He admits FDA goes easy on Pfizer due to 'revolving door'. Key regulators think of themselves as future Pfizer employees.
He admits the revolving door is 'pretty good for [us]...bad for everyone else in America'.
P.S. No one's gaydar is 100% but he shows up on mine.
Yet another public vaxxer, Scott Adams, turns somewhat anti-vaxx.
https://twitter.com/stillgray/status/1617040271598055425
He looks at
and concludes: 2023 new situation where benefits no longer outweigh risks.
And when you see why, you see why.
https://twitter.com/TheChiefNerd/status/1617533688153096196
Why big shades & mask? even indoors, face never seen
Why insane security lining up just to block views?
Why does family arrive separately?
Why physical activity but no interview?
Last week, sadly Diamond of "Diamond and Silk" passed away at 51.
At first, Twitter libs said: unvaxxed Trump supporter died of covid & deserved it hahaha!
But the family has either stated, or implied strongly that:
https://twitter.com/RSBNetwork/status/1616939259864272897
Remember, Trump came up with the vaxx - Operation Warp Speed - so many Trump supporters were/are pro-vaxx.
These injured or "died suddenly" people are getting awkward for him.
To Trump's great credit, he was never into mandates. Libs did all the vaxx mandates. Trump wanted people to have a choice.
Still, at some point Trump will have to admit he was taken in by the Big Pharma / Fauci / Dem "safe and effective" mantra, that has proven false.
@raphjd Like "Nazi" before it, the "white supremacist" accusation has been weaponized to where it no longer has meaning.
Libs throw "white supremacist" at anyone - Asian, latin, black whatever - that they want distance from, for any reason.
With these horrible mass shooters, libs throw "white supremacist" if it turns out the shooter's social media is full of pro-Antifa & anti-Trump. As a distraction.
But that's generalities.
I have no idea where this one's motives & narrative frame will end up.
In the meantime, I pray for the victims & all involved.
@eobox91103 Yes really.
@flozen Just a quick recap of the action here.
What I'm trying to say is: Color me impressed.
Bye now & God bless. 
@ianfontinell Agree (see my earlier comment) that this has -nothing to do with gays- broadly, maybe shouldn't be in this section.
As to why post it anywhere? Also explained earlier.
As to gay v. straight phrasing.... it's to do with demographic norms. 9 times out of 10, the parents are opposite-sex / unspecified would mean exactly that.
P.S. I don't agree "gay" phrasing here is "very deceptive" since
@flozen As a wise man once said: Politics and Debate.
For example - are the charges even true? I'd welcome counter-info. It'd be great if this awful story turned out untrue. If someone knew this couple and said: No way.
Projecting there, check your mirrors before posting please.
Check them hard.
LOL
P.S. @MrMazda judgment call but just fyi, I didn't consider Gay News - and still don't - because what does this story have to do with gays broadly?
@eobox91103 "did nothing to stop" - On your own terms, ignoring anything I said: You just equated Benedict to all popes, conceding that he did no unique or exceptional damage.
I also can't think of any unique or exceptional (read that twice) way the Church damages gay people.
Sexual abuse? Yes that's bad, bad, gotta stop - and you concede schools do as much or more of it. Let's add that LGBT themselves do quite a lot. Bad yes, unique no.
Disagreeing that gay sex is good? That can't be the problem - because then I'd have to tell you boo hoo, grow up.
Especially nowadays, the Church's opinion on anything only affects people if they want it to.
And again, B16 (not 15) Ratzinger actually nudged things forward. The typical gay lib just isn't prepared to see or admit it; "Everyone hates me especially the Church" is too much ingrained in the gay-lib identity / tribalism / substitute religion. More here: https://community.gaytorrent.ru/topic/60694/the-libs-kooky-world-of-hate
@eobox91103 Again, I'm familiar with the "gay case against Benedict" and furnishing another side of the story.
Again, you're not mentioning his insistence that the gay person always be treated with respect as a person trying to live a life. In 1980s (height of AIDS) that was a signal for many Catholics to chill, get a tad more pro-gay or less anti-gay. Benedict among others, did that.
Sidebar - it's worth mentioning that traditional Catholic doctrine is, in their own view, equally hard on straights & gays ie. non-discriminatory.
Don't say "straights could get married" - because, in traditional Catholic doctrine, even properly married straights are not supposed to have sex UNLESS trying to conceive a child.
Yup. That rough. Single straights are called to celibacy, as are married ones who aren't intent on children. Their lusts & fornications, even with each other, are also disordered / sinful.
I'm not endorsing the trad-cath view, merely explaining. Traditional Catholics are mystified, if you accuse them of discriminating or being tougher on gays. "Everyone's a sinner. We're hard on everyone" mentality.
Overall - Benedict was a major, historic person in liberalizing the Church - and you're saying he did some sort of special damage as Pope.
I can't account for that, except as "Oh there goes the typical incomplete, parochial, gay-lib-tribal viewpoint again, example 1 million."
@eobox91103 small correction - I didn't say "at the Vatican", rather, "at Vatican 2" the big-deal, liberalizing Chuch council of the early 1960s.
Continuing... But in today's fractured world, I don't know what link/source you would consider valid.
Here's one:
https://www.commonwealmagazine.org/ratzinger-vatican-ii
I don't know about this magazine, merely that the link turned up quickly in a search for "ratzinger theologian vatican 2".
I know that as Pope, he repudiated none of Vatican 2 - merely said to balance it a little more with respect for tradition.
And I've seen people who followed his long career & read his books & articles over decades say, yes he was very much a liberal, then later dialed it back slightly.
So I believe this magazine's story - on the grounds that it's consistent with other stuff I have heard or observed.
Wiki lists it as a well-established "liberal Catholic" magazine............. for whatever that's worth 
@eobox91103 Nope! It merely says "Here's some other info / another story".
Reality is a vast mosaic, none of us get to see it all.
@raphjd I'm aware of the "gay case against Benedict" but gays generally know little of the wider picture, so here's a few points fyi.
As a young theologian he was the key liberal, yes LIBERAL, voice at Vatican II in the early 1960s.
Modern Catholic doctrine, insisting that gays must always be treated with dignity & respect for the person, even as doctrine still treats gay (and straight!!) fornicating lusts as "disordered" - That was him.
As time went by, he did become a "liberal mugged by reality" ie. more centrist or tradition-friendly as his liberal illusions were overturned. Sound familiar?
By Church standards, he didn't go far rightward. But the fact he made any rightward shift at all made his name poison to vicious Church leftists. Sound familiar?
He was mainly a theologian and tried more than once to leave Church politics or avoid being Pope. JP2 & others demanded that he stay involved.
The current papal resident, Francis, is a 100% Covidist-globalist-commie, beloved by Davos/WEF/Hillary types, tries to appear more moderate than he is, and election was/is fraught with questions. Sound familiar? (cough Biden)
People who follow this stuff say that Benedict was actually better day to day at hounding clerical pedophiles, while Francis protects most of them - while making a show of the opposite, pursuing his own opponents in a high-publicity, selective way with weaponized (or even faked) accusations. Sound familiar?
You can think what you want of course.
And I don't love Benedict. Nor claim to know everything.
As with Trump, the fact that I want criticisms to be rational & will speak the other side of the story, makes me a supposed "supporter" - Not really.
Stamping on Benedict's grave tho is in zone between Unseemly & Uninformed.
Benedict R.I.P.
@flozen Brave face but we both know that the fact you were stung enough to respond to me, is the high praise here.
Thank you. Glad I could teach you a moment & it prob won't stick, but let's hope.
Re: @raphjd, I took his comment as sarcasm against your commentary - but whatever, it's up to him & I don't really care.
Again: Benedict R.I.P. ..........and while we're at it, Cardinal Pell R.I.P. too - pretty weird story there, with his conviction & then it being all reversed out - the point would be, none of us know. I don't, you don't. Catholic "deep politics" is every bit as twisted & nothing-is-as-it-seems, as Anglo-American.
https://twitter.com/FarmGirlCarrie/status/1615745857076461568
Sorry but
he's hot
if ur going to hate on "conservatives" or "toxic masculinity" or "religion" or "breeders", the world soon won't have any more of these beautiful genuine men for ur target practice
Gay Pride flag: once a symbol of freedom and tolerance, today in Clown World 2023 a symbol of intolerance & being a crybully
Honest people know.
@flozen Dumb commentary.
First - A death at 95 needs no explanation and merits no gloating from opponents. If anything, it's a personal "win" & shows lack of guilt. We should all be lucky to live as long.
Second - People who know the inside baseball, know that actually Benedict was one of the nicer & saner people, both for gays & for fighting clerical abuse. Catholic inside baseball gets very very very complicated, the public images statements accusations & lawsuits very different from who's who behind the scenes.
Not defending it. Only pointing out that nobody can ever know everything, and here, you sure don't. Not that I would know all either, so enough said.
Benedict R.I.P.