Mediaboss Marketing

A group of students from the Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology (MIPT) started holding online chess tournaments in the autumn of 2020. First, they invited a team from MIT. And then they organized an international tournament called Global Chess, where hundreds of students from dozens of universities worldwide now take part and share their love for the game.

It all started two years ago, in 2019. It was New Years Eve and the MIPT dorm in Moscow was almost totally empty, because most had already left after their exams.

Andrey Danilov, a third-year student whos the head of the online chess club at MIPT, didnt know what to do, so he met a friend and they started playing chess. The game was so intense that they didnt even notice how the clock struck 12 and the New Year arrived, remembers Danilov.

It later turned out that there were many students living in our dorms who stopped playing chess in university. So we began to play often, all styles without exception: blitz, bullet, rapid. Then I started training my fellow students, recalls Danilov.

That was the beginning of what would later become the Global Chess startup. For Andrey Danilov, it is more than a tournament, however. It is a community whose core values are honesty, personal development, friendship and mutual assistance - all united by a common hobby.

When the COVID-19 pandemic hit, Danilov found himself stuck in Ukrainian coastal city of Odessa and his life moved almost fully online. Together with his chess buddies, Danilovv created an online team and they started training and holding tournaments remotely. It was also a great coping mechanism during the uncertainties of the pandemic and was probably the only thing that helped Danilov to not drop out of university.

Soon, we found similarly locked down friends from MIT who were studying remotely and it turned out that there was no difference between us - we even literally spoke the same language: the head of their chess club studies Russian as an elective subject! We are not very different culturally, Andrey Danilov says.

The first tournament against MIT students was a rollercoaster of emotions: halfway through the tournament, the MIT students were beating the MIPT team with a score of 9037. Then, the MIPT team pulled itself together, managed to close the gap and take the lead three minutes before the end of the tournament! The final score was 104-100 in favor of MIPT.

Then, we also started inviting teams from Harvard, Stanford and other universities to take part in our tournament, Danilov says.

As a result, Andrey and his friends started holding large tournaments, comparable in size to the one held among universities by famous Russian chess player Gary Kasparov. They decided that it was time to do team tournaments according to the Swiss system, in which players are never eliminated, but are paired in every round. In the last tournament held on July 3, 2021, 415 players from 38 different universities took part.

The tournaments that were previously held according to the Swiss system were very complicated - they had to use separate websites for drawing lots, keeping a table and playing chess. So, instead, we combined it all and created our platform [at] global-chess.com, Danilov explains.

Not everyone is eligible to take part in Global Chess tournaments, but if youre a student, recent graduate or researcher then you can play to your hearts content.

As good as it is to be able to bring together players from all corners of the world thanks to the possibilities offered by the Internet, Danilov and his friends really miss playing chess face-to-face. Thats why theyre planning to hold an offline tournament for their fellow students.

We are going to make an annual selection based on a hybrid system and then try to get sponsors to pay for travel expenses for the winners to take part in the face-to-face tournament. It would make for a truly exciting 9-10 days: chess plus learning about the culture of the host country and the organizing universities, Danilov adds.

Additionally, the MIPT students are currently working on an online course for Coursera, which will teach chess alongside analytical thinking in real life situations based on the game. Together with professional programmers, they are developing a platform for playing chess according to the Swiss system. This project has already won several major accelerators and raised a total of 400,000 rubles ($5,400). And they are growing their YouTube channel.

But the most important aim of Global Chess is to build a real community and friendships that transcend borders and where people understand each other better, as well as inspire participants to achieve their goals in all spheres, not just in chess.

FIDE master Arman Geyvondyan, for example, became friends with a commentator from the University of Warwick.

I was commenting on the tournament and, at the end of the broadcast, I popped into a stream by my colleagues from the University of Warwick. We talked for a few minutes, discussed the results of the competition and then went on our merry way. And then Jack thanked me on Discord and offered to pop in next time. Before we knew it, we ended up chatting for several hours about everything and anything! We even agreed on a couple of chess lessons and a joint game in CS: GO, says Geyvondyan.

The analytical thinking that chess instills in people makes it possible to build a community where everyone feels comfortable, can grow and find real friends, develop culturally and always keep improving. It seems to us that many problems in modern life arise, due to the fact that people do not analyze what is happening to them, what others are doing and, as a result, they do a lot of things without thinking them through. Chess, on the other hand, teaches one to be aware and to weigh every move and action, Danilov concludes.

If using any of Russia Beyond's content, partly or in full, always provide an active hyperlink to the original material.

') }, error: function() { $email.val(''); alert('An unknown error occurred. Try later.'); } }); } }); }; initFormSubmit(); $completeButton.on('click', function (evt) { evt.preventDefault(); evt.window.location.reload(); }); }());

Go here to read the rest:
How a group of Russian students created a GLOBAL chess community - Russia Beyond

Why the Delta scare? As a virus mutates, it becomes more contagious and less lethal. And then eventually it mostly disappears. Many voices claim that Delta will be with us for a very long time, but we should be so lucky. Its way more likely that it will soon be followed by a next variant that will in turn become dominant. And more contagious and less lethal.

And no, thats not because of unvaccinated people, or at least theres no logic in that. If most people are not vaccinated, the virus has no reason to mutate. If many people are, it does. So this CNN piece is suspect. Vaccinated people are potential variant factories, just as much, if and when the vaccines used dont stop them from being infectious, as the present vaccines dont, far as we know.

Unvaccinated People Are Variant Factories, Infectious Diseases Expert

Unvaccinated people do more than merely risk their own health. Theyre also a risk to everyone if they become infected with coronavirus, infectious disease specialists say. Thats because the only source of new coronavirus variants is the body of an infected person. Unvaccinated people are potential variant factories, Dr. William Schaffner, a professor in the Division of Infectious Diseases at Vanderbilt University Medical Center, told CNN Friday. The more unvaccinated people there are, the more opportunities for the virus to multiply, Schaffner, a professor in the Division of Infectious Diseases at Vanderbilt University Medical Center, said. When it does, it mutates, and it could throw off a variant mutation that is even more serious down the road.

Even more serious? Well, yes, it can become more contagious, but then it loses lethality. Maybe thats what we want. Maybe we want a virus that everyone can be infected by, and build resistance to, without serious consequences. Maybe thats even what we should aim for. And also, maybe thats what we already have, with survival rates of 99.99% among most people.

And maybe, just maybe, a one-dimensional solution in the shape of an experimental vaccine is the worst response of all. Because it doesnt protect from anything other than more severe disease, while unleashing potential adverse effects for decades to come in the inoculated. Maybe one dimension simply doesnt cut it. Maybe we should not refuse to prevent people from becoming infected, or to treat them in the early stages of the disease.

Maybe the traumatic effects of lockdowns and facemasks should be part of benefits and risks models. And maybe we should start trying vitamin D, ivermectin and HCQ on a very large scale. No research, you say? Theres more research for those approaches than for the vaccines. But its largely been halted in the west to maintain the viability of the one-dimension solution; the medical Siamese twin of the Trusted News Initiative, one might say. Of which The Atlantic is also a valued member, look at this gem:

The 3 Simple Rules That Underscore the Danger of Delta

2. The variants are pummeling unvaccinated people.

Vaccinated people are safer than ever despite the variants. But unvaccinated people are in more danger than ever because of the variants. Even thoughtheyll gain some protection from the immunity of others, they also tend to cluster socially and geographically, seeding outbreaks even within highly vaccinated communities.

The U.K., where half the population is fully vaccinated, can be a cautionary tale, Hanage told me. Since Deltas ascendancy,the countrys cases have increased sixfold. Long-COVID cases will likely follow. Hospitalizations have almost doubled.Thats not a sign that the vaccines are failing. It is a sign that even highly vaccinated countries host plenty of vulnerable people.

[..] And new variants are still emerging. Lambda, the latest to be recognized by the WHO, is dominant in Peru and spreading rapidly in South America. Many nations that excelled at protecting their citizens are now facing a triple threat: They controlled COVID-19 so well that they have little natural immunity; they dont have access to vaccines; and theyre besieged by Delta.

First, the vaccines dont confer immunity on the jabbed, there is no evidence of that. Second, a large majority of healthy people have an immune system strong enough to fight off the infection, even without ever being infected. So to suggest that unvaccinated people might gain some protection from the immunity of the vaccinated is simply nonsense.

As for Deltas ascendancy, yes, cases are rising in the UK and Israel, two highly vaccinated countries. Not that anyone would acknowledge a possible connection there: its all despite the vaccines, not because of them. But as the graph below shows, while cases there are up a lot, hospitalization and deaths are not over the past month. They barely register.

On January 20, the UK had 1,823 deaths. Today, they had 15.

I even enlarged the hospitalizations a bit, or you wouldnt see anything.

Hospitalizations have almost doubled, says The Atlantic. Yeah, but theyre still very low, as are deaths. And perhaps thats not all that surprising, because the Delta variant doesnt appear to be the big killer that everyone wants to close their borders and restaurants for again. Theres no conclusive evidence, its too early, but this is what we know today.

Rand Paul Cites 0.08% Delta Variant Death Rate Among Unvaccinated

Kentucky GOP Sen. Rand Paul is telling Twitter followers to not let the fearmongers win, amid growing concerns about the newest delta variant of the coronavirus. Paul, who is a doctor with a degree in medicine from Duke University, cited a study of the strain that shows only a 0.08% death rate among unvaccinated people. Dont let the fearmongers win. New public England study of delta variant shows 44 deaths out of 53,822 (.08%) in unvaccinated group. Hmmm, he tweeted Tuesday to his 3.2 million followers. The variant, which has caused virus outbreaks in Australia and other countries, has resulted in officials reimposing recently lifted health-safety orders including mask-wearing.

In another graph, the Delta variant Case Fatality Rate in the UK even appears 8 times higher among the fully vaccinated than the unvaccinated. Maybe the press should pay a little more attention to that, instead of the Great Big Delta Scare. All they do today is sell fear and vaccines, but that will backfire, promise.

And what goes for the press is also valid for politicians and their experts: there will come a day that people realize you could have focused on prophylactics and early treatment, but chose not to. And that this cost a lot of lives and other misery. What are you going to do then? Apologize?

Maybe its finally time for some real science, instead of clickbait and fear and gene therapy.

Pre-existing polymerase-specific T cells expand in abortive seronegative SARS-CoV-2 infection

Individuals with likely exposure to the highly infectious SARS-CoV-2do not necessarily develop PCR or antibody positivity, suggesting some may clear sub-clinical infection before seroconversion. T cells can contribute to the rapid clearance of SARS-CoV-2 and other coronavirus infections15 . We hypothesised that pre-existing memory T cell responses, with cross-protective potential against SARS-CoV-2612, would expand in vivo to mediate rapid viral control, potentially aborting infection.

We studied T cells against the replication transcription complex (RTC) of SARS-CoV-2 since this is transcribed first in the viral life cycle1315 and should be highly conserved. We measured SARS-CoV-2-reactive T cells in a cohort of intensively monitored healthcare workers (HCW) who remained repeatedly negative by PCR, antibody binding, and neutralisation for SARS-CoV-2 (exposed seronegative, ES).

16-weeks postrecruitment, ES had memory T cells that were stronger and more multispecific than an unexposed pre-pandemic cohort, and more frequently directed against the RTC than the structural protein-dominated responses seen post-detectable infection (matched concurrent cohort). The postulate that HCW with the strongest RTC-specific T cells had an abortive infection was supported by a low-level increase in IFI27 transcript, a robust early innate signature of SARS-CoV-2 infection16.

We showed that the RNA-polymerase within RTC was the largest region of high sequence conservation across human seasonal coronaviruses (HCoV) and was preferentially targeted by T cells from UK and Singapore pre-pandemic cohorts and from ES. RTC epitope-specific T cells capable of cross-recognising HCoV variants were identified in ES. Longitudinal samples from ES and an additional validation cohort, showed pre-existing RNA-polymerase-specific T cells expanded in vivo following SARS-CoV-2 exposure, becoming enriched in the memory response of those with abortive compared to overt infection. In summary, we provide evidence of abortive seronegative SARS-CoV-2 infection with expansion of cross-reactive RTC-specific T cells, highlighting these highly conserved proteins as targets for future vaccines against endemic and emerging Coronaviridae.

Reprinted with permission fromThe Automatic Earth.

Excerpt from:
The Great Big Delta Scare - LewRockwell

Its axiomatic that when you suddenly change the election rules and modus operandi, causing 65 million mail-in ballots (out of 159 million total) to flood unprepared local elections systems, you will get beaucoup irregularities, mistakes and fraud. To that extent, the impending Trumpite challenge when the Congress meets on Wednesday to certify the 2020 election results is spot on.

But at the end of the day, the challenge being mounted by Senator Hawley (R-Missouri) and the Cruz Eleven is both futile and mischievous. Thats because, thank heavens, American government is not organized into an all-powerful, centralized, unitary state like France, Red China or countless other authoritarian regimes in-between.

To the contrary, government in America remains decentralized and federalist, even if the founders design, culminating in the 10th Amendments reservation of unexpressed powers to the states, has been relentlessly chipped away since the New Deal. Indeed, when it comes to many aspects of day-to-day governance, such as on matters of public welfare or commerce, federalism has been drained of substance and the sovereign states have, regrettably, morphed into administrative appendages and fiscal supplicants of Washington.The Great Devaluation:...Baratta, AdamBuy New $25.00(as of 05:09 EDT - Details)

Yet notwithstanding that erosion, one originalist feature from the 1787 convention remains largely in tact: Namely, that the election of Federal officials congressman, senators and presidents is to be conducted by the states as seen fit by their sovereign legislatures.

And thats where the Trumpite challenge comes a cropper: No state has sent dueling slates of electors to the Congress, and no state legislature has petitioned the Congress asserting that its now certified tally of the presidential votes was the product of fraudulent or nefarious maneuvers.

Q.E.D. There is nothing to contest rooted in electoral Federalism because there are no state-based disputes pending before the new Congress. Thats essentially the position of solid libertarians like Congressman Thomas Massie. Hes dead-on correct and not just owing to Scaliaian regards for the Constitutions language and intent on the matter of Federal elections.

The far bigger issue is that there is really nothing more dangerous than the unitarianism implicit in the Trumpite challenge. Namely, the notion that a caucus of Washington pols can appoint themselves de facto commissioners of Federal elections and override state certified results that are not to their liking or partisan advantage even if they are able to proffer plausible evidence of state level irregularities.

For one thing, the nation has weathered prior episodes of state election irregularities and at the end of the day has not been worse for the wear. Clearly, in 1960 the Illinois Dems (led by Chicago Mayor Daley) stole the election for Kennedy, but in the great scheme of things we doubt whether Tricky Dick Nixon would have behaved any better had he won the first time.

Likewise, Bush the Younger may have won Ohios 20 electoral votes in 2004 due to local GOP chicanery. But had it gone the other way, a 271 to 266 win by John Kerry might have resulted in a much earlier end to the Bush Wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Notwithstanding the limited gray matter under the latters great shock of dark hair, Lt. John Kerry saw the evil of Americas imperial wars first hand in Vietnam and was far more inclined to stop the pointless shedding of blood and treasure in those woebegone theaters than weekend-warrior national guardsmen, George W. Bush.The Last Gold Rushu202...Haynes, BillBuy New $28.00(as of 04:04 EDT - Details)

This time there is even less difference at stake. The Donald would surely bankrupt the nation by 2024, perhaps only a tad latter than is likely to be the case under Sleepy Joe and/or the Kamala Harris Regency, as the case may be.

But which claimant to the Oval Office will do the most damage in the next four years is not the real issue. The cardinal matter is that the Washington-based Democrat party is now intellectually and politically bankrupt. It has absolutely nothing to offer the American electorate except Woke virtue-signaling and collectivist rhetoric about the lie that America needs a unifer and that we are all in this together against a handful of billionaires, except for (most of) those who support the Dem agenda.

Consequently, the Dems real national agenda is brazenly this: Everything For More Democrat Votes. Period.

Their self-righteously proclaimed positions on open immigration, more beneficent welfare programs, the $15 minimum wage, Federal legislation against so-called voter suppression, statehood for DC and Puerto Rico, prison reform, Federal subventions to the nations decaying big cities etc. are all designed to round up more Dem votes and thereby keep todays mendacious class of Dem pols in power.

For crying out loud, these people are so craven that they speciously claim that requiring voters to present an ID is burdensome and discriminatory. In fact, if people are too incompetent to get an ID, their failure to vote is their own damn fault and leaves American democracy no worse for the wear.

Accordingly, there could be nothing more untoward than GOP sanctioning of Washington control of the elections for Federal office. That would open the floodgates to legislative artifice and lawfare maneuver in the courts designed to make voter harvesting of one kind or another easier and more fruitful for the Dem apparatus in the socially and economically dispossessed precincts of the nation.The New Great Depressi...Rickards, JamesBuy New $20.99(as of 04:29 EST - Details)

Meanwhile, what was actually being stolen in the recent past is not a few hundred-thousand votes in a handful of swing states that are the object of the futile Trumpite challenge.

At the end of the day, those legitimately dubious votes dont begin to ixnay the elections larger verdict: Namely, that Trump was such a lousy, self-obsessed candidate and the GOPs agenda was so me too Big government that Sleepy Joe Biden, who barely left his basement bunker, massively won the popular vote by 81.28 million to 74.22 million. Even street-fighter Sidney Powell has not claimed voter fraud of anything close to that huge 7.0 million popular vote margin, the second largest plurality in American history.

So what matters now is whether control of the GOP can be wrested from the careerist pols and neocon empire advocates who dominate the so-called conservative party today. Thats because what has actually been stolen in recent months and years is trillions of dollars from future taxpayers to fund that bipartisan fiscal bacchanalia fostered by the Trumpite-GOP; and also the tens of trillions of windfall gains to the top 1.0% and 0.1% that have been pilfered from the main street economy owing to the Feds hideously unhinged money-pumping.

Consequently, unless the likes of Rand Paul can mobilize a new coalition of liberty-seeking young people, antiwar believers of all generations and adult citizens who can be made to see that capitalist prosperity and future opportunities for individual betterment are being quashed by a rogue central bank, the Real Steal will go on until it ends in fiscal and economic catastrophe.

In that respect, we find it telling that noisy Trumpites like Senator Hawley, who has already effectively thrown his hat in the ring for 2024, dont have a clue about the Real Steal. For crying out loud, this brash populist know-nothing joined forces with Bernie Sanders in pushing the $2,000 helicopter drop of free stuff to everyone, and is so blindly and rabidly anti-Chinese that the neocon war machine could have ordered him from central casting.

By contrast, what Rand Paul and a few others understand, it that the motor force of the Real Steal lies in the upwardly soaring purple line in the chart below. Thats the Feds out-of-control balance sheet, which has grown by 10X just in the last 18 years.

Simply stated, there is no possible world in which sound fiscal governance and productive financial markets can function when the central bank is massively and systematically poisoning the system with falsified asset prices and overpowering inducements for debt accumulation and speculation in the public and private sectors alike.

The Feds Out-of-Control Balance Sheet, 2003-2021

As we have frequently noted, this central bank enabled distortion of fiscal and financial choice has been building for decades, ever since Alan Greenspan panicked during the overdue and healthy purge of the stock market on Black Monday during October 1987.

But by now the unproductive explosion of debt in all sectors of the U.S. economy government, corporate, household and financial has reached epic proportions. Since Q2 1987

This is the heart of the Real Steal. Owing to rotten money, the nation has gone mad burying itself in debt stealing from the future in order to live high on the hog today.

Total Debt Vs. GDP, 1987-2020

The problem is that under the baleful regime of Keynesian central banking, like in Orwells Animal Farm, all of todays high living hogs are not treated equal. On the margin, the overwhelming impact of runaway public and private debt has been the fantastic inflation of financial assets.Say Yes to No Debt: 12...Soaries Jr., DeForest BBest Price: $1.70Buy New $10.44(as of 04:29 EST - Details)

As the estimable Lance Roberts showed this morning, stock prices and earnings grew pretty much in tandem until 1987, as would be inherently the case under a sound money regime. Since then, however, the Feds uncontrolled money-printing has caused the mother of all financial distortions. To wit, since mid-1987

So, yes, there is a reason that Sleepy Joe won. The GOP has not had enough sense to understand that the Fed is the root of todays economic failure in Flyover America so the voters signed up for an old dufus and 47-year pol who still had enough wits about him to tilt at the baleful consequences of the nations rogue central bank.

PEAK TRUMP, IMPENDING CRISES, ESSENTIAL INFO & ACTION

Reprinted with permission fromDavid Stockmans Contra Corner.

The Best of David Stockman

Read this article:
Stop the Real Steal! - LewRockwell

Im a big fan of Ron Paul. I supported him in 2008 and 2012. For this reason, I really tried to like Rand Paul, but he makes it hard. I still have some residual sympathy for Rand, so I really want to help him out even though I wont be voting for him. Once he drops out, I plan to do a post-mortem on his campaign, because I really think Rand and his supporters need to hear some hard truths from someone associated with the liberty movement who isnt one of the libertarian cool kids This is not that post-mortem, but consider it a preview.

Since Rand has slipped in the polls, he seems to have decided that he should take on the role of conservative orthodoxy enforcer. I dont know if he was advised to do this or if he took on the role himself, but it is a role he is very ill suited for, and it isnt going to help him.

First of all, the role of orthodoxy enforcer is best suited for an ideological or message candidate who actually isnt in it to win it. This is a role Rand could have taken. It is the role, in my opinion, that he should have taken. He could have run as the slightly less dogmatic version of his father, with the point of carrying on the banner, especially on foreign policy, and keeping the movement together and energized. But Rand, likely bolstered by early poll numbers and some flattering press, deliberately chose not to run that type of campaign, so now the conservative orthodoxy enforcer role seems desperate and contrived.

Second, the role of conservative orthodoxy enforcer might also be suited for someone with a plausible shot at the nomination (meaning not just a message candidate), but who more clearly represents the more conservative by degree niche, which in this race would be Ted Cruz. One problem with Rand acting as conservative orthodoxy enforcer is that he is himself viewed with suspicion by many conservatives. Dont get me wrong, on the issues such as foreign policy and government surveillance where Rand might be viewed suspiciously, I side with Rand rather than most of the more conservative by degree crowd, but that doesnt change the fact that this suspicion makes Rand a poor messenger for the Candidate X is not conservative enough strategy. Note also, that Ted Cruz, who is better suited for the role, has very wisely chosen not to play the more conservative than thou card against Trump.

Third, early in the campaign my social network feed, peopled as it is with many liberty movement types, was filled with denunciations of Rand from more plumb line libertarians, excoriating him for deviating too much from libertarian orthodoxy and for tarnishing his fathers legacy. These were inevitably followed by more pragmatic supporters of Rand pleading with Rands critics to put aside their orthodoxy for the sake of political expediency. Regardless of what side you come down on in that debate, it is a bit clangy for a candidate who has been routinely criticized by some of his potential base for wandering off the ranch, to then turn around and question the orthodoxy of other candidates from a niche he doesnt exactly fit in himself.

So why is Rands campaign struggling despite what many believed to be a promising start, such that now he feels the need to play conservative attack dog? I think the most obvious answer is the entrance into the race of Donald Trump. If you look at where the candidates started in the polls and where they are now, you could argue that only Jeb Bush has been hurt more by Trump than Rand. Trump has clearly sucked up most of the energy of the angry anti-Establishment crowd. Since Trump is far from a libertarian, many libertarian activists dont want to believe this. They wonder how anyone who might have supported Rand could support Trump, but most voters, unlike political hobbyists like us who debate these things on the internet, are not precision ideologues. They may have certain issues they are invested in like guns or abortion, but they are not necessarily ideological box checkers. Much of what determines who they support is visceral and gestalt.

In 2011 Donald Trump gave a speech at CPAC where he made a comment critical of Ron Paul. He did not criticize Ron Paul preemptively, but responded to chants of Ron Pauls name from his supporters in the audience. He said Ron Paul cannot get elected, Im sorry to tell you. This little exchanged caused howls of outrage from Ron Pauls admirably defensive supporters, but I advised at the time within my own Ron Paul circles that we should take it easy on Trump because there was potentially a lot of overlap between the respective bases. Again, this contention was greeted incredulously by many Paul supporters, but I was aware of Trumps populist leanings and past flirtation with the Reform Party. Despite what many would like to believe, not all of Ron Pauls supporters were libertarians or even Constitutionalists. Many were populist anti-Establishment types who were simply mad as Hell and not going to take it anymore, and Ron Paul was the candidate that best communicated their discontent. I believe the direction of the campaign season so far vindicates my contention of overlapping bases.

So what should Rand Paul do instead of playing conservative attack dog? He simply needs to be himself. He needs to make the case for the policies he supports in a straightforward manner. Not everyone is going to agree with him, but voters do sense and respect authenticity. No number of appearances in a red checked flannel shirt was ever going to make voters believe Lamar Alexander was a man of the people rather than the Establishment pol that he was. Likewise, no amount of role playing by Rand is going to make him into a more authentic version of Ted Cruz. He is what he is, his daddys son who toned it down a bit to win a Senate seat.

Also, Rand needs to learn from the Donald Trump phenomenon, rather than flail at it. There is a real groundswell of angry, anti-Establishment, populist sentiment among the Republican electorate. There are ways for libertarians to tap into this without endorsing government economic activism. Denounce crony capitalism. Denounce corporate welfare. Denounce big money vote buying. Denounce Federal Reserve interest rate manipulation. Denounce phony free trade deals. That field is ripe for harvest, but petulant finger wagging at Trump and his supporters for ideological deviations is not going to win over many Republican primary voters.

The Best of Dan Phillips, MD.

Excerpt from:
A Better Strategy for Rand Paul - LewRockwell

Lying Leftists at AOL

An AOL headline today is about how Senator Rand Paul said that he is not taking the jab because hes had the disease and has natural immunity. The AOL headline declares that this is unscientific while pointing out that Rand Paul is a doctor by trade, like his father.

Well, if you just go on the CDC Web site and find the entry for natural immunity you will find that it says exactly what Rand Paul said the opposite of what the lying skunks at AOL are saying. It says that your body creates antibodies once you are infected and that they may last a lifetime. Get the measles, says the CDC, and you body will create antibodies that may very well protect you from measles but not other illnesses for the rest of your life.

In addition to being the paid political whores of the Demo-Bolshevik party, AOL and all the rest are also corrupt puppets of the pharmaceutical industry and its government sponsors.

The Best of Thomas DiLorenzo

Follow this link:
Lying Leftists at AOL - LRC Blog - LewRockwell