Rand Paul says vaccines can lead to "mental disorders."

[Lakhota]

It's sadly funny to watch the GOP clown car in motion.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The mainstream GOPers find the clown car funny as well.

 

[Lakhota]

 

[bendog]

Further confirmation that Paul is an idiot.

Compare what Paul said to this liberal.

Robert Kennedy s Dangerous Anti-Vaccine Activism - Forbes

"Robert Kennedy is obsessed with the notion that vaccines cause autism. He’s particularly obsessed with the discredited idea that thimerosal, a preservative used in some vaccines, causes autism. Now Kennedy is about to publish a new book on this topic, and he’s promoting it both in the press and, as described in today’s Washington Post, in the halls of Congress. He’s recently had personal meetings with U.S. Senators Barbara Mikulski and Bernie Sanders to try to convince them to take action based on his claims. Why is it that a scientifically unqualified anti-vaccine advocate can get a private audience with a U.S. Senator? Because he’s famous, that’s why."

You are reaching aren't you. Kennedy is neither an elected official nor is he a Doctor. Rand Paul is both. His words were irresponsible and dangerous. And he wants to be President?

What words did Paul use that were irresponsible or dangerous? The fact that parents have the right to not have their children is neither. He did say that he and his kids have been vaccinated and others should do the same. If you think the Kennedy's do not influence the decisions of the elitists and their followers you would be wrong.

He said vaccination leads to mental disorders, and that is not correct. He's spouting pseudo-science misinformation. While is appears correct that measles outbreaks begin with a person from outside the US, the numbers of infected children is greater because of idiot parents who opt out of vaccination and cowardly pols who allow them to do so and still enroll their kids in child care and schools.

Rand Paul said that "he had heard from parents whose children had suffered “profound mental disorders” after being vaccinated.". Quit making crap up!

blow it out your ass. You sound like Bill Clinton on sex ... only not as smart or experienced

Rand Paul once compared mandatory vaccination to 8216 martial law 8217 - The Washington Post

 

[nodoginnafight]

Compare what Paul said to this liberal.

Robert Kennedy s Dangerous Anti-Vaccine Activism - Forbes

"Robert Kennedy is obsessed with the notion that vaccines cause autism. He’s particularly obsessed with the discredited idea that thimerosal, a preservative used in some vaccines, causes autism. Now Kennedy is about to publish a new book on this topic, and he’s promoting it both in the press and, as described in today’s Washington Post, in the halls of Congress. He’s recently had personal meetings with U.S. Senators Barbara Mikulski and Bernie Sanders to try to convince them to take action based on his claims. Why is it that a scientifically unqualified anti-vaccine advocate can get a private audience with a U.S. Senator? Because he’s famous, that’s why."

You are reaching aren't you. Kennedy is neither an elected official nor is he a Doctor. Rand Paul is both. His words were irresponsible and dangerous. And he wants to be President?

What words did Paul use that were irresponsible or dangerous? The fact that parents have the right to not have their children is neither. He did say that he and his kids have been vaccinated and others should do the same. If you think the Kennedy's do not influence the decisions of the elitists and their followers you would be wrong.

He said vaccination leads to mental disorders, and that is not correct. He's spouting pseudo-science misinformation. While is appears correct that measles outbreaks begin with a person from outside the US, the numbers of infected children is greater because of idiot parents who opt out of vaccination and cowardly pols who allow them to do so and still enroll their kids in child care and schools.

Rand Paul said that "he had heard from parents whose children had suffered “profound mental disorders” after being vaccinated.". Quit making crap up!

blow it out your ass. You sound like Bill Clinton on sex ... only not as smart or experienced

Rand Paul once compared mandatory vaccination to 8216 martial law 8217 - The Washington Post

But that was at least a year ago - you can't expect Paul to maintain his positions for more than a week or two.

 

[Ravi]

Paul forgot to mention another thing that cause mental disorders

LIBERALISM

and you are witnessing it right here in this thread.

It get more pathetic everyday.

Look at stuphie, blaming her stupidity on others. Priceless.

 

[Lakhota]

 

[Lakhota]

Since Ayn Rand Paul is a known plagiarist - he was probably quoting someone else in the OP. Just sayin'...

 

[GHook93]

Rand Paul Vaccines can lead to mental disorders - Washington Times

REALLY?

You are Doctor and you make stupid statements like this. You want to be President and you make statements that cannot be supported by science, or anything else? DUDE! You are are clueless as your father.

He also said he is a HUGE fan of vaccines.

Funny how the left is all in a uproar over the antivaccine crowd, but they are AOK with Obama allowing the disease and NON-VACCINATED illegals being spread across the country by Obama!

 

[Dana7360]

The problem with that is babies.

Babies aren't old enough to have vaccinations. So if the baby's parents take them to a school function for their older child and one child there who isn't vaccinated has a disease that child can spread it to that baby and that baby will die.

How about if I put it in the selfish terms that you seem to be expressing above.

You maybe vaccinated but your new born baby isn't. In fact your baby won't start to get vaccinations for months or even as much as a year. You take your baby to your older child's school play. Without your knowledge, a child there who isn't vaccinated has the measles and spreads it to your unvaccinated baby. Your baby dies.

Now will you care?

It's not selfish to allow people to decide for themselves. You want mandatory government vaccinations?

Yes it's selfish to let people put other people's babies at risk of death.

Yes I want mandatory government vaccinations.

It was that way when I was growing up. It was taken out of the hands of the parents and put in the hands of the public schools which is the government.

All children were lined up in either the gym or cafeteria and were vaccinated. With the only exceptions being those children who already had been vaccinated. The parents had no choice. However in those times no parent objected at all. Our parents were the ones who saw what happened to kids who weren't vaccinated or to kids when there weren't vaccinations available. In fact, my aunt had polio. So did my mother in law.

You don't care if your own child or grandchild is killed because someone else didn't get vaccinated? Wow.

Of course I do, you jerk. What in the heck kind of thing is that to say to somebody? WTF is wrong with you?

I asked you Now do you care? Your reply was to say it's not selfish to let people decide for themselves. Then asked me if I wanted it mandatory.

You didn't say you cared. In fact you kept defending the let everyone decide for themselves attitude.

So I had to believe from your reply that you didn't care if your child or grandchild was killed because someone else didn't get vaccinated.

It's funny. I was wondering the same thing about you. What is wrong with a person who doesn't see that babies aren't old enough to be vaccinated and they will die if they're exposed to a disease like the measles and advocate that it's a choice to vaccinate instead of an obligation? How selfish does a person have to be to not care about anyone else's child or even their own child?

So then you care if it's your child or grandchild but do you care if the child isn't related to you? Is it ok for someone else's baby to die because someone else didn't get vaccinated?

Or are you still going to advocate the let the parent decide attitude?

Force is not the way to get people to cooperate with what you want.

It worked when I was a kid. Which the result was that some childhood diseases were eradicated.

Everyone was vaccinated and we didn't have outbreaks of childhood diseases.

It work out very well and future generations benefited from it. For example small pox. That vaccination was stopped being given in the 80s. The reason for it is because it was eradicated and no one needed to get it anymore. Everyone in my generation and before has that small pox scar on their upper arm. People born in the 80s, like my nieces and nephew, don't have it because the disease was eradicated.

The only way that was possible was not giving anyone a choice on whether to be vaccinated.

Are you saying that the government and the adults at the time were wrong?

I noticed you didn't say whether you would care if a stranger's baby died because someone else wasn't vaccinated. I guess you draw the line at someone related to you and a perfect stranger's baby's death is no problem with you. It was the choice of that person who didn't get their child vaccinated to kill that baby. I don't believe anyone should have that choice. I believe in keeping our most innocent and defenseless citizens healthy and alive. I guess you don't as long as it's someone else's baby.

My parents didn't have any choice, neither did I. The only end result is that some diseases were eradicated and there were no outbreaks of some deadly diseases.

So your way kills innocent babies. My way doesn't kill people but it does eradicates deadly diseases. Your way has proven not effective. My way has been proven very effective.

I'll take My way. The old way that brought so many very good results that allowed children to grow into adults instead of dying as a child.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Mexico has a better vaccination record for children, dumb ones.

 

[Vandalshandle]

I suspect that these guys are taking a stand against vaccinations because the world has not come to an end because of Obamacare, as they predicted, and it is time to move on to another fake crisis. I never go to the conspiracy theory threads, but I would bet that someone is arguing that the government is injecting bots into your body so that they can keep track of what you are up to while they poison you with fluoridation.

 

[Dana7360]

At what point do you defend the right of the child to receive proper medical care over the objections of an ignorant parent?

Do the children really just belong to their parents like property or do they have rights - endowed by their creator - that extend beyond their parents?

thats really the question isn't it? The libs want to make this about Rand, but as usual they totally miss the real issue.

Well, Rand Paul's quote said: " ... The state doesn't own your children, parents own their children, and it is an issue of freedom. "

I disagree with his notion that parents own their children - like chattel.

It's illegal in America to own a human being.

paul is a nut case. Parents don't own their children. They're responsible for them. They're responsible to make good choices for their child until their child is an adult and can make those choices for themselves.

I'm not surprised paul said that.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Paul is a nut case on this issue.

Children are the responsibilities of the parents, and the parents' behavior is the responsibility of We the People.

 

[Stephanie]

Well well, the left caught up in their own hate and lying AGAIN. shocker eh? losers

SNIP:
Remember when the media treated vaccine skepticism as respectable?
posted at 11:31 am on February 4, 2015 by Allahpundit

• 99 SHARES

Inevitable pushback as we enter day three of the “wingnuts hate vaccines” news cycle. Reporters like this story, as Mollie Hemingway says, because it can with great effort be squeezed into the broader “wingnuts hate science” narrative that the media’s reheating for Campaign 2016. Never mind that Chris Christie’s position on vaccine mandates is indistinguishable in practice from Barack Obama’s: Flattering low-information voters by assuring them that a vote for Democrats is a vote for enlightenment is a smart way to pick up support from people who may not have strong preferences on policy. Vaccine skepticism is not an exclusively right-wing bugaboo; even the left’s favorite satirist felt obliged last night in haranguing vaccine skeptics to note the role of “science-denying affluent California liberals.” But if you’re a casual news consumer watching one major Republican after another — versus practically zero Democrats — be quizzed on his stance on this issue by the media this week, naturally you’ll conclude that this is a “Republican problem” and just maybe something you should be thinking about in deciding which way to tilt next year.

All of which is to say, this is most definitely a rhetorical question:



So, the pushback. Three clips for you here. The first, via Dave Weigel, is none other than Jon Stewart listening respectfully in 2005 as RFK Jr rambles for seven minutes about possible links between vaccines and autism. The second, via Ed Driscoll, is of CNN handing a forum to unofficial Anti-Vaxxer-In-Chief Jenny McCarthy in 2008. And the third, via the Daily Caller, is of Bill Maher asking former GOP Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist in 2009 why he should let the government force him to inject himself with some substance. (Maher remains skeptical of vaccines to this day.)

ALL of it here:
Remember when the media treated vaccine skepticism as respectable Hot Air

 

[Ravi]

Well well, the left caught up in their own hate and lying AGAIN. shocker eh? losers

SNIP:
Remember when the media treated vaccine skepticism as respectable?
posted at 11:31 am on February 4, 2015 by Allahpundit

• 99 SHARES

Inevitable pushback as we enter day three of the “wingnuts hate vaccines” news cycle. Reporters like this story, as Mollie Hemingway says, because it can with great effort be squeezed into the broader “wingnuts hate science” narrative that the media’s reheating for Campaign 2016. Never mind that Chris Christie’s position on vaccine mandates is indistinguishable in practice from Barack Obama’s: Flattering low-information voters by assuring them that a vote for Democrats is a vote for enlightenment is a smart way to pick up support from people who may not have strong preferences on policy. Vaccine skepticism is not an exclusively right-wing bugaboo; even the left’s favorite satirist felt obliged last night in haranguing vaccine skeptics to note the role of “science-denying affluent California liberals.” But if you’re a casual news consumer watching one major Republican after another — versus practically zero Democrats — be quizzed on his stance on this issue by the media this week, naturally you’ll conclude that this is a “Republican problem” and just maybe something you should be thinking about in deciding which way to tilt next year.

All of which is to say, this is most definitely a rhetorical question:



So, the pushback. Three clips for you here. The first, via Dave Weigel, is none other than Jon Stewart listening respectfully in 2005 as RFK Jr rambles for seven minutes about possible links between vaccines and autism. The second, via Ed Driscoll, is of CNN handing a forum to unofficial Anti-Vaxxer-In-Chief Jenny McCarthy in 2008. And the third, via the Daily Caller, is of Bill Maher asking former GOP Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist in 2009 why he should let the government force him to inject himself with some substance. (Maher remains skeptical of vaccines to this day.)

ALL of it here:
Remember when the media treated vaccine skepticism as respectable Hot Air

Right, because saying vaccines shouldn't be mandated is the SAME thing as saying vaccines cause severe mental illness.

When you get trash from a place called Hot Air you might as well keep your mouth shut.

 

[nodoginnafight]

Paul is a nut case on this issue.

Children are the responsibilities of the parents, and the parents' behavior is the responsibility of We the People.

Well, SOMEONE has to be responsible for protecting the rights of children to receive medical care. If the parents are too stupid to do it, who is left to shoulder that burden?

 

[Stephanie]

At what point do you defend the right of the child to receive proper medical care over the objections of an ignorant parent?

Do the children really just belong to their parents like property or do they have rights - endowed by their creator - that extend beyond their parents?

thats really the question isn't it? The libs want to make this about Rand, but as usual they totally miss the real issue.

Well, Rand Paul's quote said: " ... The state doesn't own your children, parents own their children, and it is an issue of freedom. "

I disagree with his notion that parents own their children - like chattel.

It's illegal in America to own a human being.

paul is a nut case. Parents don't own their children. They're responsible for them. They're responsible to make good choices for their child until their child is an adult and can make those choices for themselves.

I'm not surprised paul said that.

no you are the nut job. I'd take a doctors opinion (Paul) over any of you nut jobs on the left ranting and raving about him and acting like you just KNOW IT ALL..... but really just looking like raving freaking idiots and don't care one bit you do

 

[Ravi]

At what point do you defend the right of the child to receive proper medical care over the objections of an ignorant parent?

Do the children really just belong to their parents like property or do they have rights - endowed by their creator - that extend beyond their parents?

thats really the question isn't it? The libs want to make this about Rand, but as usual they totally miss the real issue.

Well, Rand Paul's quote said: " ... The state doesn't own your children, parents own their children, and it is an issue of freedom. "

I disagree with his notion that parents own their children - like chattel.

It's illegal in America to own a human being.

paul is a nut case. Parents don't own their children. They're responsible for them. They're responsible to make good choices for their child until their child is an adult and can make those choices for themselves.

I'm not surprised paul said that.

no you are the nut job. I'd take a doctors opoinion (Paul) over any of you nut jobs on the left ranting and raving about him and acting like you just KNOW IT ALL but really just looking live raving freaking idiots

So if a doctor tells you that you can own a human you'll believe it?

 

[bendog]

Paul is a nut case on this issue.

Children are the responsibilities of the parents, and the parents' behavior is the responsibility of We the People.

Well, SOMEONE has to be responsible for protecting the rights of children to receive medical care. If the parents are too stupid to do it, who is left to shoulder that burden?

Yeah, well smallpox and polio are history because we really did mandate vaccines by making accessing public school contingent upon getting them ... without exception .... back when no responsible parent would consider home schooling.

But times have changed. I think it's absurd to allow exemptions to let unvaccinated kids in schools with kids whose parents have done the responsible thing. Vaccines are not 100% effective in all instances. So allowing unvaccinated kids loose amongst the others will probably cause some vaccinated kids to get sick too. That is hardly fair to the kid.

But, that's really not the same as polio and smallpox. So, I can see keeping the kids of irresponsible parents out of schools, but getting courts to force all parents to vaccinate their kids ..... I dunno. Isn't there sort of a pre-constitution natural law to be a dumbshite? (-: