My letter to the editor re: Resolution 237-09

[Rob Tucker]

I have spoken to Will Hoover the author of the October 14th Adertiser article referred to as a basis for fears about National Guard enforcing a mandatory vaccination program.

At his request the Advertiser has provided a link to the original story here:

http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/articl...40325.html

The word mandatory does not occur.

The word consent does.

The use of the National Guard on a island wide voluntary vaccination program appears to be based factually on the fact that the Guard has medial staff, doctors and nurses, trained to provide medical care.

I have to run. I may add a bit more here later.



Assume the best and ask questions.

Punaweb moderator

[Bob Orts]

quote:

---

Originally posted by 808blogger

OFFTOPIC better start that slashing!

---

Translation: It contradicted what was being said so, Whaaa whaaa, mommy - make him go away....

quote:

---

Originally posted by 808blogger

that is not enumeration that is judicial legislation and opinion

---

The United States Supreme Court is the FINAL interpreter of the US Constitution. Their rulings is under law the meaning of the US Constitution. They said you are wrong. You may not like the ruling. You may wish it was never made. You may disagree. But that is what the highest court of our country said it means.

[808blogger]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bob Orts

quote:

---

Originally posted by 808blogger

OFFTOPIC better start that slashing!

---

Translation: It contradicted what was being said so, Whaaa whaaa, mommy - make him go away....

LOL that was a Sarcastic remark. too bad the internet doesnt have a <SARCASM> Tag

quote:

---

Originally posted by 808blogger

that is not enumeration that is judicial legislation and opinion

---

The United States Supreme Court is the FINAL interpreter of the US Constitution. Their rulings is under law the meaning of the US Constitution. They said you are wrong. You may not like the ruling. You may wish it was never made. You may disagree. But that is what the highest court of our country said it means.

---

if you read history that was not and is not the purpose of the supreme court, in many of the framers opinion. Now we really are going off topic. Leave it at this, I know your type and I am sure you know mine We are all free sovereign individuals, you can choose to join in the party or abstain. I abstain, and choose freedom thanks.

[Rob Tucker]

I believe that what we in Puna are experiencing regarding the debate on mandatory vaccination theories is related to the following from Wikipedia...

Confirmation bias
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

Confirmation bias (or myside bias[1]) is a tendency for people to confirm their preconceptions or hypotheses, independently of whether or not they are true. People can reinforce their existing attitudes by selectively collecting new evidence, by interpreting evidence in a biased way or by selectively recalling information from memory.[2] Some psychologists use "confirmation bias" for any of these three cognitive biases, while others restrict the term to selective collection of evidence, using assimilation bias for biased interpretation.[3]

People tend to test hypotheses in a one-sided way, focusing on one possibility and neglecting alternatives.[2][4] This strategy is not necessarily a bias, but combined with other effects it can reinforce existing beliefs.[5][2] The biases appear in particular for issues that are emotionally significant (including some personal and political topics) and for established beliefs that shape the individual's expectations.[2][6][7] Biased search, interpretation and/or recall have been invoked to explain attitude polarization (when a disagreement becomes more extreme as the different parties are exposed to the same evidence), belief perseverance (when beliefs remain after the evidence for them is taken away)[8], the irrational primacy effect (a stronger weighting for data encountered early in an arbitrary series)[9] and illusory correlation (in which people falsely perceive an association between two events).[10]

Confirmation biases are errors in information processing, as opposed to the behavioral confirmation effect (also called self-fulfilling prophecy), in which people's expectations influence their own behavior.[11] They can lead to disastrous decisions, especially in organizational, military and political contexts.[12][13] Confirmation biases contribute to overconfidence in personal beliefs.[7]

Assume the best and ask questions.

Punaweb moderator

[808blogger]

I want to be 100% clear on my point. I KNOW that there are NOT MANDATORY vaccinations. However I do think that it is to the benefit of the people that the localities make it clear that they are opposed to that sort of thing ever occuring. It is not beyond the State or the Feds from implementing such a program as is being described and even defended in other posts. The US is not superior nor exceptional, we need to realize that the rules apply us as well.

[rasman]

No one is saying that any mandate has been made, at least I'm not.
What I am saying is that the measures to do so and to forcibly enforce such measures has been well planned for and contemplated by our government. Shouldn't "we the people" be planning and contemplating our response to such an event? It just seems like common sense to protect ourselves for the road ahead.

www.naccho.org/.../infrastructure/PHLaw/upload/Microsoft-Word-FINAL-Public-Health-Emergency-Law-FAQ.pdf - 2009-09-24

or go to naccho.org and type in search: public health emergency FAQ

[808blogger]

<SARCASM>
Oh go put your tin foil hat back on, the government loves its population and only wants the best for us. We vote for them after all!
</SARCASM>

we should be ready, and we should be aware,

But people watch too much TV and have been dumbed down.

[PaulW]

"However I do think that it is to the benefit of the people that the localities make it clear that they are opposed to that sort of thing ever occuring."

There are so many things the government could do, I think it's more time-cost-effective to wait for them to actually try doing something dumb first. Have you seen signs that they're considering mandatory vaccinations? They're completely impractical and I struggle to see what possible benefit they could have for the government.

Are you intending to march on the State Capitol with a sign reading "No Mandatory Vaccinations"? What will you do when they tell you that there are no mandatory vaccinations?

[808blogger]

That is a rational argument. I agree with you. I actually sort of feel 50/50 on this issue. As a libertarian (not party just thinker) I think the government should shut up and get out of the way and leave me alone, however in this system that we are now running under, I do enjoy see localities (like the county council) taking strong freedom loving positions, especially in the current weird world we are living in.

digressing, you are totally valid in that argument, factual and logical.

[mdd7000]

I agree with your points, but you did move to the land of socialism and liberalism. Some of us are in the minority here. Less taxes, less government intervention, and let the economy prosper like it would if that actually happened.