Home>Articles>Santa Barbara County Supervisors Insult the Little People Who Bother to Show Up

Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors. (Photo: countyofsb.org)

Santa Barbara County Supervisors Insult the Little People Who Bother to Show Up

Cancel the Mouse and Ignore the Elephant!

By Andy Caldwell, October 19, 2021 2:33 am

Last week, I spoke about how government hearing chambers have morphed into echo chambers. As a way of reminder, the definition of an echo chamber is an environment in which people encounter only beliefs or opinions that coincide with their own, so that their existing views are reinforced and alternative ideas are not considered.  Hence, debate and the meaningful exchange of ideas have been forsaken.

In this day and age of the cancel culture, we have seen some of the top scientists in the world canceled because they simply asked questions about the inconsistencies, incongruencies, and flat-out contradictions of the ever-changing narrative about all things COVID.  Canceling some of the best doctors, research scientists, and even Nobel prize winners was downright dangerous in light of the fact that both practicing medicine and promulgating laws, to be legitimate, require informed consent.  That is, the one thing more dangerous than COVID is the emergence of a totalitarian approach to both medicine and governmental powers.

Having said that, there has also been an ongoing insult to inquiry to the little people of this world who have bothered to show up before our Santa Barbara County Supervisors and the county public health department.  These little people, who dared to question the county’s fawning allegiance to whatever Fauci and our state health department have to say, have become cannon fodder in a theater of the absurd.

To wit, at the board meeting of 10/5/21, county staff showed a pictorial graphic of their approach to managing COVID.  The graphic consisted of several layers, five to be exact, of the Swiss cheese (you can’t make this up even if you tried!) methodology of preventing COVID.  The five layers were, in order of effectiveness, good ventilation, hand hygiene, face masking, physical distancing, and being fully vaccinated.  You can say, with all certainty, that this is their story and they are sticking to it.

However, there was more to the pictorial.  At the bottom of picture, there was a little mouse, ostensibly eating away at the layers of cheese.  The mouse had a name.  He was the “misinformation mouse.”  Pesky little fellow that he is, always asking questions about the efficacy of the Swiss cheese approach to managing COVID, albeit, by the county’s own admission, their approach is full of holes!

Santa Barbara County COVID graphic. (Photo: countysb.org)

So it was, while the county supervisors and their staff were busy trashing the mice for eating away at the cheese, they missed the elephant in the room.  The elephant represents the superior natural immunity gained from having had COVID!  There have been over 15 studies around the world that confirm this, including the latest from Israel (one of the most vaccinated countries in the world).  “The newly released data show people who once had a SARS-CoV-2 infection were much less likely than vaccinated people to get Delta variant, develop symptoms from it, or become hospitalized with serious COVID-19.”  To be precise, vaccinated individuals were 27 times more likely to get a symptomatic COVID infection than those with natural immunity from COVID.”  Hence, the lack of efficacy of vaccine passports.  The message to those who had COVID should be, “you are now free to move about the country!”

Finally, it turns out that the worst theory about the COVID cult has legs.  The theory?  Scientists, including Fauci, pined for the day they could unleash MRNA vaccines on the world without having to wait a decade to go through trials.  That is, they wished for the release of a new virus, specifically from China, that would be so disruptive, the world would abandon all caution to this new technology.  This discussion took place in Oct 2019 at a Milken Institute Event titled “The Future of Health Summit.”  Google it. Their wish became our command, Swiss cheese and all.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
Spread the news:

 RELATED ARTICLES

6 thoughts on “Santa Barbara County Supervisors Insult the Little People Who Bother to Show Up

  1. I live in Santa Barbara & yes our board of supervisors are idiots! Liberal idiots 100%, especially Das Williams
    I have never understood how they get re-elected. Santa Barbara is known for idiot ran govt. but what surprises me is that most I talk with are Republicans. I’m a Republican & never have or will vote for these fools, another left wing nut is County supervisor Hart. It’s been time to leave for a long time, just hate leaving the kids.

  2. But in their photos they look so reasonable, approachable and rational😒
    Group think is a dangerous tool!

  3. How do these Democrat despots keep complete control over the City of Santa Barbara? No doubt they receive some votes from the leftist cabal at the UCSB, but more than likely it’s Democrat voter fraud and rigged voting machines that keeps them in power?

  4. This is in response to your October 12 & 19 articles. Thirty-plus years ago, I was selected by then SB County Supervisor Bill Wallace to serve on the Santa Barbara County General Plan Advisory Committee (GPAC), supporting the 10-year General Plan update. At that time, I lived on Plaza Aleman, and worked at the General Research Corporation (GRC), just a few blocks from home.
    The Board of Supervisors (BoS) had laid out several goals that they wanted as part of the Plan update, including adding mixed-use commercial with low-cost housing, water conservation, and improved traffic flow. They also wanted to add more golf courses, since Santa Barbara was well below the national standard for “golf holes per capita.”
    There was a substantial area of “agricultural” land to the south and west of the intersection of Hollister and Patterson (beyond the hospital and the GRC facility). However, the land had suffered from saltwater incursion into the aquifer due to the prolonged drought, making the land very difficult to farm. In addition, because the suburbs had surrounded the land, the owners were not able to use some of the traditional farming methods, like spraying or crop-dusting. But these owners came to the GPAC meetings, heard what was being discussed, and came up with a plan, which their professional architect presented to a GPAC meeting, hosted by the BoS. Their plan included:
    • Mixed-use commercial and “affordable” residential along the Hollister frontage, with curbing set-backs to accommodate public transportation and customer parking;
    • An 18-hole golf course occupying the majority of the “agricultural” land that was no longer suitable for farming;
    • An already-negotiated agreement with the Goleta Sanitary District, located just across the Highway 217 UCSB spur from 101, that would upgrade their treatment plant to tertiary treatment (which would also relieve the Santa Barbara Sanitary District from having to treat that volume);
    • Double-plumbing the commercial / residential complex along Hollister to use the reclaimed, tertiary-treated water for all landscaping;
    • Using the tertiary-treated water to irrigate the golf course, while simultaneously regenerating fresh water back into the underlying aquifer;
    • All upgrades and developments to be paid for out of the profits that would accrue from mortgages, rents, leases, and golf fees, with zero need for public funds.
    This plan was well thought through, professionally designed, and resulted in a net reduction in water usage (i.e., from Lake Cachuma).
    After the BoS and the GPAC heard the presentation, the GPAC was almost unanimous and quite enthusiastic in its support for this development plan that touched on so many of the desired goals. But the GPAC was a citizen “advisory committee,” and the decision was up to the BoS. The BoS, after private consultation among themselves, to the dismay and disappointment of the GPAC and the land-owners, denied the plan, and would not deign to comment or to provide any supporting argument or rationale.
    So, your “echo chamber” is NOT a new phenomenon.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *