The super-rich be like: "more lockdowns, please"

The super-rich be like: "more lockdowns pls" pic.twitter.com/UJ06IeUkiv

— Kevin Bass PhD MS (@kevinnbass) July 6, 2023

See it to the end.  

Dr. Michael Huang was a brave physician in California who treated vaccine-injured patients and wrote vaccine exemptions.

Please watch this heartbreaking 3 minute video that he just sent me. This is the CA medical system at work. No mainstream doctors will speak out in support. pic.twitter.com/VyAAd4Izwk

— Steve Kirsch (@stkirsch) July 6, 2023

This was interesting.

Dr. David Herbert, CEO of Sutter Independent Physicians, said he’d heard from concerned parents within the district complain about the number of students excused from wearing masks for health concerns unrelated to COVID-19.

Looks like Dr. David Herbert likes to choke not only his members, but his patients and teenagers.  Hmmm.  There's a word for this.   _____________ abuse."  Can't think of the phrase . . . . 

INCOMING REGULATION ON FULL-SIZED TRUCKS

Requiring backup cameras has led to an increase in the amount of infotainment, which leads to an increase in distractibility within the car.  I don't love regulation is what I'm trying to say.  But there is no requirement yet for front-facing cameras. 

The Straussian Two-Step is coming for more regulations on big trucks. He's completely right.

This is a solution covering up the cause.. CAFE standards which legislated small trucks off the market.

/1
https://t.co/1DxmuqPTTD

— Tom Luongo (Head Sneetch) (@TFL1728) July 6, 2023

3:24. Regulators have one job and that is to create more regulation.  Just as an example, requiring backup cameras on everything.  Requiring backup cameras has led to an increase in the amount of infotainment, which leads to an increase in distractibility within the car.  I don't love regulation is what I'm trying to say.  But there is no requirement yet for front facing cameras.

I see the groundwork being laid to stir up the population to build up popular support in Congress to move regulations.  In fact, there has already been a regulation created and presented at the 117th Congress, and I think what's going to happen here is I don't think this is an issue that can be swept under the rug.  I don't think automakers are going to address it by themselves, and that means that we are going to see regulation and regulators requiring things to fix it.  And I'm afraid it's going to fall into the least restrictive and the most restrictive.  I think the least restrictive will be front-facing cameras.  We are already getting them in 360° views, but I think they're going to require just like they did with backup cameras. cameras.  If they're going to have a front-facing camera.  So if you're stopped and you're putting it in Drive, the camera will show you if there is something directly in front of you.  I think this is going to be required.  I think it's honestly just a matter of time.  So they're going to start requiring detection, collision detection on every single vehicle, especially at extremely low speeds for pedestrian detection like this.  I don't know if we will get to what Europe has of requiring additional space between the engine and the hood, so that if somebody hits it, it gives a little more cushioning.  I don't know if we're going to get there or not.  But I do see them requiring additional technology to see what is in front of you in that blind spot directly under the nose, and collision detection so that you don't run over Jimmy's tricycle.  Number two, and slightly more onerous, is I'm not sure that they won't pass regulation requiring certain sight lines from the driver's seat.  This will force a design change with a slightly more sloping hood similar to what you had when you went from the 1970s cars to the Ford Taurus and the '90s cars, where the hood sloped and you basically could see straight down.  You didn't look out over it.  That's kind of like where trucks are now.  I can see them making requirements for that.  That's more onerous.  That's telling the automakers that there's a government standard they have to meet. It's easier just to require that front-facing camera. 

"The reason why Justice Jackson was going nuts is because it's a direct threat to the entire Obama regime of woke liberal academic institutional politics in America"

The ramifications of the end of race-based admissions is a real white pill moment. "YOUR WELCOME" with Michael Malice #266: Robert Barnes  https://t.co/pH3d4n23l2 via @YouTube

— Robert Barnes (@barnes_law) July 5, 2023

18:25. The woke regime and its administrative state within the academic structure depends on this upper middle-class favoritism with legacies, donors, and affirmative action for its sustenance.  What happens when, as you point out, it's working class kids from Vietnam who are dominating parts of, say, Cal's campus?  You're going to have a very different political response.  The degree of tolerance, the degree of people seeking out, "Hey, I really wanted to study intersectional feminist to study the difference between trans and whatever, and some weird category that they created with its bogus Professor who used to work for the Weather Underground, you're going to have all these people questioning administrative decisions, questioning not filling in the certain class needs a certain categories of the academy and not being on board with the political message.  The reason why Justice Jackson was going nuts is because it's a direct threat to the entire Obama regime of woke liberal academic institutional politics in America.  Their core base of power is the Academia.  The core basis for that power has been affirmative action.  Take affirmative action away, the pillar of wokeness falls, and we get back to merits and Enlightenment thought in our universities which would be revolutionary and critical for the sustenance of American society. 

Tom Woods and Vivek Ramaswamy on Affirmative Action

Thank you to Tom Woods.  Check out his show notes.  

Lyndon Johnson's Executive Order 11246 created affirmative action in the private sector.

On September 24, 1965, more than two years after the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. delivered his “I Have A Dream” speech on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial and more than a year after the Civil Rights Act of 1964 became the law of the land, the Nation took a historic step towards equal employment opportunity when President Lyndon Johnson issued Executive Order 11246.