's necessary to say that. Root ideological differences can matter, and must not be waved away.
Frankly, Covid-dissidents who are conservative have yet to find their publication or rallying point. All of the older leaders and publications have betrayed them, with Sen. Johnson, Bannon, Emerald Robinson, and a handful of others being about the only exceptions to the rule. There is seldom much difference b/t Trump-supporting conservative leaders/publications and the dwindling number of anti-Trump ones on this point, so I wish my fellow dissident conservatives would stop framing things around that increasingly irrelevant feud, which the anti-Trumpers just outright LOST.
2025 may be the year, given that a MAGA betrayal of MAHA still sickeningly looks quite possible, that dissident conservatives actually have to take radical actions against the conservative/GOP leadership. See my recent writings "Dissident Mutiny?" and "2025, Supservatives, 2025." In other words, 2025 could see the end of conservativism as we have known it.
Thanks for adding this Carl. You make a good point that "conservative" probably isn't the best label for the Brownstone "tent." Jeffrey has written many times about his disillussionment with many of his former "libertarian" allies. I've been to one Brownstone "retreat." At that conclave I was struck by the number of ex-liberals who were now on "our team." In fact, that was one of of the main points made by many speakers.
We need a new movement of genuine conservatives. I've written a little about how the so-called conservatives (RINOs) captured the authentic "Tea Party Movement," which was really led by Ron Paul and his supporters in 2012.
I didn’t die. I also definitely had COVID in January 2020 after visiting NYC and spending a few days 2 blocks away from China Town, so…
I did lose 3 friends to turbo cancer and blood clots within 5 months of the vaccine rolling out. …But I’ve been told that is ‘normal’ for healthy 37 year olds with no prior medical history.
There never was a Covid pandemic. There has never been a pandemic
The Covid vaccine works as designed. To slowly or quickly kill you. Population reduction.
Other vaccines work as designed. To damage the immune system.
Nobody died of measles. They died of starvation. Toxic air and water. Stress.
It's good for children to get sick and get well.
9,000 6-month-old babies are being given a Covid vaccine every day...just in the USA