Friday, October 1, 2021

Biden’s ‘Build Back Better’ B.S.

America has a massive infrastructure problem. 
The Democrats would exchange new pipes for progressive pipe dreams.


The winding road to American utopia is dotted with potholes, buckling bridges, leaking canals, and lit by flickering lights. To repave America’s highways, shore up her bridges, repair her waterways, and reinforce her power grid, the Democrats’ left-wing insists Congress must first pass a $3.5 trillion bill to fund the federal government and remake large swaths of society along the way. 

So the $1 trillion bipartisan infrastructure bill, first scheduled for a vote in the House of Representatives on Monday, then punted to Thursday, might not get a vote before the weekend as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) redoubles her efforts to wrangle her fractious caucus into supporting the whole stinking mess.

What’s the problem? The politics are stupid, and mainly involve intramural disagreements among Democrats, but they might be summarized thus: the House Progressive Caucus vows to vote against the infrastructure bill unless they get the full $3.5 trillion reconciliation budget bill, which is chock full of their pricey policy priorities (including—please don’t mention this—a few that Donald Trump had tried to advance with limited success). 

But “moderate” Democrats, including Senators Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.), object to the size and scope of the bill. In a word, it adds too much debt. Pass the infrastructure bill first, Manchin said Wednesday, then let’s “start negotiating in good faith.” 

Taken together, Congress would spend $3.5 trillion (in fact, the number is probably somewhere between $4.3 trillion and $5.5 trillion) to fund Joe Biden’s “Build Back Better” agenda, a progressive wish list that portends higher taxes on everyone, not just the rich, in exchange for expanded government-funded healthcare, education, and “climate mitigation” programs that would lay the groundwork for a Green New Deal.

It’s all very ambitious and controversial, which is why Biden has had to resort to transparent lies to fluff public opinion. 

In a play so mendacious only a Washington Post columnist could believe it, Biden on Saturday tweeted that his “Build Back Better Agenda costs zero dollars,” adding: “Instead of wasting money on tax breaks, loopholes, and tax evasion for big corporations and the wealthy, we can make a once-in-a-generation investment in working America.”

Oh, and it won’t add anything to the national debt, Biden assures. (Not true.) As long as everyone pretends the tax revenue estimates are real and massive increases in social spending are hazard-free, the road to utopia is flat, straight, and without a speedbump in sight.

Right. 

A Proper Infrastructure Bill 

Regardless of the fate of Biden’s “Build Back Better” B.S., America really does need more infrastructure spending. A lot more. And as incredible as this may sound, the $1 trillion infrastructure plan arguably doesn’t go far enough, while at the same time squandering hundreds of millions of dollars on the wrong things. 

The compromise legislation shifted much of the silly “human infrastructure” stuff that the administration wanted initially to the bigger $3.5 trillion budget bill. What’s left is $550 billion in new spending on roads, highways, tunnels, bridges, dams, water and power, and transit over the next decade.

As a rule, bipartisanship is a sucker’s game. But infrastructure might be the rare and glaring exception to that rule. Since the very earliest days of the country, farsighted statesmen have recognized that prudent investment in essential infrastructure—“internal improvements” such as roads, waterways, and eventually rail—was essential for national prosperity. 

In that sense, Trump was right to make infrastructure a centerpiece of his 2016 campaign. His “plan”—more of a broadly drawn list of aspirations, really—resembled what Congress is debating now. (The main difference was that Trump wanted more private investment in public projects, which Democrats have tended to shun.) 

And it, too, didn’t go nearly far enough. 

The United States has a bona fide need for roughly $2.6 trillion in infrastructure repairs, upgrades, and expansion over the next decade, according to the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE). Surface transportation alone—mostly roads—accounts for about half of the expense.  

The figure is massive but unsurprising. A nation of 350 million is making due—to name just one problem—with a highway system built for a country with roughly two-thirds of the current population. Some major cities, such as New York and Los Angeles, are getting by with waterworks that are a century old in places. It’s a slow-motion catastrophe born of misplaced priorities and sometimes malign neglect, as politicians have raided infrastructure funds to pay for pet projects. 

The result? Examples are too numerous to list, but here’s one from my own backyard: Residents of the Los Angeles district of Westwood near UCLA awoke early one morning in August 2020 to the sound of roaring floodwaters and crashing trees after a 30-inch water main ruptured beneath Sunset Boulevard. Some people may have been caught off guard, but the L.A. Department of Water and Power couldn’t have been too surprised. After all, the same thing happened six years earlier a mile or so down the street. The only difference was the time of day. 

In short, these are not “bridges to nowhere” or government make-work jobs we’re discussing. These are real projects for real needs. We’re talking about everything from repaving thousands of miles of the federal highway system and upgrading our antiquated air traffic control system to reinforcing aging dams and levees and weatherizing power lines. The longer we wait, the more it will cost, not only in tax dollars but lost productivity and stunted economic growth. 

And unlike certain government transfer programs, infrastructure spending has real multiplier effects. Infrastructure projects create jobs, obviously—anywhere from 6 million to 13 million, depending on the study. But they also have secondary and tertiary economic effects, which lead in turn to innovation, greater profits, and necessarily greater tax revenues.

Better infrastructure, in short, makes for a great America. 

A certain breed of progressive once understood this. The Democrats’ current infrastructure plan provides for a fraction of what the country actually needs. In lieu of new pipes, it appears they’re prepared to settle for pipe dreams.


X22, Red Pill news, and more-Oct 1st


Can you believe that in a few days, it'll officially be 2 months since I started posting articles on here?! Man, time sure flies by! :) Here's tonight's news:

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/09/cringe-stephen-colbert-reduced-dancing-like-fool-big-pharma-effort-convince-people-get-vaxxed-video/

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/10/tgps-jim-hoft-destroys-msm-lies-surrounding-vaccines-metoo-election-audit-infowars-video/

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/10/now-delaware-10-2020-election-results-audited-20000-invalid-suspect-ballots-identified-biden-may-lost-home-state/

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/10/deblasios-new-york-city-business-40-60-percent-due-vaccine-mandates/



 

The Arson Strategy of the Biden Administration

Democrats set one fire and before the American people can react, put it out, or demand accountability, this arsonist administration sets a new fire.


The Biden Administration is arguably the most overtly, unapologetically corrupt and scandal-ridden in American history. It’s unprecedented. Richard Nixon was forced to resign over far less—Watergate. Ronald Reagan was politically damaged in his second term by the Iran-Contra scandal. And George H. W. Bush arguably lost reelection for reneging on his famous promise, “Read my lips: no new taxes.” They were all Republicans.

But even Bill Clinton and Barack Obama attempted to conceal their scandals and radicalism—compared to the Biden Administration, which has yet to “face the music” for a single thing. Clinton was impeached (but not removed) for committing perjury and obstruction of justice. Even Van Jones, Obama’s “green jobs czar” was forced to resign after a video surfaced of Jones describing Republicans as “assholes.” 

While Clinton survived impeachment and Obama got away with much worse—“Fast and Furious,” IRS targeting Tea Party groups, and the bogus Benghazi spin, for example—neither administrations’ scandals were as fast, furious, or constant as those exhibited by the Biden Administration. The Biden Administration, unlike any before, has managed to transform its scandals into an effective strategy—intentionally engaging in them in order to overwhelm the American people and escape accountability. 

The Biden Administration is the arsonist administration—setting one fire after another to render the American people frozen, indecisive, and overwhelmed. Let’s just look at the revelations of the last month.

Less than 48 hours after a deadly suicide bombing outside the Kabul airport left 13 American service members dead, the Biden Administration authorized a drone strike in retaliation against two “high-profile” ISIS-K members and wounded a third. Well, at least that’s what we were told.

“They were ISIS-K planners and facilitators,” Pentagon Press Secretary John Kirby announced. Yet Kirby refused during the August 28 press conference to release the names of the ISIS-K planners “killed.” In the same press conference, Major General Hank Taylor emphatically declared, “we know of zero civilian casualties.”

The retaliatory strike came just as Biden was drowning in failure, facing increasing pressure from the media and the American people to explain his administration’s undeniable and inexplicable failures in withdrawing from Afghanistan—a move that left $85 billion in U.S. arms and equipment in the hands of the Taliban, as well as countless American citizens turned hostages. The horrific murder of the 13 American servicemembers in Kabul only solidified Biden’s standing as one of the worst presidents in American history.

But despite it all, Biden was determined to give a self-congratulatory speech on August 31, announcing that he had successfully ended the “war” in Afghanistan. In light of his abject failures, he needed something concrete to celebrate—to distract and deflect from his inexplicable, irrational, and unjustifiable decisions. In his August 31 speech, Biden proudly declared, “We struck ISIS-K remotely, days after they murdered 13 of our service members and dozens of innocent Afghans. And to ISIS-K: We are not done with you yet.”

But Biden lied, as did Kirby and Taylor. Not only did the drone attack not kill two “high profile” ISIS-K planners and facilitators, it killed 10 innocent Afghan civilians, including seven children. 

Nearly a month later, on September 17, the Pentagon was forced to admit to killing 10 Afghan civilians, calling it a “tragic outcome.” But they only admitted it because New York Times reporter Evan Hill reported the story on September 10. Biden murdered 10 innocent Afghan civilians, including seven children, and then lied about it so that he could claim success.

But conveniently, just as this scandal broke, it was quickly replaced with a new scandal.

On September 14, four days after the Times broke the story of the murdered Afghan civilians, news broke that General Mark Milley had potentially committed treason. According to Peril, by Bob Woodward and Robert Costa, Milley told Chinese General Li Zuocheng in a private phone call in October 2020 that he would warn China in the event of any likely U.S. attack. But before the American people could digest the severity of Milley’s unprecedented act, yet another scandal broke.

On September 18, just four days after the Milley scandal dominated the news cycle, some 17,000 Haitian migrants (maybe more) had gathered at the border in Del Rio, Texas. The Milley scandal was quickly replaced by the shocking images of a crowded migrant encampment of Haitians. In less than a month, the media had leapfrogged over two massive scandals to highlight the now-inescapable crisis at the border. 

The Biden Administration, colluding with their Democratic propagandists in the media, are acting as professional arsonists. They set one fire and before the American people can react, put it out, or demand accountability, this arsonist administration sets a new fire. 

The upshot is an overwhelmed citizenry that watches nearly frozen—incapable of any action or strategy to put out the flames. Just as one fire burns, another begins. We are quickly becoming a nation engulfed in flames, surrounded, with no chance of fighting. 

While we are rightly focused on the latest reminder of our open borders and unfettered illegal immigration, Americans remain trapped in Afghanistan, innocent Americans and Afghan civilians are dead, and General Milley has yet to face the music for his treason. 

But these previous scandals are a distant memory. Soon, too, will be the Haitian encampment. The Democrats will do something else atrocious, criminal, and scandalous and before the new fire is contained, another will be ignited. 


General Mark Milley’s Sketchy Intelligence on China Fears Likely Came From Twitter and New York Times


CTH has discovered what we believe will turn out to be the currently classified “intelligence product” that Joint Chief’s Chairman Mark Milley has been claiming as justification for his unilateral phone call with the Chinese military to discuss their concerns.  {Background One -and- Background Two}   I am 80% certain we have located that intelligence product, and you ain’t gonna believe where it was from.

Yesterday, congressman Mike Turner of Ohio noted that no one in the entire system of intelligence and oversight had any idea what intelligence product Mark Milley was describing in his two days of testimony.  Former Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe said Wednesday, in response to the claims of Milley, that no such intelligence product ever existed.   Congressman Turner, who sits on the House Intel Committee (HPSCI) and the House Armed Services Committee, confirmed the same.

Congressman Turner has demanded that General Milley turn over this mysterious, secret, oddly untraceable intelligence product that Milley alone has seen.  WATCH:


Mike Turner (video 02:30): “Now, you claim that you had information, and it’s all over that China was worried about an imminent attack. You did not tell the president, the vice president, the White House chief of staff, the national security adviser, the secretary of defense, the secretary of state, the director of national intelligence, either of the relevant committees in the House, including the big eight, which you know include Intel.

You didn’t tell the Intelligence Committee. You didn’t tell the Armed Services Committee. You report that after you took it upon yourself to have this phone conversation, that you told them of the conversation heard not that China believed that we were going to imminently attack them, which by the way, has never been true in my lifetime.”

“But you chose instead to handle it yourself with a phone call. So, General Milley, you offered all of the concerning intelligence, and I’m going to request that you provide it to us. I would like you to provide us the relevant intelligence information that you based your belief that China was going to — the belief that there was an imminent attack.

I also want your request for declassification of the approval that you release that information that China believed so, including your request for declassification of your conversation that you had with General Li and any approvals. I want a transcript of your call with General Li, and I also want any readouts, memorandums, notice of calls, or outcomes.”

Congressman Turner wants to see the magic intelligence that no one else has seen except General Milley.

Keep in mind, Milley has described this “intelligence product” as originating in September and October of 2020.  As Milley said in both days of his testimony: “Concerning intelligence, which caused us to believe the Chinese were worried about an attack on them by the United States.”  Milley then organized a call to the Chinese on October 30, 2020, based on this intelligence.

The most likely source of that Milley/China intelligence is: from TWITTER and from The New York Times

(Source Link)

New York Times – […] The propaganda has accompanied a series of military drills in recent weeks, including the test-firing of ballistic missiles and the buzzing of Taiwan’s airspace. Together, they are intended to draw stark red lines for the United States, signaling that China would not shrink from a military clash.

While the prospect of war remains remote, the militaristic tone reflects the hawkishness of the country’s leader, Xi Jinping. The risk is that the propaganda could translate into more provocative actions, at a time when the relationship with the United States has sharply deteriorated. The recent military moves in the South China Sea and the Taiwan Strait raise the possibility of actual clashes, intended or not.

In Washington, President Trump’s hospitalization for treatment of Covid-19 has overshadowed everything else, creating the impression that his administration is in chaos and raising fears of a decision-making void. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo cut short his trip to Asia this week, although he is expected to push for confronting China when he meets in Tokyo with his counterparts from Australia, India and Japan. (read more)

There it is folks….  In October of 2020 President Trump was battling COVID-19, and the opportunity arose with a distracted nation for the Fourth Branch of Government to insert a narrative using General Mark Milley to fulfill their intents and purposes.

I can almost guarantee to a certainty this is what Congressman Mike Turner (R-OH) will discover when he forces General Milley to show him the intelligence.

Keep in mind, the circular process of intelligence officials (1) leaking to/influencing media; (2) building a narrative; and then (3) using those same media reports as evidence to support their claims, is exactly the process we have seen play out over the past five years within the Trump-Russia hoax.   The China-Fear-of-Attack hoax was simply a deployment of the same playbook.

Lastly, it is also important to keep in mind the Pentagon mistake of the Predator Drone strike against innocent civilians near the Kabul airport was also based on flawed intelligence from the same origination sources.

Again, a strong likelihood the overarching intelligence apparatus was attempting to deflect attention from their own failures in Afghanistan by putting the Pentagon in the central spotlight by manipulating an attack as a blame-casting maneuver. [Team1, State Dept/Intel Community -vs- Team2, White House/Pentagon]

The purposefully false drone hit, is bolstered by the same IC (Team1) then giving the New York Times the evidence to showcase the attack was a mistake by Team2.  The Fourth Branch of Government knows how to manipulate outcomes for their own intents and purposes. {Go Deep}


There Really Are Two Different Americas — Fear vs. Freedom


Nick Arama reporting for RedState

There really are two different Americas.

You can see them in this ad, paid for by folks who want to remove Florida Governor Ron DeSantis. It’s actually pretty hilarious that they spent money on this, but have no idea how it plays for people.

There are the folks behind this ad, who pitch fear for power, who would watch and feel threatened beyond all reason by DeSantis saying that “We trust people to make their own decisions in this state, we’re not going to be bludgeoning people” and fearful that people aren’t having more “rules” imposed upon them. Oh, no! Only the government can save you; you’re not capable of making your own decisions. Just listen to the scary music.

Then there are the folks who would find the ad funny and think that it really seems like an ad for DeSantis, because the dark dystopian visuals don’t seem to be with him but with the people against him. “If you’re trying to lock people down,” DeSantis says, “I’m going to stand in your way.” If I lived in Florida, this ad would make me want to vote for DeSantis more.

Ultimately, the funniest part is that if Florida were such a dystopian mess, then why are all those people on the plane flying to Florida? Indeed, it seems more like they’re flying out of other areas to freedom in Florida. As National Review writer Charles Cooke observes, you know that they’re all going to jump off the plane and run over to Universal.

The ad even appears to mock the press who are usually their buddies, calling them things like “The Miami End Times Tribune” and “The Pensacola Pandemic Press.”

Now, the bottom line here is DeSantis has issues with the government ordering mandates. Because — shocker — he believes whether you get the jab is between you and your doctor. But when the Biden administration cut the supply on the monoclonal antibody treatment to Florida (because they care so much, and it wasn’t at all political), it was DeSantis who came through for his state, getting additional supply to help the people in his state. Who was standing for Florida? Hint: not Joe Biden.

Moreover, Florida is hardly the dystopian vision that the ad would like to present, in any sense of the word, including from a vaccine point of view.

As of couple of days ago, Florida was second in number of doses given and fourth in number of people who were fully vaccinated, with 12.3 million.

So, despite not believing in forcing things down people’s throats, they have a lot of folks vaccinated. Funny how giving people a choice works.

Maybe DeSantis should engage these ad folks for his campaign — because they surely are doing a good job pointing out a variety of reasons why people should vote for him.


How the West Adopted China-Style Lockdowns

 How the West Adopted China-Style Lockdowns

Prior to the global pandemic caused by SARS-CoV-2 or covid-19, many looked to the United States as a beacon of freedom and liberty. When viewed in comparison to the harsh realities of the world, this may seem rather true. After all, one’s perception of freedom and liberty is skewed by perspective. In recent weeks, the Biden administration has escalated its increasingly authoritarian approach to “managing” the threat of the virus. Even President Biden himself stated that safety takes precedence over freedom. Examples of the Biden administration’s overreach include: its extension of the eviction moratorium through the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, vaccine mandates through the Department of Labor, and its investigations into states that refuse to adhere to the federal government’s preferred public health guidelines.

Over the past eighteen months, countless commentators have declared that the pandemic should be treated akin to warfare, often using military analogies. During a prior pandemic, the nation’s predominant civil liberties defender, the American Civil Liberties Union, released a report that warned of the government imposing national security measures to clamp down on an “invisible enemy.” An ACLU report from 2008 stated the following: “Coercion and brute force are rarely necessary. In fact they are generally counterproductive—they gratuitously breed public distrust and encourage the people who are most in need of care to evade public health authorities.” The past eighteen months have demonstrated that the public health institutions view their role as part and parcel of the nation’s broader national security apparatus.

As if the ACLU had predicted the government’s response to covid-19, their report notes the following: “Too often, policymakers are resorting to law enforcement and national security–oriented measures that not only suppress individual rights unnecessarily, but have proven to be ineffective in stopping the spread of disease and saving lives.” During the early stages of the pandemic, governors of all political persuasions instituted similar shutdown measures throughout their respective states. After a period of weeks, conservative-leaning governors slowly withdrew these executive edicts as more was learned about the transmissibility and lethality of the threat. Progressive-leaning governors have been more reluctant to withdraw these executive edicts.

As vaccines became widely available, individuals across the country slowly warmed to the idea of lifting the covid-19 mitigation measures. Some progressive-leaning American cities like New York City, San Francisco, and New Orleans have chosen to do so while introducing a digital health pass, often referred to as a vaccination passport. Other cities have been more skeptical of this concept; the mayor of Boston, Kim Janey, compared the concept to the slavery-era freedom papers.

The vaccination passport was only an abstract idea in the early days of the mass vaccination campaign. The urban elite and the managerial class have fully endorsed the idea of requiring vaccination or proof of a negative covid test to participate in daily life. It is unlikely that the vaccination passport will ever be fully adopted by the United States government as policy. It is also unclear what is the end goal of our covid-19 containment policy. The conflicting public health messaging has led to fears of a “permanent pandemic,” whereby emergency powers are invoked indefinitely.

The Vaccine Passport Idea Grows

Along with much of the global establishment—e.g., the World Health Organization—in November 2020, Chinese president Xi Jinping endorseda concept similar to the vaccination passport: “a global mechanism on the mutual recognition of health certificates based on nucleic acid test results in the form of Internationally accepted QR codes.” While President Xi’s idea is related explicitly to a negative covid test versus proof of vaccination, the underlying concept of “showing your papers” remains. Other regimes soon pushed similar ideas. 

Similarly, the Chinese state was an early proponent of using digital QR codes to help the country navigate through the pandemic. Digital QR codes are a simple and efficient means of tracking one's movement and verifying proof of identity for those with a smartphone. Digital QR codes are now frequently used at restaurants and other venues to replace paper menus and to provide further information on products. Few could have predicted that prominent progressives in the United States would openly embrace proof of identity upon entry into nearly any venue. The thought of being required to scan a personal digital QR code upon entry to any venue is reminiscent of “Your papers, please.” Given that America has been effectively governed by the flip-flopping public health diktats of Dr. Anthony Fauci, I assume that vaccination passports are merely the icing on the cake.

Dr. Fauci provided an eyebrow-raising endorsement on September 13; on cable television, he endorsed the idea of requiring vaccination in order to travel domestically by aircraft. Dr. Fauci’s proposal comes nearly a year after a Department of Defense joint study with United Airlines that said “the risk of COVID-19 exposure onboards its aircraft is ‘virtually non-existent’ … when masks are worn.” Despite the cheaper, less intrusive option of universal masking in certain situations, Dr. Fauci’s neurotic endorsement of mandatory vaccinations for air travel continues to propel America’s descent toward an authoritarian nightmare.

Australia Abandons Liberalism

No Western country has so embraced the despotic lockdown ideal as Australia. The Atlantic’s Conor Friedersdorf writes, “the government of South Australia, one of the country’s six states, developed and is now testing an app as Orwellian as any in the free world to enforce its quarantine rules. Returning travelers quarantining at home will be forced to download an app that combines facial recognition and geolocation. The state will text them at random times, and thereafter they will have 15 minutes to take a picture of their face in the location where they are supposed to be. Should they fail, the local police department will be sent to follow up in person.” In ordinary times, such a government application would be considered a police state’s control mechanism; however, the government of South Australia apparently feels no remorse for subjugating its citizens to highly intrusive measures under the guise of public health.

In late July, the BBC reported that Australian Defence Force soldiers would be deployed to help enforce covid lockdowns. The soldiers would “join police in virus hotspots to ensure people are following the rules.” In late August, Australian police arrested hundreds of protesters participating in “unauthorised protests” against the government’s draconian lockdown measures. When questioned about the police response to the protesters, Victoria Police chief commissioner Shane Patton warned against participation and added “that it was ‘just ridiculous to think that people would be so selfish and come and do this.’” Friedersdorf contends that Australia’s prolonged police state methods are a product of its failure to significantly invest in a large supply of vaccines. In closing his argument, Friedersdorf presents the poignant question specifically for the supposedly liberal, democratic government of Australia: “[H]ow much time must pass before we must regard Australia as illiberal and unfree?”

In the face of an “invisible enemy,” many Western nations have implemented emergency measures that were once considered dystopian and wholly incompatible with liberal democracy. The adoption of such intrusive and draconian measures would not be possible without the constant fear-mongering drumbeat of the news media, which has led to many so-called liberals devaluing the meaning of freedom and liberty in order to ensure their own “safety.” To be sure, freedom and liberty do not require one to abandon safety, and safety does not require the abandonment of freedom and liberty. 

The problem with the Western adoption of vaccination passports, enforced universal masking, and draconian lockdowns is that mass protests in opposition to those policies have sprung up in nearly every Western country. Here are just a few examples:

  • Governors of two of the largest states in the United States have waged a full-on assault on the perceived overreach of the Biden administration’s public health edicts, specifically President Biden’s recent executive order on mandating covid-19 vaccines.
  • A group of truck drivers in Australia threatened to strike against public health restrictions in late August; the truck drivers urged “Australians to stock up on groceries and other supplies before the protest disrupts the supply chain.”
  • In France, mass protests against vaccination passports have raged for months as the “unvaccinated” worry about a two-tier society.
  • In Canada, the Provinces of Quebec and Ontario have announced the development of vaccination passport applications, which have resulted in some small protests.

As everyday life begins to adjust back to its precovid normal, it is of paramount importance that everyday individuals push back against government attempts to maintain emergency powers despite the absence of a raging pandemic. Similarly, it is past time that we demand clear goals from public health experts on what level of “herd immunity” is necessary to emerge from the officially recognized pandemic. If both tasks fail, it is not clear that the West will emerge from the pandemic as anything remotely resembling liberal.