Abbott affirms he will take no action to mitigate future COVID waves

He’s on brand, that much is for sure.

Gov. Greg Abbott says he will not impose another statewide mask mandate, despite COVID-19 cases being on the rise again.

“There will be no mask mandate imposed, and the reasons for that are very clear,” Abbott told KPRC-TV in Houston on Tuesday. “There are so many people who have immunities to COVID, whether it be through the vaccination, whether it be through their own exposure and their recovery from it, which would be acquired immunity.”

It would be “inappropriate to require people who already have immunity to wear a mask,” Abbott said.

During a news conference Wednesday in Houston, Abbott went further and expressed blanket resistance to any new restrictions to fight the virus. He said Texas is “past the time of government mandates” and “into the time for personal responsibility.”


Abbott reiterated Tuesday that Texas schoolchildren will not face mask requirements as they return to school later this summer.

“Kids will not be forced by government or by schools to wear masks in school,” Abbott said. “They can by parental choice wear a mask, but there will be no government mandate requiring masks.”

Well, he answered my question, and that answer is “You’re on your own, it’s not my problem if you get sick”. What happens when and if hospitals begin to get overrun remains a mystery. The most charitable explanation of this stance is “Look, we all know that the idiots who haven’t gotten vaccinated are the same idiots who refuse to wear masks, so what’s even the point?” If only he as Governor had some power to enforce compliance, or to be a voice of persuasion to those who have refused to bear any responsibility. But at least he cleared that up for us, so thanks for that. The Chron and Reform Austin have more.

Related Posts:

This entry was posted in The great state of Texas and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

38 Responses to Abbott affirms he will take no action to mitigate future COVID waves

  1. Precluding Policy Responses and Preventing Lesson Learning

    Foreclosing a priori an available policy response without knowing how the pandemic situation will evolve in the future is the opposite of smart. It arguably amounts to an abdication of responsibility and leadership at the highest level.

    This approach is hardly surprising for Governor Abbott and his modus operandi, however, which is driven by ideological commitments and internal GOP politics, rather than by a rational deliberative process to forumulate the state’s public policy to best serve the public interest, and to adjust it in response to new information.

    Prohibiting lower-level governmental units – such as school districts – from devising their own approaches also prevents policy analysts from drawing conclusions as to effectiveness (and other consequences) of different mitigation strategies, based on patterns of cross-jurisdictional variation.

  2. C.L. says:

    That’s our Guv’ner ! It appears he believes that people who have been vaccinated can’t now get the virus they were vaccinated against, and spread it to others…

    When is he up for reelection ? November 2022 can’t come quick enough…

  3. Jason Hochman says:

    I think that the lesson learning has taught us that: lockdowns and shutdowns are damaging and don’t help. Mask mandates make little or no difference, but they are a way to keep fear literally right in our faces, so it is disingenuous to suggest out of hand that there has been no rational deliberative process, and that, in fact, the policy response is not based on an adjustment in response to new information (i.e. now we have data to see that mask mandates didn’t make any big difference, and we can see that shutting down everything is more dangerous overall).

  4. Jason Hochman says:

    C.L., you are destroying their narrative…getting vaccinated is supposed to be the key to being normal. No more distancing, no more masks, no more being terrified all the time. Once again, the goal posts have shifted. Now they claim that the vaccines aren’t that effective, there are breakthroughs but they will be “milder.” But there is no comparative. You can’t get vaccinated and compare your mild illness to the illness that you would have had without the vaccine. Even without the vaccine, you were very likely to have a mild illness. That is why you needed to wear a mask to protect everyone. You could have been sick and it was asymptomatic, or so mild that you didn’t notice that you were actually sick–maybe you thought that you were a little tired, had a bit of seasonal allergies, ate something that disagreed with you, but really, you had a deadly virus and could spread it to parents, grandparents, and the overweight, all of whom would promptly fall over dead.

    I can’t make sense of all of this contradictory, confusing stuff. No offense to anyone, but it seems like blind panic or a means to control the public. Maybe someone can explain this to me–how do all of the contradictions make sense? Remember when it all started with two weeks to “flatten the curve?” This was an economic and health care decision. It was not to stop all cases. It was to allow hospitals to be prepared for an increase and to prevent a giant influx of patients all at once.

  5. Bill Daniels says:

    Weird how, “No more state sponsored tyranny” is a controversial policy.

    If you believe the Trump injections will benefit you, get them. If you believe wearing one or more face masks will benefit you, wear them. If you believe being around people is too dangerous, stay home.

    And speaking of

    “Precluding Policy Responses and Preventing Lesson Learning”

    This is EXACTLY what the Biden regime has done to Texas. It doesn’t matter how many Wu flu infected pour across our now wide open border, Biden will NOT change his response by correcting the open border policy bringing the disease to America. This has been going on long enough for lessons to be learned, but Biden is absolutely NOT going to learn the lesson that mass importing illegals just keeps the Wu flu flowing.

    So here we are, experiencing the cognitive dissonance of simultaneously cheering the tyranny of flooding our communities with unwanted infected, while criticizing Abbott for NOT imposing tyranny on our communities. In fact, Abbott’s stated intent to build border wall to keep the infected out isn’t celebrated; it isn’t considered a legitimate policy response to lessons learned.


  6. Bill Daniels says:

    Apologies in advance, I know this is a conservative link, but the general topic is germane to the thread subject:

    “The Dept of Homeland Security (DHS) is now announcing enhanced travel restrictions for law-abiding Americans, blocking non-essential travel into Mexico and Canada. Simultaneous to this the same, ironically named, Homeland Security is facilitating a mass influx of illegal entry into the United States.


    Stay aware and evaluate this for what it is. This is an intentional effort to provoke American citizens. This is Alinsky methods deployed at a federal and institutional level.

    Often we see people ask, ‘Why are they so openly admitting to their wrongdoing and still carrying it out’? Within the answer I have written frequently, ‘They simply do not care’. It is not a sense of boundless hypocrisy that drives the far-left to showcase their disconnect. The disconnect is not cognitive dissonance. The disconnect is purposefully part of the ideological advancement of their goal.

    The leftists, the “elites” writ large, are so open in their proclamations of being beyond reach – because they want us to view their power as all encompassing. They act as rulers and dictators without accountability because that puts the victim, We The People, automatically in a demoralized subservient role.

    We are in a very precarious time, and we must be careful as we are inundated by the openness of the corruption in the system. The radicals want a reaction; they want a strong -perhaps violent- reaction; as that plays into their larger objective. Misplaced anger toward the visibility of the corruption can be weaponized against us.

    The question, “do the elites care if we know”, is accurately answered by, “they want people to know.” The viewpoint that elites are hypocritical is the wrong nuance to what is visible. Their openness about their untouchable constructs is part of their purpose.

    “Elitism” in its most raw and brutal display is a system of people who are beyond reproach according to their own outlook. They must not be questioned; they are in ultimate control of society, outcomes or (fill_in_the_blank) as an extension of their self-proclaimed magnanimity. Essentially, they are projecting their position inside a club, and all those not in the club are outsiders who do not get to provide input or judgement on the club rules.

    This might sound like a DUH statement from the literal definition of “elitism”; however, it must be accepted this outlook is one of consumption, not determination. They believe they represent the ‘greater good’, and by extension control moral authority. Thus, within their mind, they are above reproach. The visible outcome is they operate outside the systems they push upon others who are not in the club.

    Elites do not have to wear masks (Pelosi hair salon); or elites do not have to abide by group and social distance rules (Newsom at restaurant party); or elites do not have to concern themselves for carbon emissions (Kerry private airline travel); or elites do not have to worry about the justice system (Clinton emails, Comey FBI lies), etc.

    This is NOT hypocrisy, this is a fundamental part of creating a classist society.

    Those within the club, in this example the DC club, want those outside the club to accept there are two systems of rights and responsibilities. The club members have all powerful rights and no responsibilities for consequences; the non club members have lesser rights and full responsibility for consequences. This is the cornerstone of a tiered or classist society outlook.”

  7. policywonqueria says:


    Re: “You can’t get vaccinated and compare your mild illness to the illness that you would have had without the vaccine.”

    Sure you can, not within a single person (such as you), but in a controlled experiment.

    But controlled experiments at the level of entire states or lower-level governmental units are not really feasible because the “treatment” cannot be randomly assigned by the principal investigator (PI) when each government makes its own decisions as to which policy/program to implement (or none, as a default). That leaves the quasi-experimental research strategy of comparing jurisdictional units that have already adopted different policy approaches, and making causal inferences based on patterns of variations across units and over tiem, while having to contend with the associate control-variable issues, i.e., other inter-jurisdictional differences that could have affected/caused the observed variance in outcomes or relevant performance metrics. It’s a standard method in policy evaluation studies.

    An experimental approach can also be done at the individual level (i.e. with persons as units, rather than political units), but that involves the problem of self-selection and the self-selected study participants facing the prospects of getting thrown into the control group even if they want to get vaccinated and would likely benefit from it.

    It’s similar to the ethics issue of keeping a clinical trial going for the control group member after there are indications that the experimental drug is working for the study participants that are receiving the active ingredient, compared to those receive conventinal treatment or a placebo.


    A viable alternative approach, of course, is to look at who is dying from COVID (or needs hospitalization), and whether they had previously been vaccinated or not. Back-end effectiveness assessment, if you will.

    Regarding Mr. Hochmans’ professed (or feigned?) confusion … he has already given the answer previously: the matter of pandemic management and mitigation is complex. Exactly! That’s why interdisciplinary research and ongoing policy assessments are needed.

    Instead of a dumbing down of the masses on the day-in-day-out basis, and grandstanding. 

    And instead of partisan polemics, for which some commentators here reliable furnish textbook examples ad nauseam.

  8. Bill Daniels says:

    “It’s similar to the ethics issue of keeping a clinical trial going for the control group member after there are indications that the experimental drug is working for the study participants that are receiving the active ingredient, compared to those receive conventional treatment or a placebo.”

    There should be a similar ethical issue to consider if there are documented, consistent negative reactions to the experimental drug being given. VAERS, and now even our own government admit that negative reactions, like heart problems, lethal blood clots, on down to more mundane effects, like flu like symptoms, are occurring in people recently injected.

    So here we are, there are some purported benefits to the experimental injections, and some negatives as well, negatives in numbers that, if this were any other drug during normal times, might cause it to be pulled from the market.

    Given all of this, it seems we should be happy we have a robust control group, to compare the large scale results between the injected, and the non injected, because as Wolf correctly points out, anecdotal experiences have limited value.

  9. Manny says:

    The weirdos are getting desperate with their conspiracy theories.

    I, for one, agree that we that are vaccinated should use our vaccination as a weapon by attending Republican events to help thin, “The poorly educated,” so Trump called them.

    If the “elites” really were doing all some people claim, those people that claim that would no longer be with us.

    Elites are what the poorly educated people smarter than them, which is almost everyone.

  10. Manny says:

    Jason, the masks are not for the benefit of the people vaccinated it is for the unvaccinated, which includes children under 12; thus I wear a mask. Not to protect stupid.

  11. Manny says:


    9,000 dead, all but 43 had not been vaccinated.

    No excuse for stupid, are asking for the vaccine as you are dying from covid complications.

  12. Jason Hochman says:

    Manny, I believe that vaccines work, and, like the linked article said, some break through cases are not unexpected. However, the article stated that 75% of those who died had a serious condition already.

    Policy: a clinical trial of vaccination efficacy has already been done. Hard though to compare efficacy on the basis of “mild” cases which is not defined, it is a rather subjective term.

    Right, I agree, a pandemic is a complex situation for management and mitigation However, that is why we must not be tricked into believing that it is The Science driving all of these responses. There is no science to back up the claim that the runaway legislators had mild cases due to the vaccinations. It is pure speculation. There is little evidence supporting mask mandates, and even less to support shutting down everything. Yet, there is no debate, and those who don’t follow along are labeled as disinformation, science deniers, etc. The contradictions are still contradictions, yet here we are, being told that it is The Science that drives these contradictory policies.

  13. Bill Daniels says:


    “I, for one, agree that we that are vaccinated should use our vaccination as a weapon by attending Republican events to help thin, “The poorly educated,” so Trump called them.”

    Good! Great! Then you should be SUPPORTING Abbot’s stated policy going forward of no more lock downs, no more mask mandates, none of that. You should be the loudest cheerleader supporting that. Why are you here running down Abbott?

    This is the rare moment when you absolutely agree with his policy!

    Manny: “I mean, screw all the unvaccinated! Let them die!”

    Vaccinated: “OK!”

    So we all agree then. Everybody’s happy, everybody gets what they want.

  14. Manny says:

    Bill, I don’t think I have said anything about Abbott; he is pretending to be far to the right because of the primary coming up.

    But he is Republican/Racist by choice and against seems to hate America so much that he will do anything for political purposes. I voted for him for governor when he first ran, but those days of supporting any Republican are gone.

    Besides people will isolate themselves (or wear masks) based on science not the ramblings of idiots.

    When the orange buffoon got elected, I promised myself that I would never vote for anyone with an R in front of his name. I intend to keep my promise for the rest of my life.

    Bill, you really come up with stupid arguments quite often.

  15. policywonqueria says:

    The Writing on the Wall …

    Not the Trump/Abbott Wall; – the Old Testimentary One:


    Assuming that there are clear-thinking Republican strategists, and that not-necessarily clear-thinking GOP elites are disposed to pay heed to them, a realization may soon come to materialize on the horizon:  

    That the marginal vote suppression success to be achieved by ramming through their package of “election integrity” measures will be outweighed by the differential mortality rates of their vax-resisting supporters.  

    What is the point of going to all that trouble with the veto, imposing stress on Lege staffers, locking up the House chamber and requiring stay-putters to obtain permissions slips from the Speaker to go pee, if — upon eventual passage of the bill only — say — 10 Democratic-prone voters are kept away from the polls in a hypothetical district thanks to the heightened logistical burdens, while in the meantime 50 diehard Republican voters in the same district have died – whether hard or otherwise — because they refused to get vaccinated?

    There may not be solid data yet to do the electoral math and scale it up to the state level, or estimate the ratio, but it might be worth looking into comparing the ROI for the efforts to keep Democratic-leaning voters from the poll vs. the benefits of keeping loyal Republican voters alive by making sure they get vaccinated.


    Not to mention that the most dedicated Republican voters can be targeted for vaccination promotion and facilitation – even if they are not already in the campaign management database — because their participation in GOP primaries is a matter of public record. So, financial and organizational resources could to directed to assure most jabs for the buck, with none wasted on folks who would support the opposition party.

  16. Manny says:

    Right on the button, Wolf.

    Why Abbott is going far to his right, from his opponent.

    “When Abbott had the chance to protect the freedoms of all Texans, he instead sided with power-hungry, pro-lockdown politicians in Washington,” Huffines said. “Abbott’s lockdowns killed more than 3 million Texas jobs in one week.”

    Republicans make all kinds of bogus bs, but their base loves it and tends to believe it so that Abbott will come back with a bigger lie against his opponents, while trending fascist and racist.

    Jason, I’m not too fond of masks, seat belts, helmets, but I’m not too fond of fines, and I tend to follow the law even when stupid.

    I believe that our fate is determined the moment we are conceived. I quit riding a motorcycle when Texas made wearing a helmet mandatory. I have always disliked seatbelts that save fewer people from deaths than masks.

  17. C.L. says:

    I take my COID-related advice from Dr. Hochman as he appears to have a firm grasp on infectious viral transmission and the social/economic ramifications of same.

  18. Bill Daniels says:


    Your narrative hinges on a demonstrably false premise….that it will only be Republicans refusing to be injected. We’ve seen that blacks in particular, not a known Republican constituency, and many Mexicans as well (mixed constituency) are refusing the injections. This apocalyptic die off of the uninjected will be attrition to both sides, not just the racist R’s.

    So you’d have to do some more research. For every Trump supporting, American flag waving right winger who dies, un-injected, from the Wu flu, how many blacks and leftist Mexicans who also refused the injection, die?

    You also inadvertently downplay the narrative of black and Mexican helplessness in regards to voting. You assert that when 24 hour drive through voting is formally outlawed, that only a few blacks and Mexicans will be disenfranchised, when, in fact, we know that it will be a wholesale disenfranchisement of those groups, because they’re too frail/incompetent/stupid/lazy to actually walk into a polling place during the plentiful normal hours of operation like dem White folks do.

    If it was just a handful of people, we wouldn’t be talking about Jim Crow 2.0 here. Either the narrative is a lie, or you are wrong, saying that just a few people would lose their right to vote, pick one.

  19. Bill Daniels says:


    I know you are being facetious, but you really should think about making that your actual position. Your government has lied its ass off to you continuously for the last 5+ years about all kinds of things. They’ve lied about the Wu flu from the start. Remember when it was a massive right wing conspiracy theory and that this didn’t come from a Chinese bioweapon facility? Remember when we were shown videos of Chinese people falling out on sidewalks, being scooped up by people dressed in hazmat gear?

    Remember just a couple of days ago when Fauci lied again and said the US government didn’t pay that Chinese lab for “gain of function” research, AKA, researching on how to make viruses more transmissible, and across species? Remember 14 days to flatten the curve? Remember, “get vaccinated and you can get back to normal?”

    Turns out this is all bullshit lies from our own government. Remember the serial liar character played by John Lovitz? That’s your federal government these days.

    I don’t always agree with Jason, but he has lied much less, and been wrong much less, than our federal government. If I had to choose, I’ll stick with the pronouncements from Jason.

  20. Manny says:

    Bill, Mexicans, don’t vote in American elections; Americans vote.

    Bill, your hate of minorities knows no bounds.

    Spanish speakers, may or not be citizens.

    “The CDC reports demographic characteristics, including race/ethnicity, of people receiving COVID-19 vaccinations at the national level. As of July 19, 2021, CDC reported that race/ethnicity was known for 58% of people who had received at least one dose of the vaccine. Among this group, nearly two thirds were White (59%), 9% were Black, 16% were Hispanic, 6% were Asian, 1% were American Indian or Alaska Native, and <1% were Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, while 8% reported multiple or other race. However, CDC data also show that recent vaccinations are reaching larger shares of Hispanic, Asian, and Black populations compared to overall vaccinations. Thirty percent of vaccines administered in the past 14 days have gone to Hispanic people, 6% to Asian people, and 14% to Black people (Figure 1). These recent patterns suggest a narrowing of racial gaps in vaccinations at the national level, particularly for Hispanic and Black people, who account for a larger share of recent vaccinations compared to their share of the total population (30% vs. 17% and 13% vs. 12%, respectively). While these data provide helpful insights at a national level, to date, CDC is not publicly reporting state-level data on the racial/ethnic composition of people vaccinated."

    Bill, you let the part of your body that sits on a water closet do your thinking too often.

  21. Jason Hochman says:

    Bill, thanks for your vote of confidence, and, no, I haven’t lied, maybe been mistaken. Also, I am not giving out advice, so much as pointing out to people that it is better to look at the real sources: the data and statistics available, the journal papers, interviews with the researchers, rather than accepting as gospel what is in the news. The federal government may have been wrong, but even more than that, the news misrepresented many things that came from the government.

    I also point out many of the contradictions in the policies and advice we get. You had pointed out yourself that the government is extending the advice against non-essential travel to Mexico and Canada through Aug. 21st, but, at the same time, has the border wide open, for people we don’t know who they are, why they are here, if they have been vaccinated, tested, or what.

    Many other contradictions, such as when you go to a restaurant, wear a mask for 10 seconds until you get to your table, then take it off to eat, drink, talk, watch the game for the next two hours, then put it back on for 10 seconds to walk out the door. Or 14 days to flatten to curve–this strategy was a lie from the beginning, because they had already rolled out the “new normal” at that time. A fourteen day period by itself should not constitute a new normal. Then, when the curve did get flattened, and no hospitals were overwhelmed, we had to continue for another 15 months, with no specific goal in mind.

    WE are right to be confused by this. Let’s remember that worldwide about 50,000 or more people die annually from rabies. There are still cases of bubonic plague. TB is still out there. Covid is going to be around. Again, my “advice” has been simply to read the primary sources of information and use your judgment as to what is safe for you–not waiting on Abbott or Biden or the county judge to give you some blanket orders.

    The videos of the people collapsing in China and then being whisked away by workers in space suits were probably staged. I read about them in the book A State of Fear. No source for the video has been identified. IN China, they have the Great Firewall, so the social media and other sources where it circulated are banned in China. They have paid people in China who create this content for Europe and the US.

    I also believe that there is no sense of urgency from our government about problems taking many young lives. Not much concern from the county judge about rising murder rates. Not much being done about traffic fatalities. They just kind of shrug and accept it. A 28 year old shot dead or crushed on Fannin Street is not as tragic as someone 87 years old and lived a long full life who died and happened to test positive for Covid.

    And personality responsibility is a vital skill. I go around a lot on two wheels, and accept that there is a risk. I wear a helmet, don’t listen to music, or wear headphones, adjust my route accordingly, etc. I do expect drivers to follow the rules but take responsibility to be aware. The other day I saw a young woman probably 20 something, about as wide as tall, in front of me in the store, buying a package of cigarettes. Not a recipe for longevity and good health, but nothing from our leaders blaming fast food and tobacco.

  22. policywonqueria says:


    Re: “demonstrably false premise….that it will only be Republicans refusing to be injected.”

    Once more, alas, Bill propagates simpleton thinking. The issue here is not whether *only* Republican voters refuse to get vaccinated, but whether the incidence/rate of them doing so is higher in the aggregate, compared to Democrats. And that’s not a question of having an opinion, but one that can and should be answered based on the relevant data.

    For purposes of evaluating the future effect on elections (results are always based on the aggregate), we would further have to restrict the comparison to registered voters, a subset of the population that differs in its composition from the general population.


    Whether the non-vaccination rate is higher among Republican vs. Democratic registered voters is an empirical question answerable with data, not a question of opinion or clever argumentation or whether it somehow creates cognitive dissonance or doesn’t. That remains so no matter how much Republicans try to suppress or ignore demographic facts on the ground, and no matter how much they engage in fantasy thinking. Which is not to say that skilled demagogues can’t be successful in instilling reality-remote fantasies in their followers. Minds can be manipulated, demographic trends not so much.

    Speaking of demographic facts … even if — assuming arguendo and contrary to what has been reported — the non-vax *rate* is the same for adherents of the two major parties, Republican candidates will still suffer more from natural attrition (deaths) to the extent support for them is linked to age. And that is generally the case, according to studies of voting behavior. Again, this is an empirical question answerable with data, and any findings at one point in time don’t become gospel to be regurgitated ever after.

    As Hochman regularly points out without using the term comorbidity, many of the folks who die from (or with) COVID have other medical conditions that predispose them to death. So, to the extent there are surplus deaths over the normal historic rate, Republicans will be disproportionately affected because they disproportionately rely and depend on older and more death-prone voters.

    Because of this age skew in partisan leanings and voting behavior, the more members of the older segment of the electorate die off, the worse for Republican candidates. But this would be a secular trend even without the pandemic.

    Another aspect of the demographic movement concerns the recruitment and mobilization of new voters to replace those who have expired since the last election: those that reach age 18, newly naturalized citizens, and those who migrate in from other states. To the extent there is out-migration, it will heighten the need for replacement to maintain the status quo, not to mention improving the vote tally to bring it above the level achieved in previous election cycles. Both parties face the problem of having to constantly rejuvinate themself just to stay afloat, not to mention making gains.  

    As for the young first-time voters, Republicans would suffer a disadvantage to the extent they have less appeal to this age cohort, and the same applies in new citizens and in-migrants. That said, the GOP disadvantage as to the youth segment (first-time voters) could be attenuated or even balanced out by a trend of existing voters to become more conservative as they age from one election cycle to the next. The latter, too, is again an empirical question, and the answer may not be the same everywhere, or over longer periods of time.


    For Bill Daniels et ilk, Uncle Joe is the anti-Christ and for black Dems it is Jim Crow. Then there are more purported kin of varying degrees of popularity: Uncle Sam and Uncle Tom, to mention notable figures. It’s all pure rhetoric. You invoke your favorite boogeyman from the past to propagate a position favored or denounced by yourself in the present. Nazis and Commies will do duty again too. Albeit only war-of-words duty. 

    That said, why wouldn’t black Southern Democrats, especially descendants of slaves, see GOP-sponsored laws that make it more difficult to vote as a continuation of Jim Crow laws of the past? It makes sense in light of family history. Even if it is just a way to look at it. One way to look at it. A way to look at history from a particular angle. 

  23. Bill Daniels says:


    You write:

    “Once more, alas, Bill propagates simpleton thinking. The issue here is not whether *only* Republican voters refuse to get vaccinated, but whether the incidence/rate of them doing so is higher in the aggregate, compared to Democrats. And that’s not a question of having an opinion, but one that can and should be answered based on the relevant data.”

    I previously wrote:

    “So you’d have to do some more research. For every Trump supporting, American flag waving right winger who dies, un-injected, from the Wu flu, how many blacks and leftist Mexicans who also refused the injection, die?”

    We both said essentially the same thing, but I propagated simpleton thinking. I assume you recognize your own ‘simpleton thinking,’ since you pointed out the same thing I did.

  24. Bill Daniels says:

    “That said, why wouldn’t black Southern Democrats, especially descendants of slaves, see GOP-sponsored laws that make it more difficult to vote as a continuation of Jim Crow laws of the past?”

    Well, if I was a black Southern Democrat, I’d be embarrassed to claim that black people specifically, have some kind of disability, mental disease or defect that causes them to be unable to vote, except by drive through, in the middle of the night. So, having any kind of pride might be a reason they wouldn’t make that claim.

    Pride would be saying, “Hey, y’all, black people are just as competent as anyone else in this country, and we don’t require special treatment and we are offended by the notion that we do need special handicap-like treatment.” That’s what I would want my representative to be saying.

  25. Manny says:

    Bill, why would they allow perfectly healthy, mostly white people to vote by mail? Don’t they have no pride? Are they mentally disabled, defects?

    Bill, are you suggesting that it was mostly Black and Brown people that voted by car or at night? If you are, you have definitely been sitting on your brain too often.

    In fact, your racist comprade, Dan Patrick, claims that minorities don’t tend to own vehicles.

    Your racist’s tirade gets tiring, but when idiots don’t have anything else to do, they do what they do best; they lie.

    Why are Republicans so scared of making voting easier for everyone?

  26. C.L. says:

    Dr. Hochman, based on previous astute observations by yourself, I believe the Wuhan TV footage was doctored, manipulated so as to make us unsuspecting Americans believe this virus is capable of causing widespread illness. Certainly not that many people have actually gotten sick from this illness and died. Didn’t you inform us that the mortality rate was 1% or less ? People dying from this virus borders on a statistical impossibility.

    I’m with you – it’s a global travesty that every country on the planet has had their officials push this dastardly, absurd ‘theory’ that there is anything to fear from C-19. Imagine the synchronization that would have had to take place for them to put in place this Fear mongering plan ! Mind boggling.

  27. policywonqueria says:

    Re: Special treatment in election modalities – No!

    If any voter  and all voters can use drive-thru voting as an additional option, to be exercised at their choice or convenience, it’s got nothing to do with special treatment. No affirmative action here. You and Hotze and Woodfill can do it too.

    As for differential take-up of the option, that’s an empirical question. One fallacy here is to look at who voted drive-thru in Harris County and then jumping to a conclusion about how those votes affected the outcome without considering that many (though not all) of those same voters would have voted in traditional polling places, had the new option not been offered. And would have voted for the same candidates.

    That’s also why it would have been so pernicious had Judge Hanen thrown out all the already-cast drive-thru votes without the affected voters getting another opportunity to cast a replacement ballot in the conventional manner. That could have distorted the tally and even the outcome of some local races (though not necessarily).

    The claims about racial disparity impacts of more restrictive voting laws are not very strong from the policywonqueria viewpoint, but such claims would obviously be the ones to be made under the VRA since you can’t complain that about merely partisan motivations under that civil-rights statute.

    It’s also understandable that the Black Caucus would complain about adverse impact on black voters, and the disability advocates about adverse impacts on disabled persons. Wisely, the Democratic Caucus qua party-in-the-Lege would (or should) complain about the voter-suppression/turnout reduction effects on *any and all* voters, not just specific tribal or other constituencies. There is obviously a sizeable overlap between Democrats and the Black-Brown contingent. So if the distinction doesn’t always come out clearly in public statements and media coverage, that’s understandable too. 

    On the point about needing more research to determine differential rates of vaccination by party affiliation, we do appear to stand on common ground after all.

    So, alright. That was a fair criticism in retort.  

  28. Jason Hochman says:

    C.L, you should get the book A State of Fear, it explains some of the machinations that have been done. Nobody knows where the Wuhan video originated.

    That is correct, the Covid survival rate is 99% or more. I remember at the start of the whole thing, people saying that “we will probably all get this virus, but for most of us it will just be another cold or flu, not a fatal illness.” So they did know this very early on.

    The synchronization needed is probably mostly in place. Remember Ed Snowden? Remember how he told us about the Five Eyes countries? It was an alliance between the US, UK, Australia, NZ, and Canada to spy on the public? So we can kind of see that there has been a mechanism in place, a psy ops infrastructure, so to speak, and not a big leap to enlist China, which is mad because Trump didn’t bow down to China. The more you think about it, the more it looks like Trump was right, even though he’s a loud annoying blow hard, he can be right about some things. Obama was a tyrant who approved assassination of US citizens without trial, if O labeled them a terrorist. He also mislabeled Snowden as a spy, and exiled him to Siberia. The truth is out there.

  29. Manny says:

    Only in the minds of some is close to one million dying from covid complications a minor problem.

    A new study estimates that the number of people who have died of COVID-19 in the U.S. is more than 900,000, a number 57% higher than official figures.

    Worldwide, the study’s authors say, the COVID-19 death count is nearing 7 million, more than double the reported number of 3.24 million…

    Only a few bike riders die, about (800). Why wear a helmet, Jason?

    Don’t you get tired of pushing garbage day in and day out, Jason?

    1/6 persons had severe complications from covid

  30. Manny says:

    World health experts have long suspected that the incidence of COVID-19 has been higher than reported. Now, a machine-learning algorithm developed at UT Southwestern estimates that the number of COVID-19 cases in the U.S. since the pandemic began is nearly three times that of confirmed cases.

    The algorithm, described in a study published today in PLOS ONE, provides daily updated estimates of total infections to date as well as how many people are currently infected across the U.S. and in 50 countries hardest hit by the pandemic.

    As of Feb. 4, according to the model’s calculations, more than 71 million people in the U.S. – 21.5 percent of Americans – had contracted COVID-19. That compares with the substantially smaller 26.7 million publicly reported number of confirmed cases, says Jungsik Noh, Ph.D., a UT Southwestern assistant professor in the Lyda Hill Department of Bioinformatics and first author of the study.

    Of those 71 million Americans estimated to have had COVID-19, 7 million (2.1 percent of the U.S. population) had current infections and were potentially contagious on Feb. 4, according to the algorithm.

    Noh’s written study is based on calculations completed in September. At that time, it reports, the number of actual cumulative cases in 25 of the 50 hardest-hit countries was five to 20 times greater than the confirmed case numbers then suggested.

  31. Bill Daniels says:

    “The claims about racial disparity impacts of more restrictive voting laws are not very strong from the policywonqueria viewpoint…”

    I guess that’s as close to an admission that formally stopping all night drive through voting isn’t the dogs, fire hoses and truncheons moment that the Texas Dems are claiming, so thanks for an honest evalation of the facts, Wolf.


    I’m not the one that made the claim that blacks can largely only vote by drive through, in the middle of the night. The Dems have not only said it, they fled the state, because they believe so strongly that it’s true….blacks can only vote drive through in the middle of the night, and can’t vote like everyone else. I’m not saying that, Texas Dems are saying it.

    It’s Jim Crow 2.0 because me, Hotze and Woodfill can show up during the 12-14 hours a day during the two+ weeks of early voting plus election day. We can do that because Whites have special skills and talents blacks apparently don’t have, even after 60 some years of affirmative action. Blacks can be the US president, congressmen and senators, CEO’s, business owners, police officers, doctors, and pretty much anything anyone else can be, but there’s just something about blacks that they are only able to vote drive through in the middle of the night, which is why banning that is so racist and discriminatory against blacks.

  32. Manny says:

    Bill, you are persistent with your lies. How much do they pay you?

    The only special skills whites like you have is whine, whine, whine, and lie.

  33. Manny says:

    Bill, show me where Democrats stated that “black people and/or brown people, can vote largely at the middle of the night.”

    Let me see it coming from someone other than racist/fascists pigs.

  34. Manny says:

    can only vote

  35. Jason Hochman says:

    Yeah, the estimates of Covid deaths is way over estimated. They are looking at excess mortality, the excess deaths were caused by lock downs, by Surges in violent crime, by people who neglected health care and were afraid of going to the hospital for heart disease, cancer, and other dangerous conditions, also suicide, over dose, and other psychological conditions caused by excessive fear and isolation.

    Only about 800 bike riders die in the US per year, because so many wear helmets. You see, you prove my point, I don’t have Abbott, Biden, or Mrs. Harris telling me to wear a helmet, I have made that choice for my self based on the work I do in my scientific studies of things.

    Abbott and Biden are not smart, they went to law schools, and never lived life in a working environment. Biden has gotten even dumber as he has brain decay. He should have the 25th Amendment put on him. He threatened to run over a journalist with a truck, and he has mentioned that he has nuclear weapons that he can use on the US. Hopefully California. And, when he threatened (maybe jokingly) to floor the accelerator when the journalist was in front of the truck, he should have realized that if someone even jokingly said that they would do that to a president, the Secret Service would immediately shoot them dead on the spot.

  36. Pingback: It’s not vaccinated people that are dying – Off the Kuff

  37. Manny says:

    No one that wears a mask all the time has died from covid or covid complications.

    Jason, tell me, how have you determine that both Abbott and Biden are not smart? What scientific study have you conducted?

    Biden threatened to run over a journalist with a truck?

    “”Mr. President, can I ask you a quick question on Israel before you drive away, since it’s so important?” a reporter said.

    “No, you can’t — not unless you get in front of the car as I step on it. I’m only teasing,” Biden said, with laughter heard in the background. Then he floored the vehicle and drove away, to the apparent delight of the reporters nearby.

    Jason, you claim that you don’t lie, but to me, you lie all the time; I think you think much more of your cognitive ability than most people do of it.

  38. Pingback: “Universal masking” for school children recommended – Off the Kuff

Comments are closed.