hotair--2020-12-03--Trudeau: U.S.-Canadian border to remain closed until coronavirus is under control

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau extended the U.S.-Canadian border closure to non-essential traffic through December 21 .
The ban on non-essential travel will remain in effect until COVID-19 is “ significantly more under control around the world.
” Trudeau ’ s decision to close the border began back in March in order to mitigate the spread of the virus .
Exceptions were put in place for airline crews , diplomats , immediate family members of citizens , and U.S. citizens .
Border crossings have been limited by both the United States and Canada since then , with the restrictions extended @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of an extension through December 21 seems routine enough but he ’ s upping the ante with more stringent language .
He now speaks of the necessity of the virus being more under control around the world .
That covers a lot of territories .
Different countries and parts of the world are in various stages of the coronavirus pandemic , with some countries in a second or third wave of infections .
It looks like non-essential travel will be off the table for the foreseeable future .
The prime minister is happy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the United States and Canada continues while limiting humans from crossing the border .
“ Until the virus is significantly under more control everywhere around the world , we are not going to be releasing the restrictions at the border , ” Trudeau told the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation .
“ We are incredibly lucky that trade in essential goods , in agriculture products , in pharmaceuticals is flowing back and forth as it always had , ” he said .
“ It ’ s just people not travelling , which I think is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ made certain to acknowledge the incoming Biden administration and deliver a bit of snark about the change in presidents .
Trudeau said although President-elect Joe Biden has an “ obvious ” different approach to the pandemic than President Donald Trump , the situation in the U.S. remains serious and it will take awhile to change that .
About 400,000 people crossed the world ’ s longest international border each day before the pandemic .
About 75 % of Canada ’ s exports go to the U.S. which has more confirmed cases and deaths @ @ @ @ @ @ @ world .
Hmm .
I wonder what exactly Trudeau thinks he ’ s heard that shows Biden has an “ obvious ” different approach in addressing the pandemic .
I hate to burst his progressive bubble but so far Biden hasn ’ t put forth a single action that his administration will take to deal with the coronavirus pandemic that is different from the actions of the Trump administration .
The only changes will be the personnel working in the White House and a different manner of speaking from Joe Biden .
His @ @ @ @ @ @ @ some people take that to be comforting and calming .
Unfortunately , after just a few minutes into any kind of speech or presentation , Sleepy Joe devolves into rambling confusion .
Does anyone think Biden would have had the persistence and backbone to create and oversee Operation Warp Speed with drug companies and manufacturers ?
He sure didn ’ t when he was in charge of the Obama-Biden administration ’ s responses to Eboli and to H1N1 .
Biden ’ s longtime right-hand man , Ron Klain , was the pandemic czar @ @ @ @ @ @ @ how poorly they performed .
He specifically has admitted to failing , just giving up .
So spare us on how great the next president is going to be in approaching the coronavirus .
Trudeau is in for a surprise .
Canada doesn ’ t have mass vaccine-production facilities .
There are no COVID-19 vaccines being made in Canada .
Trudeau is feeling the heat from opposition parties over his remarks that Canadians won ’ t be the first to get the vaccines when they become available .
He expects the first doses @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they are made in .
However , he did offer some good news for Canadians during his news conference – Canada was one of the first countries to pre-order Moderna ’ s vaccine .
Trudeau said the coronavirus situation in the U.S. remains serious and the border will not re-open to non-essential traffic in the near future because it will take some time to stop the spread of the virus .

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau extended the U.S.-Canadian border closure to non-essential traffic through December 21. The ban on non-essential travel will remain in effect until COVID-19 is “significantly more under control around the world.”
Trudeau’s decision to close the border began back in March in order to mitigate the spread of the virus. Exceptions were put in place for airline crews, diplomats, immediate family members of citizens, and U.S. citizens. Border crossings have been limited by both the United States and Canada since then, with the restrictions extended every month. Trudeau’s announcement of an extension through December 21 seems routine enough but he’s upping the ante with more stringent language. He now speaks of the necessity of the virus being more under control around the world. That covers a lot of territories. Different countries and parts of the world are in various stages of the coronavirus pandemic, with some countries in a second or third wave of infections. It looks like non-essential travel will be off the table for the foreseeable future.
The prime minister is happy with how the flow of trade between the United States and Canada continues while limiting humans from crossing the border.
“Until the virus is significantly under more control everywhere around the world, we are not going to be releasing the restrictions at the border,” Trudeau told the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. “We are incredibly lucky that trade in essential goods, in agriculture products, in pharmaceuticals is flowing back and forth as it always had,” he said. “It’s just people not travelling, which I think is the important thing.”
Prime Minister Trudeau made certain to acknowledge the incoming Biden administration and deliver a bit of snark about the change in presidents.
Trudeau said although President-elect Joe Biden has an “obvious” different approach to the pandemic than President Donald Trump, the situation in the U.S. remains serious and it will take awhile to change that. About 400,000 people crossed the world’s longest international border each day before the pandemic. About 75% of Canada’s exports go to the U.S. which has more confirmed cases and deaths from COVID-19 than any country in the world.
Hmm. I wonder what exactly Trudeau thinks he’s heard that shows Biden has an “obvious” different approach in addressing the pandemic. I hate to burst his progressive bubble but so far Biden hasn’t put forth a single action that his administration will take to deal with the coronavirus pandemic that is different from the actions of the Trump administration. The only changes will be the personnel working in the White House and a different manner of speaking from Joe Biden. His elderly raspy voice is very soft and some people take that to be comforting and calming. Unfortunately, after just a few minutes into any kind of speech or presentation, Sleepy Joe devolves into rambling confusion. Does anyone think Biden would have had the persistence and backbone to create and oversee Operation Warp Speed with drug companies and manufacturers? He sure didn’t when he was in charge of the Obama-Biden administration’s responses to Eboli and to H1N1. Biden’s longtime right-hand man, Ron Klain, was the pandemic czar in the Obama years and he admits how poorly they performed. He specifically has admitted to failing, just giving up. So spare us on how great the next president is going to be in approaching the coronavirus. Trudeau is in for a surprise.
Canada doesn’t have mass vaccine-production facilities. There are no COVID-19 vaccines being made in Canada. Trudeau is feeling the heat from opposition parties over his remarks that Canadians won’t be the first to get the vaccines when they become available. He expects the first doses to go to citizens of the countries they are made in. However, he did offer some good news for Canadians during his news conference – Canada was one of the first countries to pre-order Moderna’s vaccine.
But Trudeau said at a news conference on Tuesday that Canada was among the first to pre-order Moderna’s vaccine candidate and, “We are guaranteed some of Moderna’s first batch if the vaccine is safe and approved.” “Already, Moderna has submitted their candidate for Health Canada review, as have Pfizer-BioNTech and AstraZeneca-Oxford. And just yesterday, Johnson & Johnson joined this list as the fourth candidate for Health Canada’s review.”
Trudeau said the coronavirus situation in the U.S. remains serious and the border will not re-open to non-essential traffic in the near future because it will take some time to stop the spread of the virus.


hotair--2020-12-03--TIME magazine names first Kid of the Year

TIME magazine has announced the magazine ’ s first-ever Kid of the Year recognition .
The 2020 title goes to scientist and inventor 15-year-old Gitanjali Rao .
This new distinction of an honor bestowed by the magazine was created after the 2019 TIME Person of the Year turned out to be Greta Thunberg , the precocious Swedish teenager .
TIME worked in partnership with Nickelodeon .
Thunberg was the youngest person and the first under 25 years old to receive the recognition in the 92 years .
This year ’ s recipient of the Kid of the Year award is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ political action but actually contributing to artificial intelligence and carbon nanotube sensor technology .
Miss Rao is not encouraging school children to skip school on Fridays and protest in the streets for climate change but is working on addressing cyberbullying and water contamination .
Actress Angelina Jolie , a TIME contributing editor and special envoy of the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees , interviewed Gitanjali Rao for the magazine .
She said she tries to encourage other kids to zero in on a single problem society faces , instead of trying to solve @ @ @ @ @ @ @ chosen from a group of five finalists , including herself .
The process of choosing a winner began with a field of 5,000 nominees .
Time magazine chose five finalists total , with the other four being 14-year-old Tyler Gordon from San Jose , Calif. , 14-year-old Jordan Reeves from Columbia , Mo.
, 10-year-old Bellen Woodard from Leesburg , Va. , and 16-year-old Ian McKenna from Austin , Texas .
Gordon has painted more than 500 portraits of Black people who inspire him , Reeves designed toys better suited for kids with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for the wide variety of skin colors and McKenna started a garden to help feed families unable to afford enough food .
All of the finalists will become a time for kids kid reporter , be able to contribute to Time and obtain a cash prize from Viacom , which owns Nickelodeon .
Nickelodeon will air a Time ’ s “ Kid of the Year ” special on Friday at 7:30 p.m. She ’ s created an app for teenagers to detect cyberbullying .
This is a hot topic with teens , a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ phones in their hands .
Mean kids have always existed but their reach is much farther online .
She told Angelina Jolie that she put out a survey to parents , teachers , and students , expecting students to respond that they didn ’ t want to be micromanaged .
Instead , she said , most teens looked at the app as a chance to learn from their mistakes .
It ’ s a service called Kindly—there ’ s an app and a Chrome extension—which is able to detect cyberbullying at an early @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I started to hard-code in some words that could be considered bullying , and then my engine took those words and identified words that are similar .
You type in a word or phrase , and it ’ s able to pick it up if it ’ s bullying , and it gives you the option to edit it or send it the way it is .
The goal is not to punish .
As a teenager , I know teenagers tend to lash out sometimes .
Instead , it gives you the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ saying so that you know what to do next time around .
Rao decided to share in her successes and holds workshops to encourage others to find what interests them .
She teaches others how to go from an idea to produce a finished product .
She said she has mentored 30,000 students .
I just looked at what worked for me and decided to share it with everyone else .
So I made this process that I use for everything now : it ’ s observe , brainstorm , research , build @ @ @ @ @ @ @ simple presentation and lesson plans , and then I started adding labs and contests that students could do .
Now I ’ ve partnered with rural schools , girls in STEM organizations , museums all across the world , and bigger organizations like Shanghai International Youth Science and Technology group and the Royal Academy of Engineering in London to run innovation workshops .
The students that I work with , they just don ’ t know where to start .
I think that if you give them that spark that they can then @ @ @ @ @ @ @ everything .
That means one more person in this world wants to come up with ideas to solve problems .
At the end of every workshop , everyone has something that they can start working on .
If you can do this in 45 minutes to an hour , imagine what you can do if you spend months and months working on it .
I ’ m so excited when I get an email like , “ Hey , I attended your workshop four months ago and here ’ s my finished product @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s a shoe that calls 911.
” She is currently working on an easy way to help detect bio-contaminants in water—things like parasites .
I don ’ t know that we need another ‘ Best ’ award , especially in a time when kids receive a trophy for everything but she sounds like an impressive young woman .
I do wonder where she gets so much time to do all the outside mentoring and activities at the age of 15 while pursuing her own projects .
She is , however , a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ TIME to make a new category just for kids .

TIME magazine has announced the magazine’s first-ever Kid of the Year recognition. The 2020 title goes to scientist and inventor 15-year-old Gitanjali Rao. This new distinction of an honor bestowed by the magazine was created after the 2019 TIME Person of the Year turned out to be Greta Thunberg, the precocious Swedish teenager. TIME worked in partnership with Nickelodeon.
Thunberg was the youngest person and the first under 25 years old to receive the recognition in the 92 years. This year’s recipient of the Kid of the Year award is, thankfully, not living off of political action but actually contributing to artificial intelligence and carbon nanotube sensor technology. Miss Rao is not encouraging school children to skip school on Fridays and protest in the streets for climate change but is working on addressing cyberbullying and water contamination.
Actress Angelina Jolie, a TIME contributing editor and special envoy of the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees, interviewed Gitanjali Rao for the magazine. She said she tries to encourage other kids to zero in on a single problem society faces, instead of trying to solve every world problem.
“I think more than anything right now, we just need to find that one thing we’re passionate about and solve it,” she said in her interview. “Even if it’s something as small as, I want to find an easy way to pick up litter. Everything makes a difference. Don’t feel pressured to come up with something big.”
Miss Rao was chosen from a group of five finalists, including herself. The process of choosing a winner began with a field of 5,000 nominees.
Time magazine chose five finalists total, with the other four being 14-year-old Tyler Gordon from San Jose, Calif., 14-year-old Jordan Reeves from Columbia, Mo., 10-year-old Bellen Woodard from Leesburg, Va., and 16-year-old Ian McKenna from Austin, Texas. Gordon has painted more than 500 portraits of Black people who inspire him, Reeves designed toys better suited for kids with disabilities, Woodward launched a crayon line for the wide variety of skin colors and McKenna started a garden to help feed families unable to afford enough food. All of the finalists will become a time for kids kid reporter, be able to contribute to Time and obtain a cash prize from Viacom, which owns Nickelodeon. Nickelodeon will air a Time’s “Kid of the Year” special on Friday at 7:30 p.m.
She’s created an app for teenagers to detect cyberbullying. This is a hot topic with teens, a generation who has grown up with cell phones in their hands. Mean kids have always existed but their reach is much farther online. She told Angelina Jolie that she put out a survey to parents, teachers, and students, expecting students to respond that they didn’t want to be micromanaged. Instead, she said, most teens looked at the app as a chance to learn from their mistakes.
It’s a service called Kindly—there’s an app and a Chrome extension—which is able to detect cyberbullying at an early stage, based on artificial-intelligence technology. I started to hard-code in some words that could be considered bullying, and then my engine took those words and identified words that are similar. You type in a word or phrase, and it’s able to pick it up if it’s bullying, and it gives you the option to edit it or send it the way it is. The goal is not to punish. As a teenager, I know teenagers tend to lash out sometimes. Instead, it gives you the chance to rethink what you’re saying so that you know what to do next time around.
Rao decided to share in her successes and holds workshops to encourage others to find what interests them. She teaches others how to go from an idea to produce a finished product. She said she has mentored 30,000 students.
I just looked at what worked for me and decided to share it with everyone else. So I made this process that I use for everything now: it’s observe, brainstorm, research, build, communicate. It started with a simple presentation and lesson plans, and then I started adding labs and contests that students could do. Now I’ve partnered with rural schools, girls in STEM organizations, museums all across the world, and bigger organizations like Shanghai International Youth Science and Technology group and the Royal Academy of Engineering in London to run innovation workshops. The students that I work with, they just don’t know where to start. I think that if you give them that spark that they can then build off of, then that changes everything. That means one more person in this world wants to come up with ideas to solve problems. At the end of every workshop, everyone has something that they can start working on. If you can do this in 45 minutes to an hour, imagine what you can do if you spend months and months working on it. I’m so excited when I get an email like, “Hey, I attended your workshop four months ago and here’s my finished product, I really love it, it’s a shoe that calls 911.”
She is currently working on an easy way to help detect bio-contaminants in water—things like parasites.
I don’t know that we need another ‘Best’ award, especially in a time when kids receive a trophy for everything but she sounds like an impressive young woman. I do wonder where she gets so much time to do all the outside mentoring and activities at the age of 15 while pursuing her own projects. She is, however, a welcome relief from the person who motivated TIME to make a new category just for kids.


hotair--2020-12-03--Biden: I'll ask all Americans to wear a mask for my first 100 days in office and I'm keeping Fauci o

Biden: I'll ask all Americans to wear a mask for my first 100 days in office and I'm keeping Fauci on

Uh , I hate to tell him but at the rate we ’ re going like half the country will have had COVID already by January 20 .
If anything , he should ring in his presidency by hosting a big crowd on the Mall and celebrating America ’ s achievement by ceremonially removing his mask .
Our decadent , deteriorating nation half-assed its pandemic response all the way to partial herd immunity !
I do think putting a time limit on his mask request is a smart idea , though .
One of the most dispiriting elements of our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is .
Regulations limiting some activity or another take effect with no indication of when they might end .
You wake up one morning , are told that certain businesses are closed or public areas are off-limits , and you live with it until you ’ re told that they aren ’ t anymore .
In an environment like that it ’ s easy to go slack on proper pandemic practices .
If the ordeal never ends , you might as well live life , right ?
Here ’ s Biden telling people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ going to end .
Barring some unforeseen snag in the vaccination process , daily new infections will have declined drastically by the end of April , which is when his mask timetable will expire .
It should be safe-ish to take off the masks at that point .
It ’ s also wise to plant the idea in people ’ s heads now that precautions against infection will still need to be taken during the first few months of the vaccine rollout .
Many inevitably will receive the first dose of the vaccine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ !
” , and let down their guard even though ( a ) they ’ re not yet immune and ( b ) millions of other won ’ t yet have received the vaccine and will still be at risk from the virus .
Pushing the expectation early that masks will remain necessary until spring is a way to counterprogram that complacency before it starts .
Watch , then read on .
Mask use is already nearly ubiquitous , with 93 percent of Americans saying that they wear masks at least sometimes when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s worried about is people slacking off on that too soon .
It ’ s a reasonable concern .
As for Fauci , it ’ s a no-brainer that Biden would keep him on considering that a poll published a month ago put Fauci ’ s approval rating at 72/28 .
Even if you want to knock a few points off of that because of how pre-election polls undersampled Trump fans , he probably still enjoys approval on the order of two-thirds of the public .
That ’ s a rare case @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with a very high profile .
Basically , unless you ’ re watching Tucker Carlson every night , you probably like Fauci or at least have nothing against him .
His public credibility is hugely important to Biden too at a delicate moment like the vaccine rollout , as he ’ s destined to be the point man on TV vouching for the vaccine ’ s safety and encouraging people to get it .
In fact , the two most prominent black public officials in U.S. history have already singled out Fauci by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ guide whether they get the vaccine or not .
Kamala Harris said so three months ago and Barack Obama said so this morning : “ People like Anthony Fauci , who I know , and I ’ ve worked with , I trust completely , ” Obama said .
“ So if Anthony Fauci tells me this vaccine is safe , and can vaccinate , you know , immunize you from getting Covid , absolutely I ’ m going to take it.
” He continued : “ I promise you that when it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are less at risk , I will be taking it .
I may end up taking it on TV or having it filmed , just so that people know that I trust this science.
” Obama said he was cognizant of suspicion in the African American community toward the rapidly developed vaccines , particularly considering the country ’ s history of medical malfeasance and abuse .
He cited the Tuskegee syphilis study , in which federal medical researchers observed impoverished Black men with syphilis for 40 years without notifying them of their diagnoses @ @ @ @ @ @ @ extra convincing that the vaccine is safe .
Having Obama , Harris , and Fauci attesting to it provides some extra .
Fauci even said he ’ d get the shot on camera , as Obama , George W. Bush , and Bill Clinton have .
Every play in the persuasion playbook will be called before the vaccination process is over .
Speaking of which , new data from Pew shows that vaccine acceptance is up since September , which is great .
Less great is that it ’ s still tepid among @ @ @ @ @ @ @ In lieu of an exit question , read this depressing LA Times piece about parents in Los Angeles trying to navigate the byzantine , often inexplicable regulations that have been imposed by local officials to slow the spread .
It ’ s a perfect example of what I said up top about indefinite , unjustifiable restrictions leading people into exasperation and complacency .
Exit quotation : “ Let my kid swing on a f— swing .
”

Uh, I hate to tell him but at the rate we’re going like half the country will have had COVID already by January 20.
If anything, he should ring in his presidency by hosting a big crowd on the Mall and celebrating America’s achievement by ceremonially removing his mask. Our decadent, deteriorating nation half-assed its pandemic response all the way to partial herd immunity!
I do think putting a time limit on his mask request is a smart idea, though. One of the most dispiriting elements of our long social-distancing journey is how indefinite it is. Regulations limiting some activity or another take effect with no indication of when they might end. You wake up one morning, are told that certain businesses are closed or public areas are off-limits, and you live with it until you’re told that they aren’t anymore. In an environment like that it’s easy to go slack on proper pandemic practices. If the ordeal never ends, you might as well live life, right?
Here’s Biden telling people, correctly, that it’s going to end. Barring some unforeseen snag in the vaccination process, daily new infections will have declined drastically by the end of April, which is when his mask timetable will expire. It should be safe-ish to take off the masks at that point. It’s also wise to plant the idea in people’s heads now that precautions against infection will still need to be taken during the first few months of the vaccine rollout. Many inevitably will receive the first dose of the vaccine, decide “I’m immune!”, and let down their guard even though (a) they’re not yet immune and (b) millions of other won’t yet have received the vaccine and will still be at risk from the virus. Pushing the expectation early that masks will remain necessary until spring is a way to counterprogram that complacency before it starts. Watch, then read on.
President-elect Joe Biden tells CNN's Jake Tapper he will ask all Americans to wear masks for the first 100 days after he takes office: "I think we'll see a significant reduction … to drive down the numbers considerably" https://t.co/ympLWgxWA3 pic.twitter.com/N35a5kv1LN — CNN (@CNN) December 3, 2020
Mask use is already nearly ubiquitous, with 93 percent of Americans saying that they wear masks at least sometimes when they leave the house. What Biden’s worried about is people slacking off on that too soon. It’s a reasonable concern.
As for Fauci, it’s a no-brainer that Biden would keep him on considering that a poll published a month ago put Fauci’s approval rating at 72/28. Even if you want to knock a few points off of that because of how pre-election polls undersampled Trump fans, he probably still enjoys approval on the order of two-thirds of the public. That’s a rare case of bipartisan support for a public official with a very high profile. Basically, unless you’re watching Tucker Carlson every night, you probably like Fauci or at least have nothing against him. His public credibility is hugely important to Biden too at a delicate moment like the vaccine rollout, as he’s destined to be the point man on TV vouching for the vaccine’s safety and encouraging people to get it.
In fact, the two most prominent black public officials in U.S. history have already singled out Fauci by name in saying that his verdict would guide whether they get the vaccine or not. Kamala Harris said so three months ago and Barack Obama said so this morning:
“People like Anthony Fauci, who I know, and I’ve worked with, I trust completely,” Obama said. “So if Anthony Fauci tells me this vaccine is safe, and can vaccinate, you know, immunize you from getting Covid, absolutely I’m going to take it.” He continued: “I promise you that when it’s been made for people who are less at risk, I will be taking it. I may end up taking it on TV or having it filmed, just so that people know that I trust this science.” Obama said he was cognizant of suspicion in the African American community toward the rapidly developed vaccines, particularly considering the country’s history of medical malfeasance and abuse. He cited the Tuskegee syphilis study, in which federal medical researchers observed impoverished Black men with syphilis for 40 years without notifying them of their diagnoses and withholding treatment.
African-Americans may require extra convincing that the vaccine is safe. Having Obama, Harris, and Fauci attesting to it provides some extra. Fauci even said he’d get the shot on camera, as Obama, George W. Bush, and Bill Clinton have. Every play in the persuasion playbook will be called before the vaccination process is over.
Speaking of which, new data from Pew shows that vaccine acceptance is up since September, which is great. Less great is that it’s still tepid among some groups, notably black Americans:
In lieu of an exit question, read this depressing LA Times piece about parents in Los Angeles trying to navigate the byzantine, often inexplicable regulations that have been imposed by local officials to slow the spread. It’s a perfect example of what I said up top about indefinite, unjustifiable restrictions leading people into exasperation and complacency. Exit quotation: “Let my kid swing on a f— swing.”


hotair--2020-12-03--What it's like in one of China's detention camps in Xinjiang

I wasn ’ t going to write about China any more today but I have a feeling that looking back in a few years we ’ re all going to wonder why people didn ’ t write about it a lot more .
So with that in mind , there ’ s an excellent piece at Buzzfeed about what life is like in one of the Xinjiang detention camps for ethnic minorities .
This part three of a three part series .
I wrote about part 2 here .
The latest entry focuses on one particular camp based on interviews @ @ @ @ @ @ @ region and are therefore able to speak about it without fear of consequences .
This is the stuff of which conservative nightmares are made : This massive detention center , the size of 13 football fields , is a cog in the largest-scale detention of ethnic and religious minorities in the world since World War II , in which 1 million or more Muslims , including Uighurs , Kazakhs , and others , have been rounded up and detained in China ’ s western region of Xinjiang .
Publicly , China has claimed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Yet an ongoing BuzzFeed News investigation , based on dozens of interviews with survivors and thousands of satellite images , has exposed how China has built a vast and permanent infrastructure for mass detention in Xinjiang , marking a radical shift away from the government ’ s makeshift use of preexisting public buildings at the beginning of the campaign .
Using the same techniques that revealed the scale of China ’ s expanding network of detention centers , BuzzFeed News can now expose the inner workings of one such compound .
The Mongolküre @ @ @ @ @ @ @ newly built sites bearing the hallmarks of long-term detention centers capable of holding hundreds of thousands of people in total servitude to the state .
Buzzfeed doesn ’ t name it ’ s three sources but has clearly spent a lot of time talking to them about fine details of their captivity in the camps .
This particular camp started as a single building but was later expanded into a much large facility with a 10 foot wall around it and guards with dogs at the entrance .
Once they were put inside @ @ @ @ @ @ @ time packed tightly in rooms for a dozen or more people .
They were allowed to go outside the main building once every few weeks : The detainees were taken to exercise within the small open spaces inside the camps about once every few weeks , they remembered .
After being inside for so long , it felt strange to see the sky above them… The rooms , which could house more than a dozen people , were about 14.1 feet long ( 4.3 meters ) and 20 feet wide ( 6.1 meters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ architectural analysis — a little over half the size of a two-car garage .
The detainees spent nearly all their time there , often as many as 23 hours a day… Before meals , the detainees would be asked to stand and sing patriotic Chinese songs like “ Socialism Is Good ” and “ Without the Communist Party , There Would Be No New China , ” both popular during the Mao era .
During the days , the detainees were usually required to go to class for about an hour to study @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like the party slogan “ love the Communist Party and love the country.
” Any violations of the camp rules resulted in a beating .
One of the sources , called Ulan , remembers an instance when guards watching on security cameras heard someone speak in their native Kazakh : “ Director Ma came into our room , asked everyone to stand facing the window , and then called their names out one by one , ” Ulan remembered .
Raising an electric baton , Ma beat them over their backs .
Ulan @ @ @ @ @ @ @ must have scared everyone in the building , ” he said .
Ulan was last in line .
He felt his body tense , waiting for the blow .
But Ma paused , telling the detainees that if anyone dared to speak a language other than Chinese again , they would be sent to solitary confinement for a week .
Then Ma raised his arm and struck .
What Buzzfeed is describing is a prison camp .
But keep in mind that no one inside has been charged with a crime much less @ @ @ @ @ @ @ because of their ethnic background and religion .
And they can remain there for years or longer .
The three sources Buzzfeed spoke to were all considered low-risk prisoners .
There were two other classes of prisoners who were considered moderate and high risk .
You can imagine the kind of treatment they were receiving in the camps .
The takeaway is that China is doing all of this to hundreds of thousands of people right now .
The communist state has no problem using violence , ideological compulsion and extended confinement against @ @ @ @ @ @ @ learned during World War II , this situation could easily get much worse .
But the real problem is that China would like to see it ’ s brutal system spread beyond its current borders .
As DNI Ratcliffe said today , “ Beijing intends to dominate the U.S. and the rest of the planet economically , militarily and technologically .
”

I wasn’t going to write about China any more today but I have a feeling that looking back in a few years we’re all going to wonder why people didn’t write about it a lot more. So with that in mind, there’s an excellent piece at Buzzfeed about what life is like in one of the Xinjiang detention camps for ethnic minorities. This part three of a three part series. I wrote about part 2 here. The latest entry focuses on one particular camp based on interviews with three people who have left the region and are therefore able to speak about it without fear of consequences. This is the stuff of which conservative nightmares are made:
This massive detention center, the size of 13 football fields, is a cog in the largest-scale detention of ethnic and religious minorities in the world since World War II, in which 1 million or more Muslims, including Uighurs, Kazakhs, and others, have been rounded up and detained in China’s western region of Xinjiang. Publicly, China has claimed that Muslim detainees have been freed. Yet an ongoing BuzzFeed News investigation, based on dozens of interviews with survivors and thousands of satellite images, has exposed how China has built a vast and permanent infrastructure for mass detention in Xinjiang, marking a radical shift away from the government’s makeshift use of preexisting public buildings at the beginning of the campaign. Using the same techniques that revealed the scale of China’s expanding network of detention centers, BuzzFeed News can now expose the inner workings of one such compound. The Mongolküre facility is one of at least 260 newly built sites bearing the hallmarks of long-term detention centers capable of holding hundreds of thousands of people in total servitude to the state.
Buzzfeed doesn’t name it’s three sources but has clearly spent a lot of time talking to them about fine details of their captivity in the camps. This particular camp started as a single building but was later expanded into a much large facility with a 10 foot wall around it and guards with dogs at the entrance. Once they were put inside, detainees spent nearly all of their time packed tightly in rooms for a dozen or more people. They were allowed to go outside the main building once every few weeks:
The detainees were taken to exercise within the small open spaces inside the camps about once every few weeks, they remembered. After being inside for so long, it felt strange to see the sky above them… The rooms, which could house more than a dozen people, were about 14.1 feet long (4.3 meters) and 20 feet wide (6.1 meters), according to a BuzzFeed News architectural analysis — a little over half the size of a two-car garage. The detainees spent nearly all their time there, often as many as 23 hours a day… Before meals, the detainees would be asked to stand and sing patriotic Chinese songs like “Socialism Is Good” and “Without the Communist Party, There Would Be No New China,” both popular during the Mao era. During the days, the detainees were usually required to go to class for about an hour to study the Chinese language and political dogma, like the party slogan “love the Communist Party and love the country.”
Any violations of the camp rules resulted in a beating. One of the sources, called Ulan, remembers an instance when guards watching on security cameras heard someone speak in their native Kazakh:
“Director Ma came into our room, asked everyone to stand facing the window, and then called their names out one by one,” Ulan remembered. Raising an electric baton, Ma beat them over their backs. Ulan remembers the screaming. “Their screams must have scared everyone in the building,” he said. Ulan was last in line. He felt his body tense, waiting for the blow. But Ma paused, telling the detainees that if anyone dared to speak a language other than Chinese again, they would be sent to solitary confinement for a week. Then Ma raised his arm and struck.
What Buzzfeed is describing is a prison camp. But keep in mind that no one inside has been charged with a crime much less convicted of anything. They are there because of their ethnic background and religion. And they can remain there for years or longer. The three sources Buzzfeed spoke to were all considered low-risk prisoners. There were two other classes of prisoners who were considered moderate and high risk. You can imagine the kind of treatment they were receiving in the camps.
The takeaway is that China is doing all of this to hundreds of thousands of people right now. The communist state has no problem using violence, ideological compulsion and extended confinement against people within its borders. As we learned during World War II, this situation could easily get much worse. But the real problem is that China would like to see it’s brutal system spread beyond its current borders. As DNI Ratcliffe said today, “Beijing intends to dominate the U.S. and the rest of the planet economically, militarily and technologically.”


hotair--2020-12-03--SCOTUS to 9th Circuit: Rethink your approach on worship restrictions pronto

Consider this a tacit endorsement of the new status quo on stare decisis at the top in dealing with restrictions on worship in the pandemic .
The order overruling Andrew Cuomo ’ s COVID-19 rules for churches in Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn got lots of heated debate in the concurrences and dissents leading to the 5-4 decision .
It also drew heavy criticism as politically and culturally motivated jurisprudence , and some wondered whether the court would adhere to it in following cases .
Wonder no more .
In a brief order this morning , the Supreme Court told @ @ @ @ @ @ @ upholding similar restrictions in the Harvest Rock Church case in California .
The case had a pending cert petition , but instead the court vacated the original ruling and instructed the appellate court to remand it back “ for further consideration in light of Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn v. Cuomo.
” That seems like a pointed message , especially without any attached dissent : The Supreme Court on Thursday sided with a California ministry that argued the state ’ s Covid-related restrictions on indoor services violated its religious liberty rights , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pandemic guidelines for churches in two weeks .
… In the case at hand , the California ministry charged that Newsom , a Democrat , continued to impose “ draconian and unconscionable prohibitions ” on the lives of Californians and they accused the Governor of disregarding the restrictions “ at his own whim.
” … A lawyer for the church said that while religious worship is at times “ severely restricted , ” grocery stores , big box retails stores , laundromats and warehouses do not have similar restrictions .
“ The disparate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nonreligious congregate gatherings unquestionably and substantially burden the Churches ’ exercise of religion and violates the First Amendment , ” the lawyer said .
California Attorney General Xavier Becerra rejected the church ’ s allegations telling the justices that the restrictions also apply to museums , movie theaters and restaurants .
He also noted that there is currently a new surge spiking .
That doesn ’ t make matters as final as CNN might suggest , but it ’ s pretty clear what direction matters will take now .
SCOTUSBlog ’ s Amy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ response to a request from the state to have the lower court re-evaluate their earlier ruling in light of RCDoB .
They apparently didn ’ t want the same court to produce a final ruling after seeing what happened to Cuomo .
The court accommodated California ’ s request , but made it clear that it intended RCDoB as precedent : Last week the Supreme Court granted requests from the Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn and two Orthodox Jewish synagogues to lift New York ’ s coronavirus-related attendance limits on worship services .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ even more apparent on Thursday morning , when the justices ordered a federal district court to take another look at a southern California church ’ s challenge to that state ’ s restrictions on indoor worship services .
… The state suggested that before the Supreme Court rules on the church ’ s request , it should allow the lower court to “ promptly evaluate ” the church ’ s arguments in light of last week ’ s decision in the New York case and “ the current factual and legal circumstances in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on Thursday morning , with a brief two-sentence order .
There were no public dissents from the ruling .
The justices have two other pending requests for relief from COVID-related restrictions , involving houses of worship in New Jersey and a Christian school in Kentucky .
Presumably , California thinks its set of facts and circumstances will differ enough to keep the original ruling in place .
Perhaps it might , but the governing opinion in RCDoB ( not the concurrences ) emphasized that “ strict scrutiny ” has to be applied in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ houses of worship than to commercial businesses with similar situations : Because the challenged restrictions are not “ neutral ” and of “ general applicability , ” they must satisfy “ strict scrutiny , ” and this means that they must be “ narrowly tailored ” to serve a “ compelling ” state interest .
Church of Lukumi , 508 U. S. , at 546 .
Stemming the spread of COVID–19 is unquestionably a compelling interest , but it is hard to see how the challenged regulations can be regarded as “ narrowly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than any COVID–related regulations that have previously come before the Court,2 much tighter than those adopted by many other jurisdictions hard-hit by the pandemic , and far more severe than has been shown to be required to prevent the spread of the virus at the applicants ’ services .
The District Court noted that “ there ha [ d ] not been any COVID–19 outbreak in any of the Diocese ’ s churches since they reopened , ” and it praised the Diocese ’ s record in combatting the spread of the disease @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ___ , 2020 WL 6120167 , *2 ( EDNY , Oct. 16 , 2020 ) .
It found that the Diocese had been constantly “ ahead of the curve , enforcing stricter safety protocols than the State required.
” Ibid .
Similarly , Agudath Israel notes that “ [ t ] he Governor does not dispute that [ it ] ha [ s ] rigorously implemented and adhered to all health protocols and that there has been no outbreak of COVID–19 in [ its ] congregations.
” Application in No .
20A90 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there no evidence that the applicants have contributed to the spread of COVID–19 but there are many other less restrictive rules that could be adopted to minimize the risk to those attending religious services .
Among other things , the maximum attendance at a religious service could be tied to the size of the church or synagogue .
Almost all of the 26 Diocese churches immediately affected by the Executive Order can seat at least 500 people , about 14 can accommodate at least 700 , and 2 can seat over 1,000 .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Hills can seat up to 400 .
It is hard to believe that admitting more than 10 people to a 1,000–seat church or 400–seat synagogue would create a more serious health risk than the many other activities that the State allows .
This is the well-known test explicitly imposed by Religious Freedom Restoration Act ( RFRA ) laws .
Those do not bar restrictions on religious expression entirely , but require the state to show that ( a ) there is a compelling state interest in place , and ( b ) the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to serve that interest while allowing for full use of the constitutionally protected right otherwise .
Any restrictions that provide more flexibility to , say , acupuncture clinics than churches will necessarily fail that test .
And they should , write Michael McConnell and Max Raskin at the New York Times .
Cuomo ’ s ridiculously arbitrary rules made a mockery of constitutional rights regardless of what one thinks of the current composition of SCOTUS .
Moreover , the last-minute gambit by Cuomo to moot the case should not have been rewarded , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ actual split in the decision , not the strict-scrutiny requirement : The real disagreement between Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Breyer and the majority was over a technical though important detail .
This disagreement made the court look more fractured than it actually was .
Just days before the decision , on Nov. 19 , the governor ’ s lawyers sent the court a letter stating that he had redrawn the red and orange zones in Brooklyn , conveniently putting the churches and synagogues that were the focus of the litigation into the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cited no reasons for the reclassification and offered no assurance that it might not happen again , at a moment ’ s notice , with no more explanation than this time .
The court majority regarded the governor ’ s about-face as too fleeting and changeable to derail a decision on the merits .
Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Breyer , by contrast , concluded that the change eliminated any need for the court to intervene , at least for now .
That is a reasonable position ( though we disagree with it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ any fundamental disagreement with the five justices in the majority about the need to protect civil liberties even in a time of emergency .
Perhaps Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Breyer believed that Governor Cuomo and government officials around the country will read the court ’ s opinions and recognize that it is time to bury the meat cleaver and begin to regulate constitutional freedoms with a scalpel — without the need for a judicial order .
That message is lost if the case is seen as the mere product of Justice Amy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Supreme Court .
With the presidential election behind us , the balance between Covid-19 precautions and civil liberties no longer needs to be a partisan issue .
The right to exercise religion in accordance with conscience is one of the most important in the Bill of Rights , and it is time for mayors and governors — and courts — to treat it that way .
Indeed .
The opposition in RCDoB is more about whether this was the case in which to draw that line .
Now that it has been drawn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ intent on enforcing it .

Consider this a tacit endorsement of the new status quo on stare decisis at the top in dealing with restrictions on worship in the pandemic. The order overruling Andrew Cuomo’s COVID-19 rules for churches in Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn got lots of heated debate in the concurrences and dissents leading to the 5-4 decision. It also drew heavy criticism as politically and culturally motivated jurisprudence, and some wondered whether the court would adhere to it in following cases.
Wonder no more. In a brief order this morning, the Supreme Court told the Ninth Circuit to reconsider its ruling upholding similar restrictions in the Harvest Rock Church case in California. The case had a pending cert petition, but instead the court vacated the original ruling and instructed the appellate court to remand it back “for further consideration in light of Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn v.
Cuomo.” That seems like a pointed message, especially without any attached dissent:
The Supreme Court on Thursday sided with a California ministry that argued the state’s Covid-related restrictions on indoor services violated its religious liberty rights, the court’s second such ruling on pandemic guidelines for churches in two weeks. … In the case at hand, the California ministry charged that Newsom, a Democrat, continued to impose “draconian and unconscionable prohibitions” on the lives of Californians and they accused the Governor of disregarding the restrictions “at his own whim.” … A lawyer for the church said that while religious worship is at times “severely restricted,” grocery stores, big box retails stores, laundromats and warehouses do not have similar restrictions. “The disparate treatment of religious as compared to similar nonreligious congregate gatherings unquestionably and substantially burden the Churches’ exercise of religion and violates the First Amendment,” the lawyer said. California Attorney General Xavier Becerra rejected the church’s allegations telling the justices that the restrictions also apply to museums, movie theaters and restaurants. He also noted that there is currently a new surge spiking.
That doesn’t make matters as final as CNN might suggest, but it’s pretty clear what direction matters will take now. SCOTUSBlog’s Amy Howe notes that the order is in response to a request from the state to have the lower court re-evaluate their earlier ruling in light of RCDoB. They apparently didn’t want the same court to produce a final ruling after seeing what happened to Cuomo. The court accommodated California’s request, but made it clear that it intended RCDoB as precedent:
Last week the Supreme Court granted requests from the Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn and two Orthodox Jewish synagogues to lift New York’s coronavirus-related attendance limits on worship services. The broader impact of that ruling became even more apparent on Thursday morning, when the justices ordered a federal district court to take another look at a southern California church’s challenge to that state’s restrictions on indoor worship services. … The state suggested that before the Supreme Court rules on the church’s request, it should allow the lower court to “promptly evaluate” the church’s arguments in light of last week’s decision in the New York case and “the current factual and legal circumstances in California.” The justices did exactly that on Thursday morning, with a brief two-sentence order. There were no public dissents from the ruling. The justices have two other pending requests for relief from COVID-related restrictions, involving houses of worship in New Jersey and a Christian school in Kentucky.
Presumably, California thinks its set of facts and circumstances will differ enough to keep the original ruling in place. Perhaps it might, but the governing opinion in RCDoB (not the concurrences) emphasized that “strict scrutiny” has to be applied in cases where tighter restrictions are applied to houses of worship than to commercial businesses with similar situations:
Because the challenged restrictions are not “neutral” and of “general applicability,” they must satisfy “strict scrutiny,” and this means that they must be “narrowly tailored” to serve a “compelling” state interest. Church of Lukumi, 508 U. S., at 546. Stemming the spread of COVID–19 is unquestionably a compelling interest, but it is hard to see how the challenged regulations can be regarded as “narrowly tailored.” They are far more restrictive than any COVID–related regulations that have previously come before the Court,2 much tighter than those adopted by many other jurisdictions hard-hit by the pandemic, and far more severe than has been shown to be required to prevent the spread of the virus at the applicants’ services. The District Court noted that “there ha[d] not been any COVID–19 outbreak in any of the Diocese’s churches since they reopened,” and it praised the Diocese’s record in combatting the spread of the disease. ___ F. Supp. 3d ___, ___, 2020 WL 6120167, *2 (EDNY, Oct. 16, 2020). It found that the Diocese had been constantly “ahead of the curve, enforcing stricter safety protocols than the State required.” Ibid. Similarly, Agudath Israel notes that “[t]he Governor does not dispute that [it] ha[s] rigorously implemented and adhered to all health protocols and that there has been no outbreak of COVID–19 in [its] congregations.” Application in No. 20A90, at 36. Not only is there no evidence that the applicants have contributed to the spread of COVID–19 but there are many other less restrictive rules that could be adopted to minimize the risk to those attending religious services. Among other things, the maximum attendance at a religious service could be tied to the size of the church or synagogue. Almost all of the 26 Diocese churches immediately affected by the Executive Order can seat at least 500 people, about 14 can accommodate at least 700, and 2 can seat over 1,000. Similarly, Agudath Israel of Kew Garden Hills can seat up to 400. It is hard to believe that admitting more than 10 people to a 1,000–seat church or 400–seat synagogue would create a more serious health risk than the many other activities that the State allows.
This is the well-known test explicitly imposed by Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) laws. Those do not bar restrictions on religious expression entirely, but require the state to show that (a) there is a compelling state interest in place, and (b) the law is as narrowly tailored as possible to serve that interest while allowing for full use of the constitutionally protected right otherwise. Any restrictions that provide more flexibility to, say, acupuncture clinics than churches will necessarily fail that test.
And they should, write Michael McConnell and Max Raskin at the New York Times. Cuomo’s ridiculously arbitrary rules made a mockery of constitutional rights regardless of what one thinks of the current composition of SCOTUS. Moreover, the last-minute gambit by Cuomo to moot the case should not have been rewarded, which McConnell and Raskin argue was the actual split in the decision, not the strict-scrutiny requirement:
The real disagreement between Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Breyer and the majority was over a technical though important detail. This disagreement made the court look more fractured than it actually was. Just days before the decision, on Nov. 19, the governor’s lawyers sent the court a letter stating that he had redrawn the red and orange zones in Brooklyn, conveniently putting the churches and synagogues that were the focus of the litigation into the more permissive yellow zone. The letter cited no reasons for the reclassification and offered no assurance that it might not happen again, at a moment’s notice, with no more explanation than this time. The court majority regarded the governor’s about-face as too fleeting and changeable to derail a decision on the merits. Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Breyer, by contrast, concluded that the change eliminated any need for the court to intervene, at least for now. That is a reasonable position (though we disagree with it) — and it does not indicate any fundamental disagreement with the five justices in the majority about the need to protect civil liberties even in a time of emergency. Perhaps Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Breyer believed that Governor Cuomo and government officials around the country will read the court’s opinions and recognize that it is time to bury the meat cleaver and begin to regulate constitutional freedoms with a scalpel — without the need for a judicial order. That message is lost if the case is seen as the mere product of Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s arrival at the Supreme Court. With the presidential election behind us, the balance between Covid-19 precautions and civil liberties no longer needs to be a partisan issue. The right to exercise religion in accordance with conscience is one of the most important in the Bill of Rights, and it is time for mayors and governors — and courts — to treat it that way.
Indeed. The opposition in RCDoB is more about whether this was the case in which to draw that line. Now that it has been drawn, though, the whole court seems intent on enforcing it.


hotair--2020-12-03--Prince Harry's latest vapid hot take: COVID-19 is punishment from Mother Nature

The Duke of Sussex has come across the reason that the world is being infected with the coronavirus – it ’ s because Mother Nature is angry with us .
It ’ s almost as though Mother Nature is sending us to our rooms , you know .
Prince Harry delivered that hot take with a perfectly straight face during an interview with a new streaming service .
I don ’ t want to be too cynical here but perhaps he says such idiotic statements because it will be profitable for him to do so .
He was making a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , an environmental documentary platform .
We ’ ll know if we see promotions in the future for some beautiful nature documentary produced or moderated by Prince Harry , and probably Duchess Meghan , too , airing on the streaming service .
He signed a huge deal with Netflix recently so anything is possible .
Harry knows he ’ s spouting nonsense , playing on the emotions of people when he says things like this in order to show his level of being woke .
He doesn ’ t take credit for the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ somebody ” he spoke with at the beginning of the coronavirus pandemic .
“ Somebody said to me at the beginning of the pandemic , it ’ s almost as though Mother Nature has sent us to our rooms for bad behavior to really take a moment and think about what we ’ ve done , ” he told the network ’ s CEO , Ellen Windemuth , and head of strategy , Sam Sataria .
Harry , 36 , went on to reprimand humanity for taking Earth ’ s natural resources for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ] certainly reminded me about how interconnected we all are , not just as people but through nature , ” he said .
“ We take so much from her and we rarely give a lot back.
” There is nothing better than being lectured to by a privileged Royal from the comforts of his own recently purchased $ 14M mansion in Los Angeles , right ?
It sits on 5.4 acres and the property includes a guest house .
What kind of carbon footprint does all of that leave behind ?
How @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on private jets ?
I haven ’ t seen any stories about Harry and Meghan going off the grid and living a spartan lifestyle .
I don ’ t think Mother Nature spites us with a worldwide deadly , highly contagious pandemic .
The virus came from China .
Granted , China is one of the top two biggest polluters among all the countries on earth ( India is the other ) but the virus came from either a Chinese lab or a wet market , we still don ’ t know for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t just magically appear during a weather front and spread to human beings .
Harry is further politicizing an already over-politicized international health crisis .
What if we were all raindrops ?
“ Every single raindrop that falls from the sky relieves the parched ground , ” he mused .
“ What if every single one of us was a raindrop , and if every single one of us cared ?
” That is just vapid nonsense .
Yet , the interviewers just nod along and humor him .
He even admits that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ want to have children because of climate change .
Of course , he changed his mind , but imagine being so cluelessly daft to admit such a thought out loud for the world to hear .
He ’ s a member of the Royal family , for heaven ’ s sake .
There ’ s a bloodline to maintain .
This kind of nuttiness puts the Duke in pop star Miley Cyrus territory .
She once said , “ The Earth was too “ angry ” to handle her kids.
” At the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ too old to sound like the precocious teen in Sweden , Greta Thunberg .
The publicity of this interview comes at the same time that Harry is being criticized for his deal with Netflix .
Netflix is streaming season four of The Crown , a hugely popular series based on the Queen ’ s reign with fictional twists .
There has been criticism of how some of the events of Royal life have been portrayed , including the relationship between Prince Charles and Princess Diana .
Harry has been encouraged to speak out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it could affect his financial contract with Netflix .
He says Netflix is “ the hand that feeds him.
” Season four emphasises the image of Prince Charles as an adulterer who loves another married woman , while his wife Princess Diana is depicted as the ideal People ’ s Princess — a narrative which could now threaten Charles ’ reputation .
But royal biographer Howard Hodgson explained that , despite the focus on his own parents ’ chaotic marriage , Harry will not be speaking out against The Crown because of his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : “ I think he might be quite worried about speaking out against Netflix , because it might damage the relationship .
I would rather think that Harry ’ s claims about Mother Nature and the coronavirus were said as a distraction from the pressure he is under to discredit a Netflix production than think he ’ s just this shallow .
The coronavirus has nothing to do with weather events or pollution .
It has everything to do with nefarious actions from Communist China .

The Duke of Sussex has come across the reason that the world is being infected with the coronavirus – it’s because Mother Nature is angry with us. It’s almost as though Mother Nature is sending us to our rooms, you know. Prince Harry delivered that hot take with a perfectly straight face during an interview with a new streaming service.
I don’t want to be too cynical here but perhaps he says such idiotic statements because it will be profitable for him to do so. He was making a video appearance for an interview with WaterBear, an environmental documentary platform. We’ll know if we see promotions in the future for some beautiful nature documentary produced or moderated by Prince Harry, and probably Duchess Meghan, too, airing on the streaming service. He signed a huge deal with Netflix recently so anything is possible.
Harry knows he’s spouting nonsense, playing on the emotions of people when he says things like this in order to show his level of being woke. He doesn’t take credit for the thought, he credits it to “somebody” he spoke with at the beginning of the coronavirus pandemic.
“Somebody said to me at the beginning of the pandemic, it’s almost as though Mother Nature has sent us to our rooms for bad behavior to really take a moment and think about what we’ve done,” he told the network’s CEO, Ellen Windemuth, and head of strategy, Sam Sataria. Harry, 36, went on to reprimand humanity for taking Earth’s natural resources for granted. “[The pandemic has] certainly reminded me about how interconnected we all are, not just as people but through nature,” he said. “We take so much from her and we rarely give a lot back.”
There is nothing better than being lectured to by a privileged Royal from the comforts of his own recently purchased $14M mansion in Los Angeles, right? It sits on 5.4 acres and the property includes a guest house. What kind of carbon footprint does all of that leave behind? How about the jet fuel consumed during flights on private jets? I haven’t seen any stories about Harry and Meghan going off the grid and living a spartan lifestyle.
I don’t think Mother Nature spites us with a worldwide deadly, highly contagious pandemic. The virus came from China. Granted, China is one of the top two biggest polluters among all the countries on earth (India is the other) but the virus came from either a Chinese lab or a wet market, we still don’t know for certain its origin. It didn’t just magically appear during a weather front and spread to human beings. Harry is further politicizing an already over-politicized international health crisis.
What if we were all raindrops? “Every single raindrop that falls from the sky relieves the parched ground,” he mused. “What if every single one of us was a raindrop, and if every single one of us cared?” That is just vapid nonsense. Yet, the interviewers just nod along and humor him. He even admits that at one point he didn’t want to have children because of climate change. Of course, he changed his mind, but imagine being so cluelessly daft to admit such a thought out loud for the world to hear. He’s a member of the Royal family, for heaven’s sake. There’s a bloodline to maintain.
“The moment you become a father, everything really does change because then you start to realize, well, what is the point in bringing a new person into this world when they get to your age and it’s on fire?” he said. He pleaded, “We can’t steal their future, that’s not the job we’re here for.”
This kind of nuttiness puts the Duke in pop star Miley Cyrus territory. She once said, “The Earth was too “angry” to handle her kids.” At the age of 35, Harry is getting too old to sound like the precocious teen in Sweden, Greta Thunberg. The publicity of this interview comes at the same time that Harry is being criticized for his deal with Netflix. Netflix is streaming season four of The Crown, a hugely popular series based on the Queen’s reign with fictional twists. There has been criticism of how some of the events of Royal life have been portrayed, including the relationship between Prince Charles and Princess Diana. Harry has been encouraged to speak out but no one expects him to since it could affect his financial contract with Netflix. He says Netflix is “the hand that feeds him.”
Season four emphasises the image of Prince Charles as an adulterer who loves another married woman, while his wife Princess Diana is depicted as the ideal People’s Princess — a narrative which could now threaten Charles’ reputation. But royal biographer Howard Hodgson explained that, despite the focus on his own parents’ chaotic marriage, Harry will not be speaking out against The Crown because of his Netflix deal. Mr Hodgson told Express.co.uk: “I think he might be quite worried about speaking out against Netflix, because it might damage the relationship.
I would rather think that Harry’s claims about Mother Nature and the coronavirus were said as a distraction from the pressure he is under to discredit a Netflix production than think he’s just this shallow. The coronavirus has nothing to do with weather events or pollution. It has everything to do with nefarious actions from Communist China.


hotair--2020-12-03--Trump to hold 2024 campaign event -- on Inauguration Day?

A leftover from a few days ago .
I get that he wants to try to bigfoot Biden by stepping on his swearing-in but that seems highly likely to backfire , in the same way that the dueling townhalls he arranged with Biden in the final weeks of the campaign ended up backfiring .
Trump thought that a head-to-head TV battle with an opponent as drab as Sleepy Joe would necessarily mean a ratings win .
It did not .
Networks aren ’ t going to interrupt their inauguration coverage to carry his event .
Not even Fox News will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ OAN probably will , as that ’ ll be an opportunity for them to prove their greater loyalty to Trump by prioritizing his event over Biden ’ s .
He ’ s also going to be bludgeoned by critics for not doing the presidential thing by attending his successor ’ s inauguration , welcoming him to the White House , and participating in other niceties of the official handover .
But Trump won ’ t care and his fans won ’ t either .
Having gone all-in on claims of massive voter fraud @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Biden ?
That ’ d be even more illogical than him insisting that Georgia ’ s vote was rigged but that Republicans should vote in the state ’ s Senate runoffs anyway .
President Donald Trump is discussing the possibility of announcing a campaign to retake the White House in 2024 on Inauguration Day and skipping the swearing-in of his successor , according to three people familiar with the discussions .
There is “ preliminary planning ” underway for a Jan. 20 event to kick off a new Trump bid , the people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it ’ s possible the president could make the announcement earlier as no final decisions have been made .
Regardless of the timing of a campaign announcement , Trump is not expected to attend the inauguration of President-elect Joe Biden , according to the people familiar with the discussions .
He also does not plan to invite Biden to the White House or even call him , they said .
Note that the Inauguration Day apparently won ’ t be the date he announces his campaign .
It might be the official launch @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Trump has recently told some advisers he wants to announce a 2024 campaign shortly after the Electoral College meets on Dec. 14 , the people familiar with the discussions said.
” I ’ m frankly surprised that he intends to show his cards so soon rather than pursuing a Trumpier , more suspenseful “ will I or won ’ t I run again ?
” media strategy .
One would think he ’ d enjoy torturing the Ted Cruzes and Josh Hawleys and Nikki Haleys out there who want to run in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ move until they know what Trump is doing .
Let ’ em go to the trouble of building a campaign before declaring , “ You know what ?
I ’ m running after all !
” ‘ I also think it ’ s a mistake for him to continue to assert a major presence in politics , replete with a “ campaign , ” so soon after the election .
The biggest factor in his defeat was probably Trump fatigue .
People just got tired of the daily antics .
If he made @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , he could reemerge in time for the midterms .
People would be excited to see him bring his and his fans ’ energy back to the campaign trail .
They might even realize they miss him a little , especially if Biden ’ s presidency gets off to a rocky start .
Instead he ’ s going to try to be a “ shadow president , ” which is great if you ’ re hardcore MAGA and irritating if you ’ re part of the other 65 percent of the country .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ ve had since the election was reading this Axios piece yesterday back to back with this story in Politico .
The takeaway from the Axios piece : Trump ’ s potential 2024 competitors in the GOP ain ’ t scared .
They expect him to be badly damaged before the next primary , or at least they so claimed after being granted anonymity .
The intrigue : Trump ’ s 2024 rivals privately tell Axios they assume Trump ’ s power will fade post-White House , giving them hope they can still run @ @ @ @ @ @ @ talk regularly to Trump told Axios they believe he ’ ll announce for 2024 , but ultimately not make the run because of what one Republican close to Trump called “ hurdles he has never before experienced.
” “ I think he will have more trouble than he can begin to imagine , ” the Republican said .
“ No one is going to let him have a free pass in the primary.
” “ No one is going to let him have a free pass in the primary.
” Once you put @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , as Politico did , you find that they ’ re willing to give him so much of a free pass that they ’ re already clearing the field for him .
It ’ s not even 2021 and they ’ re lining up to kneel before Zod .
“ If he were to run in 2024 , I think he would be the nominee .
And I would support him doing that , ” said Sen. Josh Hawley ( R-Mo. )
.
“ He ’ d have a lot of support out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ d be great if he ran .
He ’ s done a good job .
I think he ought to run if he wants to run .
Who knows what ’ s going to happen in ‘ 24 ?
” said Sen. Rick Scott ( R-Fla. ) , who said he is not focused on a presidential run at the moment .
“ He can sell the things he accomplished.
” … “ We ’ re so far away from that .
I will tell you this .
If he runs , I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
I think he would win , ” said Sen. Marco Rubio ( R-Fla. ) , who ran against Trump in 2016 and has mulled another run in the future .
“ I know it ’ s an interesting story , but I have no idea.
” On the very day that story was published , the president posted a 46-minute video touting wild theories of how the election was rigged which his elite strike force of lawyers still has yet to prove in court .
He ’ s spent nearly every waking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ undermine the country ’ s faith in its election system .
Some of his most rabid fans have turned so feral in their efforts to harass people who are attached to the “ fraud ” that those people have had to go into hiding .
The security director for Dominion Voting Systems is at an undisclosed location , according to the AP , because his photo , address , and family details were published online .
He ’ s still getting threats from harassers who claim they know which town he ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s terrifying , ” he told the AP .
“ I ’ ve worked in international elections in all sorts of post-conflict countries where election violence is real and people end up getting killed over it .
And I feel that we ’ re on the verge of that.
” Neither Trump nor anyone who works for him has said a forceful discouraging word about any of that .
And even so , even so , the cretins in McConnell ’ s caucus are already scrambling to renominate him in 2024 by acclamation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lightly : Trump is one of the most respectable Republicans in government right now .

A leftover from a few days ago. I get that he wants to try to bigfoot Biden by stepping on his swearing-in but that seems highly likely to backfire, in the same way that the dueling townhalls he arranged with Biden in the final weeks of the campaign ended up backfiring. Trump thought that a head-to-head TV battle with an opponent as drab as Sleepy Joe would necessarily mean a ratings win. It did not.
Networks aren’t going to interrupt their inauguration coverage to carry his event. Not even Fox News will, I suspect — although Newsmax and OAN probably will, as that’ll be an opportunity for them to prove their greater loyalty to Trump by prioritizing his event over Biden’s.
He’s also going to be bludgeoned by critics for not doing the presidential thing by attending his successor’s inauguration, welcoming him to the White House, and participating in other niceties of the official handover. But Trump won’t care and his fans won’t either. Having gone all-in on claims of massive voter fraud, how could he play nice with Biden? That’d be even more illogical than him insisting that Georgia’s vote was rigged but that Republicans should vote in the state’s Senate runoffs anyway.
President Donald Trump is discussing the possibility of announcing a campaign to retake the White House in 2024 on Inauguration Day and skipping the swearing-in of his successor, according to three people familiar with the discussions. There is “preliminary planning” underway for a Jan. 20 event to kick off a new Trump bid, the people familiar with the discussions said, though it’s possible the president could make the announcement earlier as no final decisions have been made. Regardless of the timing of a campaign announcement, Trump is not expected to attend the inauguration of President-elect Joe Biden, according to the people familiar with the discussions. He also does not plan to invite Biden to the White House or even call him, they said.
Note that the Inauguration Day apparently won’t be the date he announces his campaign. It might be the official launch but the announcement will come sooner: “Trump has recently told some advisers he wants to announce a 2024 campaign shortly after the Electoral College meets on Dec. 14, the people familiar with the discussions said.” I’m frankly surprised that he intends to show his cards so soon rather than pursuing a Trumpier, more suspenseful “will I or won’t I run again?” media strategy. One would think he’d enjoy torturing the Ted Cruzes and Josh Hawleys and Nikki Haleys out there who want to run in 2024 but can’t make a move until they know what Trump is doing. Let ’em go to the trouble of building a campaign before declaring, “You know what? I’m running after all!”‘
I also think it’s a mistake for him to continue to assert a major presence in politics, replete with a “campaign,” so soon after the election. The biggest factor in his defeat was probably Trump fatigue. People just got tired of the daily antics. If he made himself scarce for the next 18 months, he could reemerge in time for the midterms. People would be excited to see him bring his and his fans’ energy back to the campaign trail. They might even realize they miss him a little, especially if Biden’s presidency gets off to a rocky start. Instead he’s going to try to be a “shadow president,” which is great if you’re hardcore MAGA and irritating if you’re part of the other 65 percent of the country.
One of the best laughs I’ve had since the election was reading this Axios piece yesterday back to back with this story in Politico. The takeaway from the Axios piece: Trump’s potential 2024 competitors in the GOP ain’t scared. They expect him to be badly damaged before the next primary, or at least they so claimed after being granted anonymity.
The intrigue: Trump’s 2024 rivals privately tell Axios they assume Trump’s power will fade post-White House, giving them hope they can still run. Reality check: Several allies who talk regularly to Trump told Axios they believe he’ll announce for 2024, but ultimately not make the run because of what one Republican close to Trump called “hurdles he has never before experienced.” “I think he will have more trouble than he can begin to imagine,” the Republican said. “No one is going to let him have a free pass in the primary.”
“No one is going to let him have a free pass in the primary.” Once you put these people on the record, though, as Politico did, you find that they’re willing to give him so much of a free pass that they’re already clearing the field for him. It’s not even 2021 and they’re lining up to kneel before Zod.
“If he were to run in 2024, I think he would be the nominee. And I would support him doing that,” said Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.). “He’d have a lot of support out in the country.” “It’d be great if he ran. He’s done a good job. I think he ought to run if he wants to run. Who knows what’s going to happen in ‘24?” said Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.), who said he is not focused on a presidential run at the moment. “He can sell the things he accomplished.”… “We’re so far away from that. I will tell you this. If he runs, I think he would clearly be the favorite. I think he would win,” said Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), who ran against Trump in 2016 and has mulled another run in the future. “I know it’s an interesting story, but I have no idea.”
On the very day that story was published, the president posted a 46-minute video touting wild theories of how the election was rigged which his elite strike force of lawyers still has yet to prove in court. He’s spent nearly every waking hour over the past month trying to undermine the country’s faith in its election system. Some of his most rabid fans have turned so feral in their efforts to harass people who are attached to the “fraud” that those people have had to go into hiding. The security director for Dominion Voting Systems is at an undisclosed location, according to the AP, because his photo, address, and family details were published online. He’s still getting threats from harassers who claim they know which town he’s hiding out in. “It’s terrifying,” he told the AP. “I’ve worked in international elections in all sorts of post-conflict countries where election violence is real and people end up getting killed over it. And I feel that we’re on the verge of that.”
Neither Trump nor anyone who works for him has said a forceful discouraging word about any of that. And even so, even so, the cretins in McConnell’s caucus are already scrambling to renominate him in 2024 by acclamation. I don’t say this lightly: Trump is one of the most respectable Republicans in government right now.


hotair--2020-12-03--Should people who've already had COVID go to the back of the line for the vaccine?

My first-blush reaction to that question is “ no ” because scientists don ’ t yet know for sure that recovery from the disease provides immunity .
And even if it does , they don ’ t know how long that immunity might last .
But hold on .
There have been around 14 million confirmed cases of the disease in the U.S. yet only a few reports of people being reinfected .
If reinfection were common rather than an occasional fluke , we ’ d have many thousands more examples of it than the handful we actually have .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ conferred by recovery .
And since we ’ re now almost nine months into this pandemic and reinfection remains rare , it seems like a pretty safe bet that immunity lasts at least nine months .
So what we could do , just to be on the safe side , is say that everyone who tested positive back in March should consider themselves vulnerable and get the vaccine immediately .
Everyone who tested positive in April should consider themselves vulnerable as of January .
Everyone who tested positive in May should consider themselves @ @ @ @ @ @ @ We could postpone millions of vaccinations that way with little ill effect , which means freeing up millions of doses of the vaccine for people who haven ’ t yet had COVID and are at real risk if they don ’ t gain immunity soon .
Efficient distribution is important , and getting more important by the minute : Doctors are already debating what people who ’ ve survived COVID should do : Covid-19 reinfections are thought to be rare , but if natural antibody levels wane over time , it may be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more than once .
Doctors and infectious disease experts agree that most people should get vaccinated , even if they may have natural protective immunity .
In most survivors , a vaccine might even enhance immunity from the initial infections… Although the Pfizer and Moderna vaccine trials didn ’ t recruit volunteers who were symptomatic or were known to have been previously infected , it ’ s believed that up to 10 percent of participants in the trials had had the virus , said Dr. Moncef Slaoui , the chief science adviser for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s $ 18 billion initiative to support the development of coronavirus vaccines .
Those people either were asymptomatic or had such mild symptoms that they went undetected , he said .
“ What we know is the vaccines are safe in these populations , ” Slaoui said Wednesday at a news briefing about Operation Warp Speed .
He added that more data are needed about how the vaccine works in people who had symptoms and were sick with Covid-19 .
What ’ s tantalizing about the prospect of deprioritizing people who ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , many more Americans than the 14 million we know about have had the disease .
Last week the CDC estimated that for every confirmed case there are — wait for it — eight cases that go undetected .
They estimated that 53 million Americans had been infected by the end of September .
If the eight-to-one ratio is correct it would mean that right now the actual number of Americans who are immune , or on their way to immunity after they recover , is … 125 million , more than a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the gigantic number of new confirmed cases we ’ re seeing each day , that number will skyrocket by the time the vaccine is being administered in earnest next year .
Assume 125,000 new confirmed infections each day for the next 45 days .
Per the CDC ’ s ratio , that would mean 1.1 million actual infections each day , or another 50 million people ( !
! )
by mid-January .
Half the U.S. population or more might have natural immunity by the time the vaccine program starts chugging — and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ going to roll out the vaccine without regard to that fact .
Many millions of people who are already immune will receive shots that could go to those who aren ’ t and who ’ ll otherwise get infected and die this winter .
Seems … inefficient , to put it mildly .
But what ’ s the alternative ?
Even if you told the 14 million people who tested positive to go to the back of the line ( which would mean virtually the entire White House , by the way ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ out tens of millions of doses of the vaccine to people who don ’ t actually need it in the first few months of America ’ s vaccination program .
How do we identify the people who did in fact have COVID previously , have now recovered from it and enjoy immunity , but never took a test and got a positive result confirming that they had the virus ?
The only way I know of is an antibody test .
But how do you run antibody tests on 100 million people or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there such a thing as a “ rapid ” antibody test ?
I.e .
someone shows up to CVS to get the vaccine and first has to get a five-minute antibody check to see if they ’ re already immune ?
Administering the vaccine is an onerous enough process without layering on a massive testing regime to find out who ’ s had COVID and who hasn ’ t .
Even if we did that , other hard questions would arise .
What if someone takes an antibody test and the presence of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a relatively low level ?
Do we let that guy get vaccinated ASAP or do we hold him back ?
What level of antibodies should be deemed too low ?
The logistical hassle involved in identifying who ’ s naturally immune and who isn ’ t seems like it ’ s far more trouble than it ’ s worth … until you remember that potentially half the doses of this initially scarce vaccine could be wasted on people who won ’ t benefit from it and denied to people who will .
We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ according to Politico ’ s tick-tock of when the vaccine will be available for different groups , the great bulk of us who aren ’ t essential workers or high priority due to health challenges might be waiting until April or May to get a crack at it .
Five months .
When you consider how many daily infections there are right now , you ’ re left to wonder whether we won ’ t all have had the disease and either recovered or died by then .
I ’ m aiming to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who actually needs the shot in order to gain immunity from the virus come spring .
Here ’ s Scott Gottlieb yesterday on CNBC noting that , although full immunity requires two doses , some people will get a degree of immunity from the first shot .
Between that and the fact that , uh , everyone ’ s getting infected right now , we should see some darned strong herd-immunity effects on the daily case counts in January .
This virus is going to start running out of people to infect long @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in May or June .

My first-blush reaction to that question is “no” because scientists don’t yet know for sure that recovery from the disease provides immunity. And even if it does, they don’t know how long that immunity might last.
But hold on. There have been around 14 million confirmed cases of the disease in the U.S. yet only a few reports of people being reinfected. If reinfection were common rather than an occasional fluke, we’d have many thousands more examples of it than the handful we actually have. Clearly some sort of immunity is being conferred by recovery.
And since we’re now almost nine months into this pandemic and reinfection remains rare, it seems like a pretty safe bet that immunity lasts at least nine months.
So what we could do, just to be on the safe side, is say that everyone who tested positive back in March should consider themselves vulnerable and get the vaccine immediately. Everyone who tested positive in April should consider themselves vulnerable as of January. Everyone who tested positive in May should consider themselves vulnerable as of February. Etc.
We could postpone millions of vaccinations that way with little ill effect, which means freeing up millions of doses of the vaccine for people who haven’t yet had COVID and are at real risk if they don’t gain immunity soon. Efficient distribution is important, and getting more important by the minute:
(WSJ) – Pfizer Inc. expects to ship half of the Covid-19 vaccines it originally planned for this year because of supply-chain problems, but still expects to roll out more than a billion doses in 2021. @WSJ $PFE https://t.co/7PqEs44fEe — Carl Quintanilla (@carlquintanilla) December 3, 2020
Doctors are already debating what people who’ve survived COVID should do:
Covid-19 reinfections are thought to be rare, but if natural antibody levels wane over time, it may be possible for a person to become infected more than once. Doctors and infectious disease experts agree that most people should get vaccinated, even if they may have natural protective immunity. In most survivors, a vaccine might even enhance immunity from the initial infections… Although the Pfizer and Moderna vaccine trials didn’t recruit volunteers who were symptomatic or were known to have been previously infected, it’s believed that up to 10 percent of participants in the trials had had the virus, said Dr. Moncef Slaoui, the chief science adviser for Operation Warp Speed, the Trump administration’s $18 billion initiative to support the development of coronavirus vaccines. Those people either were asymptomatic or had such mild symptoms that they went undetected, he said. “What we know is the vaccines are safe in these populations,” Slaoui said Wednesday at a news briefing about Operation Warp Speed. He added that more data are needed about how the vaccine works in people who had symptoms and were sick with Covid-19.
What’s tantalizing about the prospect of deprioritizing people who’ve already had COVID is that many, many more Americans than the 14 million we know about have had the disease. Last week the CDC estimated that for every confirmed case there are — wait for it — eight cases that go undetected. They estimated that 53 million Americans had been infected by the end of September. If the eight-to-one ratio is correct it would mean that right now the actual number of Americans who are immune, or on their way to immunity after they recover, is … 125 million, more than a third of the population. And given the gigantic number of new confirmed cases we’re seeing each day, that number will skyrocket by the time the vaccine is being administered in earnest next year. Assume 125,000 new confirmed infections each day for the next 45 days. Per the CDC’s ratio, that would mean 1.1 million actual infections each day, or another 50 million people(!!) by mid-January.
Half the U.S. population or more might have natural immunity by the time the vaccine program starts chugging — and yet it looks like we’re going to roll out the vaccine without regard to that fact. Many millions of people who are already immune will receive shots that could go to those who aren’t and who’ll otherwise get infected and die this winter.
Seems … inefficient, to put it mildly.
But what’s the alternative? Even if you told the 14 million people who tested positive to go to the back of the line (which would mean virtually the entire White House, by the way), we’ll still be dishing out tens of millions of doses of the vaccine to people who don’t actually need it in the first few months of America’s vaccination program. How do we identify the people who did in fact have COVID previously, have now recovered from it and enjoy immunity, but never took a test and got a positive result confirming that they had the virus? The only way I know of is an antibody test. But how do you run antibody tests on 100 million people or more in a short period?
Is there such a thing as a “rapid” antibody test? I.e. someone shows up to CVS to get the vaccine and first has to get a five-minute antibody check to see if they’re already immune? Administering the vaccine is an onerous enough process without layering on a massive testing regime to find out who’s had COVID and who hasn’t. Even if we did that, other hard questions would arise. What if someone takes an antibody test and the presence of antibodies is confirmed but the test shows a relatively low level? Do we let that guy get vaccinated ASAP or do we hold him back? What level of antibodies should be deemed too low?
The logistical hassle involved in identifying who’s naturally immune and who isn’t seems like it’s far more trouble than it’s worth … until you remember that potentially half the doses of this initially scarce vaccine could be wasted on people who won’t benefit from it and denied to people who will.
We should start thinking about this because, according to Politico’s tick-tock of when the vaccine will be available for different groups, the great bulk of us who aren’t essential workers or high priority due to health challenges might be waiting until April or May to get a crack at it. Five months. When you consider how many daily infections there are right now, you’re left to wonder whether we won’t all have had the disease and either recovered or died by then. I’m aiming to be one of three or four Americans who actually needs the shot in order to gain immunity from the virus come spring.
Here’s Scott Gottlieb yesterday on CNBC noting that, although full immunity requires two doses, some people will get a degree of immunity from the first shot. Between that and the fact that, uh, everyone’s getting infected right now, we should see some darned strong herd-immunity effects on the daily case counts in January. This virus is going to start running out of people to infect long before everyone’s gotten the shot in May or June.