Comments by "Kevin Schmidt" (@kevinschmidt2210) on "The WHO Is Staging A Global Power Grab u0026 No One’s Doing Anything!" video.

@KA-vs7nl Wrong. The problem is voting for the lesser of two evils, with no other voting choices.
19
@johnmusser8925 No, it is the false choice between two evils with no other choice that sucks. That way, the counting always adds up to electing evil.
13
@danielgriff2659 God has no business in public schools. Society was no better back then than it is today. In fact, society is much better today. It is our fascist governments that are worse.
10
@Procopius464 Every election is stolen by the evil, fascist Democratic-Republican Duopoly Party.
10
@danielgriff2659 Never going to happen. Thank god for that! What you want is tiered education based on income, and you want segregation. When a public school gets funded as much as a private school, the public school always outperforms the private school. That is because the private school uses a large percentage of their funding as profits for the owners. Public schools don't have that problem.
6
@malcolmnicoll1165 Jerry was not the first person to say that about voting for the lesser of two evils. It comes from ancient times: 'The maxim existed already in Platonic philosophy. In Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle writes: "For the lesser evil can be seen in comparison with the greater evil as a good, since this lesser evil is preferable to the greater one, and whatever preferable is good". The modern formulation was popularized by Thomas à Kempis' devotional book The Imitation of Christ written in early 15th century. In part IV of his Ethics, Spinoza states the following maxim: Proposition 65: "According to the guidance of reason, of two things which are good, we shall follow the greater good, and of two evils, follow the less."'
5
@AZTLANSOLDIER13 Democracy does exist if the people all stand up together and demand it.
5
Then why bring it up in the first place? Most people were fooled. Are you going to attack all of them too?
5
@SteviG9 True, it is the US who threatens over 50% of the countries on earth. Russia and China are just two of those countries threatened by out of control fascists.
4
@user-kcrpine So you prefer minorities and women have no rights? You prefer segregation? You prefer no Social Security or Medicare? Yeah... no. Wake up!
3
The US Constitution does not allow any treaty to supersede the rights within the Constitution. It is one thing to recognize a treaty that defines international law. It is something else altogether to sign a treaty that overrules US domestic laws. That is why it is unconstitutional, regardless of what the WHO says. US sovereignty rules supreme within the US.
2
@AZTLANSOLDIER13 There will be a peaceful revolution, if everybody stands up at once. Until enough people see it happening, not enough people will be standing up.
2
@jeffw1267 As long as the US War machine grinds on, murder will be legalized.
2
@saralotti7174 They who? We are talking about Dr. Campbell and no one else.
2
In my original comment, I said: "Then why bring it up in the first place? [Dr. Campbell's error caused by incomplete data.] Most people were fooled. Are you going to attack all of them too?" I was pointing out that accusing "all of them" would be ridiculous, and by extension, so would accusing Dr. Campbell be ridiculous. Hindsight is 20-20. It's easy to accuse anyone of having done the wrong thing or having the wrong opinion somewhere in the past. Honest mistakes are made all the time. However, it's hard to accuse anyone of doing wrong intentionally. But that is what she did. She accused an undefined "they" four different times in her comment. She mentioned Dr. Campbell ZERO times. This is a different context than in my first comment, where almost everyone makes an incorrect choice by accident. However, she accuses a group of undefined "they" of intentionally making the wrong choices. I responded: "They who? We are talking about Dr. Campbell and no one else." This is a guilty by association ploy. Dr. Campbell was wrong because of incomplete data. The nebulous "they" were wrong for intentionally making the wrong decisions, which they knew were intentionally harming people. Mix these two accusations together, and like magic, Dr. Campbell is thought to be one of evil "they."
2
@cptsuperstraight6924 Got proof?
1
@StoningXStephen It was not better back then. Read a history book for once in your life.
1
@StoningXStephen Me too, kid.
1
@BurningChrome Who wants your guns? I've been hearing that since forever, but every year, we have a lot more guns than the year before. Paranoia much?
1
@Tubihyxa2002 They are awake. But nobody knows what to do next.
1
@unreal4202 Wrong! First of all, Campbell did not choose to blindly follow anyone or any conclusion. He changed his opinion when he received more information, which is what any good scientist or doctor would do. Second, you are a hypocrite for not recognizing the fact that everyone, including you, makes mistakes. Dr Campbell has learned from his, but you have not learned from yours, and are destined to repeat your mistakes. Therefore, YOU should be mocked relentlessly!
1
@SteviG9 Yet, you continue to attack him for past beliefs based on the available information at the time.
1
@SteviG9 Hard to be right when there is not enough good data and too much bad data to make a well-informed decision. Further, Doctors, the MSM and everyone else were forced to parrot the propaganda. Gee, who was the cause of that propaganda? Dr Falsey, the US Government and Big Pharma. They are the ones who should be criticized, censored and prosecuted, not their victims. Stop barking up the wrong tree.
1
@michaelkeegan9260 No he has not done that at all! He spent his life teaching students how to be excellent nurses. He taught them to think for themselves. You will get that, if you actually listen to his lecture style. He uses an evidenced based style of teaching. My guess is his students resisted the dictates of WHO more than most other nurses.
1
@SteviG9 Voters of western countries are forced to vote for the lesser of two evils. Look at RFK Jr and the Democratic Party's insistence there will be no primary. The DNC has proven since at least 1968 that they would rather lose elections to Republicans, then see a truly progressive Democratic Party politician come to power.
1