• The 'Comrade' title is now available in a fetching communist red for purchase by all of you capitalists who survived the Sietch gulag during the people's revolution. And in the spirit of all communists everywhere, it was broken until the capitalist pig dogs fixed it. ;)

United States Biden administration policies and actions - megathread

bintananth

Well-known member
Joined
May 6, 2021
Reaction score
1,481
One can only hope that enough of his legitimate supporters are disillusioned with him that that his more fictitious ones won't be enough to give him a second term; though, if the establishment was smart, they wouldn't let him run again anyways. No; if they were smart, they'd use him as a scapegoat and declare him to be a false prophet that must be replaced with the next "chosen one", and thus continue the endless cycle.
Didn't he already say he wasn't going to run for a second term because of his age while running against Trump?
 

Terthna

Professional Lurker
Joined
Aug 23, 2019
Reaction score
16,066
Location
Federal Way
Didn't he already say he wasn't going to run for a second term because of his age while running against Trump?
And what; are you expecting me to take him at his word on that? After how everything else he's said has panned out? He also said the Covid vaccines were dangerous; now he's trying to force everyone into getting them. You'd have to be a fool to trust anything that man says at face value. Besides, he already wasn't fit for the position mentally or physically, and yet he still ran; what difference is four years going to make, other than the possibility of him dropping dead between now and then?
 

gral

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 15, 2019
Reaction score
2,644
Brazil has a slow-going SSN program(since the 1970s) going on. Right now, the prototype for the SSN reactor is being designed, and the SSN is expected to enter service around 2034(God only knows if it'll be able to meet this deadline).
As an addendum, some information has come up that points to the country the guy was trying to sell the information to being India.
 

DarthOne

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 6, 2019
Reaction score
9,433
Psaki Says the Quiet Part Out Loud: ‘Biden Wants to Make Fundamental Change in Our Economy and He Feels Coming out Of the Pandemic is the Time to do That’

Never let a crisis go to waste.

White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki on Tuesday said Biden wants to make a “fundamental change” in our economy and he feels coming out of a pandemic is the perfect time to do that.

They don’t even hide their true intentions.

Covid is being used to usher in a worldwide Communist revolution under the guise of a pandemic.

The China Coronavirus pandemic is being used as a shield to protect Joe Biden as he destroys the Constitution while simultaneously being used as a sword to attack conservatives.

“The president wants to make fundamental change in our economy, and he feels coming out of the pandemic is exactly the time to do that,” Psaki said.

VIDEO:


Benny
@bennyjohnson


PSAKI: "The President wants to make fundamental change in our economy and he feels coming out of the Pandemic is exactly the time to do that." THEY JUST SAID THE QUIET PART OUT LOUD.
Federal Workers, U.S. Service Members Sue Biden Admin Over Vaccine Mandates


A group of federal workers, including several members of the military, are suing the Biden administration over a pair of mandates directing all federal workers and military service members to get vaccinated against COVID-19.
“Americans have remained idle for far too long as our nation’s elected officials continue to satisfy their voracious appetites for power,” says the lawsuit, filed by a group of plaintiffs including four Air Force officers and a Secret Service agent, according to The Washington Post.

Ten plaintiffs filed a suit in the U.S. District Court in Washington on September 23, seeking for the judge to place an injunction on President Joe Biden’s vaccine mandates that cover all federal workers and contractors, as well as all members of the U.S. military.

The lawsuit argues that the mandates violate religious freedom protections in the First Amendment. Both orders grant exemptions for religious and medical reasons if one can qualify, according to the Post.

“Besides its constitutional and statutory claims, the lawsuit, prepared by attorneys in Virginia and San Diego, contains vituperative language for a legal filing, citing the administration’s ‘authoritarian grip’ on the nation and the country’s ‘forty-seven year subjugation’ to Biden’s ‘vapid political career,’” the Post reported.

Biden issued an order in September that mandated all federal workers and contractors receive the COVID-19 vaccine. The vaccine mandate was included in the rollout of a larger strategy Biden announced to combat the coronavirus, which included a mandate covering all companies in the U.S. with at least 100 employees ordering that those employers must either ensure their employees are vaccinated or tested weekly for COVID-19.

“This is a pandemic of the unvaccinated,” Biden said while announcing his orders. “And it’s caused by the fact that despite America having an unprecedented and successful vaccination program, despite the fact that for almost five months free vaccines have been available in 80,000 different locations, we still have nearly 80 million Americans who have failed to get the shot.”

“And to make matters worse, there are elected officials actively working to undermine the fight against COVID-19,” he continued. “Instead of encouraging people to get vaccinated and mask up, they’re ordering mobile morgues for the unvaccinated dying from COVID in their communities. This is totally unacceptable.”

Biden’s new approach to the illness came after Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin announced in August an order that all U.S. service members must be vaccinated. That order sparked a lawsuit from two servicemen, Army Staff Sgt. Daniel Robert and Marine Corps Staff Sgt. Hollie Mulvihill, filed later in the month. As The Daily Wire reported:
“Service members that have natural immunity, developed from surviving the virus, should be granted a medical exception from compulsory vaccination because the DoD instruction policy reflects the well-established understanding that prior infection provides the immune system’s best possible response to the virus,” the lawsuit states.
The pair filed a request for an injunction to block the vaccine mandate last week as the Pentagon moves forward with vaccinating all unvaccinated service members.
“These are the healthiest people on the planet in their age group … so why are we rushing? What is the compelling reason forcing the military to say, ‘You must take this vaccine, regardless of what the law says?’” the servicemen’s attorney Todd Callender said.
 

Random Username

Dude Whazzup?
Joined
Aug 25, 2019
Reaction score
18,560
And what; are you expecting me to take him at his word on that? After how everything else he's said has panned out? He also said the Covid vaccines were dangerous; now he's trying to force everyone into getting them. You'd have to be a fool to trust anything that man says at face value. Besides, he already wasn't fit for the position mentally or physically, and yet he still ran; what difference is four years going to make, other than the possibility of him dropping dead between now and then?
If he runs and Trump debates him again he better be called Brandon.
 

Cherico

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 12, 2019
Reaction score
21,410
Psaki Says the Quiet Part Out Loud: ‘Biden Wants to Make Fundamental Change in Our Economy and He Feels Coming out Of the Pandemic is the Time to do That’



Federal Workers, U.S. Service Members Sue Biden Admin Over Vaccine Mandates

the party thats in charge gets the blame for economic crashes, grill boys may purposefully not care about most things but they care about their pocketbooks.
 

prinCZess

Warrior, Writer, Performer, Perv
Joined
Aug 11, 2019
Reaction score
4,629
Location
Off the Rez, on the Warpath
Even then, the Vatican 'approval' is...not really that so much as an emergency allowance (approval would reverse long-standing bars on fetal cell research objections and the like), and relevant Church authorities in the US have noted that the allowance does not supersede a Catholic's own objections.

 

Vaermina

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 20, 2019
Reaction score
2,627
So passing the sincerity bar is extraordinarily difficult for any member of a religion who's religious leaders have come out and okayed it.

To actually get one in that case, the person in question would likely have to show a history of not using anything even remotely connected to the objectionable part of the vaccine. And that's a very high bar to cross in most cases.
 

S'task

Renegade Philosopher
Administrator
Staff Member
Founder
Joined
Aug 9, 2019
Reaction score
5,941
Location
ch'Rihan
So passing the sincerity bar is extraordinarily difficult for any member of a religion who's religious leaders have come out and okayed it.

To actually get one in that case, the person in question would likely have to show a history of not using anything even remotely connected to the objectionable part of the vaccine. And that's a very high bar to cross in most cases.
Actually, since the main religious objection is the testing on aborted stem cell lines, it may not be so hard to prove as you might think. The Pro-Life movement has been bringing attention to and objecting to the use of aborted fetal tissue in medicines for decades, and many dedicated pro-lifers HAVE systemically avoided medicines and treatments derived from those warnings. Sure, they may not have caught 100% of them, but if they showed a regular effort to avoid medicines developed using aborted fetal tissue when they were aware of its involvement in the process, that should pass muster. Further, under proper consideration, that of strict scrutiny, the onus of evidence should actually be on the government to prove that the person is not acting on sincerely held religious beliefs, and the presumption should be that the person requesting an exemption is sincere.
 

Vaermina

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 20, 2019
Reaction score
2,627
Actually, since the main religious objection is the testing on aborted stem cell lines, it may not be so hard to prove as you might think. The Pro-Life movement has been bringing attention to and objecting to the use of aborted fetal tissue in medicines for decades, and many dedicated pro-lifers HAVE systemically avoided medicines and treatments derived from those warnings. Sure, they may not have caught 100% of them, but if they showed a regular effort to avoid medicines developed using aborted fetal tissue when they were aware of its involvement in the process, that should pass muster.
It might have, prior to various religious leaders speaking up.

But they did, so now the people attempting it have a much much higher bar to pass.

Further, under proper consideration, that of strict scrutiny, the onus of evidence should actually be on the government to prove that the person is not acting on sincerely held religious beliefs, and the presumption should be that the person requesting an exemption is sincere.
Nope.

They are the one's suing so they are the one's who have to prove sincerity.
 

Bacle

When the effort is no longer profitable...
Founder
Joined
Aug 12, 2019
Reaction score
19,043
Except the Religious exception is inherent in our Constitution. Whatever mandate going on seeks to override religious liberty. Therefore the mandater (is that a word?) is responsible.
People like Vaermina think that all the mandates are Constitutional, because of that one SCOTUS case from the early 1900s, and never mind that the scope of that case was much different than what we are dealing with now, and the issues they were addressing was far more dangerous than the Wu Flu has shown to be.
 

Doomsought

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 19, 2019
Reaction score
6,373
People like Vaermina think that all the mandates are Constitutional, because of that one SCOTUS case from the early 1900s, and never mind that the scope of that case was much different than what we are dealing with now, and the issues they were addressing was far more dangerous than the Wu Flu has shown to be.
The SCOTUS was being strongarmed several times around then too. You can get nearly anything past them if you threaten to add 15 judges to the bench and it isn't a bluff.
 

Vaermina

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 20, 2019
Reaction score
2,627
Except the Religious exception is inherent in our Constitution. Whatever mandate going on seeks to override religious liberty. Therefore the mandater (is that a word?) is responsible.
People like Vaermina think that all the mandates are Constitutional, because of that one SCOTUS case from the early 1900s, and never mind that the scope of that case was much different than what we are dealing with now, and the issues they were addressing was far more dangerous than the Wu Flu has shown to be.
Actually in this case it's the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 that re-instituted the compelling-interest test after it was removed in 1990 via Employment Division v. Smith.

Which is important because "Public Health" is de-facto "compelling interest".
 

Abhishekm

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 13, 2020
Reaction score
1,714
In this age of prevailing domestic terrorism Antrax attacks are again a Public Heath risk. It is imperative that Antrax Vaccine Mandates are implemented.

In this age of prevailing domestic terrorism Rabies attacks are again a Public Heath risk. It is imperative that Rabies Vaccine Mandates are implemented.

In this age of prevailing domestic terrorism Tuberculosis attacks are again a Public Heath risk. It is imperative that Rabies Vaccine Mandates are implemented.

In this age of prevailing domestic terrorism Malaria attacks are again a Public Heath risk. It is imperative that Malaria Vaccine Mandates are implemented.

Etcetera etcetera. I propose just getting to the end already and suggest a regimented year over year vaccine program with atleast one inoculation a week or 52 a year.

Only you can help alleviate public health risks by enforcing public drug injection programs. Do your part citizenship optional resident and or concerned member of society currently located in another nationality.
 
Last edited:

Bacle

When the effort is no longer profitable...
Founder
Joined
Aug 12, 2019
Reaction score
19,043
Actually in this case it's the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 that re-instituted the compelling-interest test after it was removed in 1990 via Employment Division v. Smith.

Which is important because "Public Health" is de-facto "compelling interest".
And we have compelling interests in not being force tyo take a product that is shody at best, and actively harmful at worst.

Particulalry when it is shown natural immunity is far more long last and useful than any of the vaxs that are being pumped out to feed Big Pharma's bottomlines.
 
Top Bottom