Category Archives: Uncategorized

The main inspiration for today’s show topic was this sobering video from JP Sears:

Spoiler: he thinks many of the mandates our governments have imposed recently, are unjust. And, referring to Martin Luther King Jr.’s assertion, in his Letter from Birmingham Jail, that one has a moral duty to disobey unjust laws, he briefly made an argument in favor of that position, one that I had not considered. That’s the main topic I wanted to discuss today, in conjunction with some stories about one of the mandates coming soon: COVID vaccines for children.

More topics planned as well. See Program Notes, below, for all the stories, etc., I plan to discuss with Benjamin–and whoever shows up for our live chat on YouTube.

We’ll be broadcasting live on my YouTube Channel here.

UPDATE: Recording of today’s show is available here:

Support for the show is greatly appreciated? You can become a patron here.

PROGRAM NOTES:

Dan Bongino tells Cumulus he’ll quit if it enforces vaccine mandate

Brief to be “reviewed” by FDA Advisory Committee on Tuesday

White House details plans for vaccinating children ages 5 to 11

The Risk to Kids From COVID Is Miniscule. Do Not Let Them Mandate Vaccines | Opinion

Covid vaccines will keep you from acquiring full immunity EVEN IF YOU ARE INFECTED AND RECOVER

Fact check: FDA-approved blood thinner for children isn’t related to Pfizer vaccine

What’s Going On With the New Aspirin Recommendations?

UPDATE: The climate-change-related stories will be covered next week, but in the meantime, here’s the story Benjamin mentioned during today’s show:

Clinics Won’t Provide It. Insurers Won’t Cover It. So Will the First Alzheimer’s Drug Make a Difference?

Climate change is bad for your health. And plans to boost economies may make it worse

Whistleblower Moves to Halt EPA Committee Work, Claims Members Conflicted by Reliance on Government Grants

The USDA Just Made Its First Investment in Lab-Grown Beef

Beyond Meat Implodes After Reporting Catastrophic Q3 Sales

Amy on Lars Larson Show: When social media platforms stand up for free speech, the New York Times attacks them

George Farmer LTE Published in NYT

Today we’ll be discussing the problem of politicians’, bureaucrats’ and law enforcement’s data envy: how did this happen, and what can be done about it?

We’ll stream live on my YouTube channel here. After the show, I’ll update this post with the specific video link.

UPDATE: Here’s the link to the recorded video on YouTube (please like, share, and subscribe!)

Reference: our latest piece on Real Clear Policy, “Politicians’ Data Envy On Display Again in Senate Committee Hearing”

by Amy Peikoff and Benjamin Chayes

The Senate Committee on Commerce is in the midst of conducting its long-awaited hearings on privacy. This might seem long overdue, considering the European Parliament has for several years been trying to ensure that companies respect consumer privacy. Even China has enacted privacy legislation. Here in the United States, however, only a handful of states have thus far tried to address consumer privacy legislatively.

The topic of privacy in China, the country which instituted the world’s first Social Credit System, would require a separate article. Still, we might wonder why the U.S. has lagged behind Europe in the protection of individual privacy. This can be explained partly by considering the relative preoccupations of legislators on either side of the pond. Whereas the European perspective generally assumes that law is primarily intended to protect private citizens against the ill-doings of big companies, the American tradition assumes that federal law exists primarily to delineate and limit the scope of government action — to protect citizens first and foremost against government overreach. Is there a reason to break with this tradition with respect to the issue of privacy? In particular, what should we make of the proposal most touted during the hearings: not an American GDPR, but instead a new privacy and data security bureau at the FTC?

Read more at Real Clear Policy