The 2016 Presidential Election Trainwreck

[imanihonjin]

But since he isn't a serious candidate for any office, so he is a fringe idiot. Basically exactly what I said.

You have to be a serious candidate for some office in order to not be a fringe idiot? Are you a serious candidate for any office?

[old_gregg]

FTR, there is currently a debate going on in the libertarian/classical liberal circles about the vaccination issue. See

http://www.hoover.org/research/measl...ion-gone-viral
http://reason.com/archives/2014/03/2...s-be-mandatory

Libertarianism is an infinitely more reasoned approach to public policy than anything the two parties or fringe groups are proposing.

there is neither a "debate" nor a "vaccination issue." people can circlejerk all they want over philosophy, but failure to vaccinate kills kids in the immediate term.

[TripletDaddy]

You have to be a serious candidate for some office in order to not be a fringe idiot?

No, you don't. And you thought the lakers should keep kobe.

[imanihonjin]

No, you don't. And you thought the lakers should keep kobe.

And you think BYU would be better next year without Taysom!

[TripletDaddy]

And you think BYU would be better next year without Taysom!

i think the four games he plays will be very competitive.

[Uncle Ted]

About 95% of his quote is reasonable. But for a physician to spout off the "profound mental disorders after vaccines" is off the charts irresponsible. Even if he's on record as pro-vaccination, his lip service to the anecdotal causation of vaccines to mental disorders links him to the nutter crowd. Like I said, he should know better.

And another libertarian goes down. Which is sad because I really do identify with a lot of their issues.

I don't think Paul is saying that everyone that gets vaccinated will get "profound mental disorders after vaccines". He is saying he has heard of cases (e.g. from bad batches of vaccines, etc). It is true there have been cases but it is very rare... For example:

http://digitalcommons.pace.edu/pelr/vol28/iss2/6/ (The government has paid out billions in settlements? Tort lawyers' paradise! All you lawyers here need to get in on this action.)

If he didn't think vaccines were a good idea then he wouldn't vaccinate his own kids. He does state like a lot of pediatricians and pediatric specialists in the survey (see http://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperIn...2#.VNEn21r5m-K ) that he wouldn't follow all the government's recommendations and would deviate from the CDC guidelines. The example he gives is giving your baby all the vaccines at once including the Hepatitis B vaccine which is transmitted by sexually transmitted disease, and/or blood transfusions. His response actually seems accurate and logical to me.

Should Paul have said "You have nothing to worry about... No one has ever been harmed from vaccines!"? If he said that he would be lying. Yet another example of a Libertarian giving you the facts rather than political bullshit.

[Uncle Ted]

if that is in fact his position, it's a perfect indication of why libertarianism is best confined to neckbeard fedora wearers talking about it on the internet. reminds me of when IPU claimed there should be no restriction on individual possession of weapons of any kind.

Where is IPU? I miss him.

[imanihonjin]

i think the four games he plays will be very competitive.

Lol. DDD still dunce enough to believe that BYU is better of moving on without Taysom. Maybe BYU could start Mangum or better yet maybe Nacua can start when he gets back from his suspension. Do we have any other kids who happened to play QB that could potentially be a better option than Taysom next year? Someone should really ask Bronco these difficult questions.

[TripletDaddy]

Lol. DDD still dunce enough to believe that BYU is better of moving on without Taysom. Maybe BYU could start Mangum or better yet maybe Nacua can start when he gets back from his suspension. Do we have any other kids who happened to play QB that could potentially be a better option than Taysom next year? Someone should really ask Bronco these difficult questions.

Hey, I hope I'm wrong and Taysom leads BYU to the promised land of 8 wins and a bowl loss, jumping over a defender that plays for a team that is enduring a historically low downward spiral. If so, that would be amazing.

But all of that is speculation at this point.

What we do know, however, is that the Lakers are clearly better off without Kobe. That is not speculation nor has it been for 3 seasons. For some reason you feel otherwise, perhaps the same motivation that is prompting you to be so excited about Taysom's upcoming season.

[Jeff Lebowski]

I don't think Paul is saying that everyone that gets vaccinated will get "profound mental disorders after vaccines". He is saying he has heard of cases (e.g. from bad batches of vaccines, etc). It is true there have been cases but it is very rare... For example:

http://digitalcommons.pace.edu/pelr/vol28/iss2/6/ (The government has paid out billions in settlements? Tort lawyers' paradise! All you lawyers here need to get in on this action.)

If he didn't think vaccines were a good idea then he wouldn't vaccinate his own kids. He does state like a lot of pediatricians and pediatric specialists in the survey (see http://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperIn...2#.VNEn21r5m-K ) that he wouldn't follow all the government's recommendations and would deviate from the CDC guidelines. The example he gives is giving your baby all the vaccines at once including the Hepatitis B vaccine which is transmitted by sexually transmitted disease, and/or blood transfusions. His response actually seems accurate and logical to me.

Should Paul have said "You have nothing to worry about... No one has ever been harmed from vaccines!"? If he said that he would be lying. Yet another example of a Libertarian giving you the facts rather than political bullshit.

Holy cow, Ted. I can't believe you are trying to polish this turd.

The manner in which he responded to that is grossly irresponsible for a politician. And especially for an MD.

And did you seriously just cite a court settlement as evidence of a vaccine-mental disorder link?

[imanihonjin]

Hey, I hope I'm wrong and Taysom leads BYU to the promised land of 8 wins and a bowl loss, jumping over a defender that plays for a team that is enduring a historically low downward spiral. If so, that would be amazing.

But all of that is speculation at this point.

What we do know, however, is that the Lakers are clearly better off without Kobe. That is not speculation nor has it been for 3 seasons. For some reason you feel otherwise, perhaps the same motivation that is prompting you to be so excited about Taysom's upcoming season.

Lol....what a dunce.

[Northwestcoug]

I don't think Paul is saying that everyone that gets vaccinated will get "profound mental disorders after vaccines". He is saying he has heard of cases (e.g. from bad batches of vaccines, etc). It is true there have been cases but it is very rare... For example:

http://digitalcommons.pace.edu/pelr/vol28/iss2/6/ (The government has paid out billions in settlements? Tort lawyers' paradise! All you lawyers here need to get in on this action.)

If he didn't think vaccines were a good idea then he wouldn't vaccinate his own kids. He does state like a lot of pediatricians and pediatric specialists in the survey (see http://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperIn...2#.VNEn21r5m-K ) that he wouldn't follow all the government's recommendations and would deviate from the CDC guidelines. The example he gives is giving your baby all the vaccines at once including the Hepatitis B vaccine which is transmitted by sexually transmitted disease, and/or blood transfusions. His response actually seems accurate and logical to me.

Should Paul have said "You have nothing to worry about... No one has ever been harmed from vaccines!"? If he said that he would be lying. Yet another example of a Libertarian giving you the facts rather than political bullshit.

I think I understand where Paul is coming from, and a response like this would have been perfectly acceptable: "Vaccination has revolutionized medicine and saved countless lives. Benefits from vaccination outweigh its risks, by orders of magnitude. I completely support its practice, including compulsory vaccination for the most harmful diseases. I believe for other less harmful diseases, like HPV, clinicians and parents should take a reasoned approach to deciding whether or not to vaccinate children."

He still would have gotten some flack, but it's a certainly reasonable position. There's not a few clinicians who weight the benefits with the risks in some of these vaccinations. Instead, like most other libertarians who have no sense of proportionality, he spouts this off in 2009:

The first sort of thing you see with martial law is mandates, and they’re talking about making it mandatory.

(in an interview with wacko Alex Jones to boot)

And yes, it is completely irresponsible in this current climate to even mention anecdotal reports of autism to vaccines, when there is no scientific data to support that claim. He should know what kind of irrational emotional response that statement will generate. He isn't proclaiming truth in the midst of a sea of political bullshit. He's just another libertarian who believes all of our social problems are hinged to governmental overreach.

Can't libertarians do better than this?

[USUC]

Can't libertarians do better than this?

To be fair, Rand Paul is a Republican. He may lean libertarian, but he is still a Republican. I think most libertarians would prefer a free-market economist in office over a politician. Maybe Rand is the best we can hope for.

[Moliere]

I am fine with that as long as those kids (and parents) are never allowed to go out in public.

Chances are good they are home schooled kids so we should all be fine.

[Uncle Ted]

Holy cow, Ted. I can't believe you are trying to polish this turd.

The manner in which he responded to that is grossly irresponsible for a politician. And especially for an MD.

What exactly did Paul say that you believe is not accurate? It should be obvious from his full statement that he is very much in the pro-vaccinate camp. Of course, the boneheaded press seems to try to paint another picture.

And did you seriously just cite a court settlement as evidence of a vaccine-mental disorder link?

LOL... I didn't cite a court settlement but a summary of court settlements with vaccine companies backed by the government (about 5000+ cases, the study highlights about 100 of them or so). In short, like Paul said there have been (court) cases that seem to link vaccine to mental disorder. This study seems back what Paul was saying. Or maybe it is all just a big scam the tort lawyers (including those that run the government) cooked up so they can keep their fellow "sharks" feed? I sort of think it is the latter myself. So I guess it is a good thing that Paul is not a lawyer but a MD.