It’s been a predictable and infuriating series of revisions, “adjustments,” and outright contradictions going back nearly two years. It’s all been perpetrated with your cash. And it’s been done by people who seemingly don’t care to look back at the long trail of economic, physical, mental, constitutional, and spiritual destruction they have left in their wake.
And one of the most glaring examples of this human tragedy is Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Director Rochelle Walinsky.
As she followed her robot-programming from the White House early in her inimitably troubling tenure, Walensky parroted the blatantly incorrect and insufferable line, “It’s a pandemic of the unvaccinated,” – a claim that was not only provably false at the time, but which embraced the errant idea that mRNA injections were anything like real vaccinations or had been proven to stop transmission. That latter, by the way, is something that, at a recent EU meeting, the Pfizer President of International Relations Janine Small, recently admitted the corporation did not test prior to releasing its gene-vector injection unto the world’s unprepared population.
And so, as we know, and as some of our less-than-focused acquaintances are finally starting to realize, Walensky’s narrative began to take the inevitable downward steps, from claims that the jabs were effective at stopping transmission of SARS CoV-2 to admission that the jabs could not stop transmission.
Her claims that the CDC “recommended” the untested mRNA jabs for pregnant women were contracted by the CDC website itself, which noted NOT that they were “recommended” but that they were “permitted” (something troubling unto itself).
Now, just weeks after CVS tweeted a photo of her purportedly getting her “bivalent booster” (that would be a booster for something she originally claimed stopped transmission, but never did, and a “booster” which, itself, has not been tested according to traditional drug standards imposed by the FDA for “vaccines” to receive its vaunted “approval” status), Rochelle Walensky is reported to have tested positive for COVID-19.
“The director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has tested positive for COVID-19 — one month after she publicly celebrated getting her booster shot.
Dr. Rochelle Walensky, who tested positive Friday night, is ‘experiencing mild symptoms,’ according to a release posted to social media. ‘She is isolating at home and will participate in her planned meetings virtually.’”
Well, of course she is experiencing “mild symptoms.” That’s not a function of the jab, as some of the bureaucrats, pop media pundits, and politicians try to claim (perhaps as their last refuge for any sense of validity for their lengthy history of screw-ups and incorrect statements). That is the nature of viruses. They need hosts. If they kill the hosts, they don’t spread well, so the history of virology indicates that viruses generally mutate to more infectious, less lethal strains.
As a result, anyone who tries to fall to the “fall-back” position of admitting that, “well, yeah, I GOT COVID despite being jabbed, but it would be REALLY BAD without the jab” does not know the nature of the SARS CoV-2 virus as being generally non-lethal for most people and does not know that naturally occurring “variants” of viruses usually are less lethal, anyway.
“On Sept. 22, Walensky tweeted a picture of herself getting jabbed with an updated version of the COVID-19 shot, along with a message urging others to follow her lead.”
“’Laboratory data suggest these updated vaccines provide increased protection against currently circulating variants,’ she promised.”
“Pfizer formulated the tweaked’ version of the shot to better target the dominant Omicron variant, the company said.”
Are we to take it that this, too, was not tested for efficacy, just as Ms. Smalls admitted before the EU?
Sure looks like it, for Linge also notes:
“Its studies on the new jab did not track how well the updated booster prevented COVID-19 cases, or discover how long its added protection would last.”
What "added protection"? The two halves of that sentence don't jibe.
But there is a larger lesson in all of this, going back years, long before Walensky took her tax-funded job or anyone ever heard of COVID-19.
The point is that, even if these jabs – or ANY CDC-backed, FDA “approved” or “emergency authorized” “vaccines” could stop 100 percent of all diseases, the federal government has no constitutional or moral authority to pay anyone to develop them, and no such authority to buy them and then hand them to people, let alone force them on cadres of the public if they want to keep their jobs.
The CDC Director’s position is an insult to the Constitution, as is the very idea that government is supposed to stop flus, or colds, or any other naturally occurring threat. Government, according to the Lockean philosophy to which the Founders subscribed, is there to stop people from attacking/threatening the lives, property, or freedom of others. And many philosophers will admit that even THAT so-called rationale for the state assumes that the government can take your property and threaten you in order to supposedly protect you from other people taking your property or threatening you. QED.
But, at least on the Lockean foundation of “government is formed to stop or punish person-on-person aggression,” nothing in the CDC and FDA roles is acceptable, and they certainly aren’t constitutional, even if, as he did less than a week ago, Biden pushes a NEW multi-billion-Dollar "Pandemic Preparedness" scheme. That's the new "plan" to have his towers of bureaucracies put together even more tax-funded, unreliable "virus tests" and mandates. Biden even tried to excuse the authoritarianism by claiming there could be a "bioweapon" in the US future -- as if folks don't already wonder about what their tax money already has funded., and, as if some of us aren't aware that if the feds claim a foreign nation released one, the only constitutional reaction must be preceded by a Declaration of War against the offending nation.
But, like Walensky has repeatedly stepped down from her claims that the jabs are “effective” and as her current status as a COVID sufferer attests, the Constitution is a shell, a so-called rule book that long ago saw politicians and bureaucrats taking liberties and disregarding its restrictions.
Walensky’s positive COVID status belies her claims.
And her job, itself, belies political claims that we live in a “Constitutional Republic” wherein the politicians care a whit about the Constitution as their guide and rule book.