If it’s not the government’s job to protect anybody, then I want all my taxes refunded for my whole life retroactively. The Federal military budget is only part of that, state and local law enforcement are also part. If they are not going to protect us then I want my money back. I also want whatever taxes I paid toward public health refunded, and public safety, and environmental protections, etc. etc. Stupid fucking asshole Kilmeade. Choose that, moron.
I wonder how much of a hypocrite Kilmeade really is. Is he and his family vaccinated? Do they wear masks? This guy is an idiot, and he hasn’t a clue about how protected, convenient, and entitled his life is, and what kind of life he would have without a cooperative and protective government. It’s easy to talk out of your ass in his luxurious position, but he doesn’t know that because he’s insulated from the real world thanks to his living in la la land without giving a single thought to how his bullshit opinions are protected by the very system he refuses to acknowledge provides such things. What a stupid shitbag.
How hard would it be for Kilmeade to say “Let’s everyone get vaccinated and wear masks and practice safe hygeine until this threat is over.” Because the government has made that possible and affordable. Why not say that? Because he’s a stupid asshole, that’s why. He got his, what does he care?
We the People of the United States, in Order to […] promote the general Welfare […] do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
I’m going to go out on a limb here and say that protecting people from a deadly disease serves to promote the general Welfare, and is thus a legitimate function of our government.
Ryan Grim at The Hill is reporting that Fox News has a “COVID passport” requirement for its employees. (They don’t require all employees to vaccinate, but those who don’t certify they have must wear masks and socially distance in the workplace.)
Kilmeade is obviously a clown, but there’s a more nuanced version of his message that I’m pretty sympathetic to. Before the vaccines were a thing, I took masking, social distancing, and in particular avoiding gatherings and reducing trips to the store, etc., very seriously. I didn’t want to get sick, and I also didn’t want to be responsible for getting others sick.
At this point, everyone who wants a vaccine in the US has had ample time to get one, and I do think there’s a limit to how much the government can do to protect people *from themselves*. I am now resentful of precautions that have to be taken for the benefit of people who have chosen not to get vaccinated, especially because they are the type of people who will ignore said precautions. (Resentfulness aside, I will still of course abide by them because I think that following the rules set by public health agencies in a pandemic is also important, even if I am annoyed at the reasons behind the rules.)
Obviously it’s more complicated than that, because the vaccines aren’t perfect and so community spread among the unvaccinated is a risk for vaccinated people as well. If the risk were entirely on the unvaccinated, I would be 100% against making the vaccinated follow any additional precautions for the sake of the unvaccinated. I think rather than more mandates that won’t be followed by unvaccinated people anyway, we should start having institutions and businesses require proof of vaccination as a way to strongly incentivize the holdouts to get the jab.
Red Tide, I can’t ‘quite agree, because a percentage of the unvaccinated are people who can’t get vaccinated. People with some disorder that impacts their immune system may not be able to be vaccinated through no fault of their own, through no choice of their own. That’s the people the government needs to protect. IMHO, if people don’t want to vaccinate to protect the unprotected, then they should stay home. If they don’t want to wear masks, then they should keep their face out of everybody else’s space.
Which is why it is so much less than a simple position. A lot of those unvaccinated because of immunity compromise are children and elderly, and all of them are potentially at risk.
Screechy@7: When he said “if you want to [do something dangerous] that’s on you, don’t affect my life” it seemed to be kind of getting at what I was saying. Although in his case the ire seemed to be directed at the government officials (who probably couldn’t be as frank as me about the unvaccinated-by-choice people, even if that’s how they feel) rather than the unvaccinated. Maybe I’m being too charitable to Kilmeade, especially because I think he’s generally an idiot. Obviously the idea that government’s job isn’t to protect people is absurd.
iknklast@8: Yes, that’s a good point. It’s both the vaccinated-but-still-at-risk and the unvaccinated-by-medical-necessity groups that have my sympathy and who still need to be protected.
If it’s not the government’s job to protect anybody, then I want all my taxes refunded for my whole life retroactively. The Federal military budget is only part of that, state and local law enforcement are also part. If they are not going to protect us then I want my money back. I also want whatever taxes I paid toward public health refunded, and public safety, and environmental protections, etc. etc. Stupid fucking asshole Kilmeade. Choose that, moron.
I wonder how much of a hypocrite Kilmeade really is. Is he and his family vaccinated? Do they wear masks? This guy is an idiot, and he hasn’t a clue about how protected, convenient, and entitled his life is, and what kind of life he would have without a cooperative and protective government. It’s easy to talk out of your ass in his luxurious position, but he doesn’t know that because he’s insulated from the real world thanks to his living in la la land without giving a single thought to how his bullshit opinions are protected by the very system he refuses to acknowledge provides such things. What a stupid shitbag.
How hard would it be for Kilmeade to say “Let’s everyone get vaccinated and wear masks and practice safe hygeine until this threat is over.” Because the government has made that possible and affordable. Why not say that? Because he’s a stupid asshole, that’s why. He got his, what does he care?
I’m going to go out on a limb here and say that protecting people from a deadly disease serves to promote the general Welfare, and is thus a legitimate function of our government.
Ryan Grim at The Hill is reporting that Fox News has a “COVID passport” requirement for its employees. (They don’t require all employees to vaccinate, but those who don’t certify they have must wear masks and socially distance in the workplace.)
Kilmeade is obviously a clown, but there’s a more nuanced version of his message that I’m pretty sympathetic to. Before the vaccines were a thing, I took masking, social distancing, and in particular avoiding gatherings and reducing trips to the store, etc., very seriously. I didn’t want to get sick, and I also didn’t want to be responsible for getting others sick.
At this point, everyone who wants a vaccine in the US has had ample time to get one, and I do think there’s a limit to how much the government can do to protect people *from themselves*. I am now resentful of precautions that have to be taken for the benefit of people who have chosen not to get vaccinated, especially because they are the type of people who will ignore said precautions. (Resentfulness aside, I will still of course abide by them because I think that following the rules set by public health agencies in a pandemic is also important, even if I am annoyed at the reasons behind the rules.)
Obviously it’s more complicated than that, because the vaccines aren’t perfect and so community spread among the unvaccinated is a risk for vaccinated people as well. If the risk were entirely on the unvaccinated, I would be 100% against making the vaccinated follow any additional precautions for the sake of the unvaccinated. I think rather than more mandates that won’t be followed by unvaccinated people anyway, we should start having institutions and businesses require proof of vaccination as a way to strongly incentivize the holdouts to get the jab.
Red Tide@6,
You’re basically describing my position. But I think it’s a stretch to say that’s just a “more nuanced” version of Kilmeade’s position.
Red Tide, I can’t ‘quite agree, because a percentage of the unvaccinated are people who can’t get vaccinated. People with some disorder that impacts their immune system may not be able to be vaccinated through no fault of their own, through no choice of their own. That’s the people the government needs to protect. IMHO, if people don’t want to vaccinate to protect the unprotected, then they should stay home. If they don’t want to wear masks, then they should keep their face out of everybody else’s space.
Which is why it is so much less than a simple position. A lot of those unvaccinated because of immunity compromise are children and elderly, and all of them are potentially at risk.
Screechy@7: When he said “if you want to [do something dangerous] that’s on you, don’t affect my life” it seemed to be kind of getting at what I was saying. Although in his case the ire seemed to be directed at the government officials (who probably couldn’t be as frank as me about the unvaccinated-by-choice people, even if that’s how they feel) rather than the unvaccinated. Maybe I’m being too charitable to Kilmeade, especially because I think he’s generally an idiot. Obviously the idea that government’s job isn’t to protect people is absurd.
iknklast@8: Yes, that’s a good point. It’s both the vaccinated-but-still-at-risk and the unvaccinated-by-medical-necessity groups that have my sympathy and who still need to be protected.
https://youarenotsosmart.com/2021/07/15/yanss-209-why-the-reason-some-people-refuse-to-wear-masks-during-a-pandemic-has-little-to-do-with-the-masks-themselves/