Eight proofs (and 25 sub-proofs) we have been had by the coronavirus scare

Featured

  1. Lack of information, misinformation, incomplete information causes panic

What we don’t know about the coronavirus outbreak

The Harvard Gazette comments on what they think they don’t know about the coronavirus.

Cases of the new coronavirus that originated in the Chinese city of Wuhan have expanded into the thousands, with more than 170 deaths. The virus’ spread elsewhere — including the U.S., which has at least six confirmed cases, the last one marking the first time the illness was spread from one person to another here — contributed to the World Health Organization’s decision to declare the outbreak a public health emergency. The Gazette spoke to Professor of Epidemiology Marc Lipsitch, director of the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health’s Center for Communicable Disease Dynamics and an expert on the spread of infectious diseases, including his work during the SARS coronavirus outbreak in 2003.

Speaker: Quote
GAZETTE: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has identified a handful of coronavirus cases in the nation and is investigating others. How worried should residents be?
LIPSITCH: At this point, worry won’t accomplish anything and doesn’t help. It is reasonably likely that there will be more cases in the United States, but whether that means double digits or many more still remains to be seen. I do think it may be more challenging to control than SARS, because it seems that a lot of cases are relatively mild, which makes them harder to identify.
GAZETTE: It’s a coronavirus, which includes not only SARS but things like the common cold. Does this mean, when the symptoms are mild, that it’s easy to get it mixed up with something like a cold or the flu?
LIPSITCH: It seems that way. Some of the symptoms are more severe than colds or than typical flu, but not everybody has a severe infection. So the milder infections can certainly be missed.
GAZETTE: One thing that struck me watching this unfold is the rapid expansion in China. Is that because it’s more infectious than we had thought, or is it because now that we’re looking for it all these mild cases are turning up?
LIPSITCH: I think it’s a mix of things. I think responsible people weren’t saying how infectious it was until recently. The most optimistic scenario — that it’s acquired from animals and then transmitted among humans only very modestly — is no longer credible. Each day it seems clearer that transmission is relatively common — estimates are converging around something similar to SARS. Reporting has been very irregular, so the big jumps in case numbers don’t necessarily mean new cases, just newly reported cases. We should remember that it’s only been about a month since the problem was recognized. The fact that we’re able to test and confirm cases of a completely unknown virus is amazing and a testament to very, very good biological work being done very quickly.

So it’s quite extraordinary that we know as much as we do, but we still don’t know that much. By comparison, however, SARS broke out in November of 2002, and it didn’t come to global attention until February [2003]. So this epidemic may have started that same time in 2019 and came to light within a month or two of its start date.

Speaker: Quote
GAZETTE: How big a difference does that time make, as far as the number of cases you have to deal with?
LIPSITCH: It’s much better. People are still trying to figure out the doubling time of the epidemic. Because right now, what we’re seeing is doublings of cases, sometimes even in one day, but that’s because people are getting tested, not because new cases are appearing. But whatever the doubling time is, a month is probably at least enough time for it to grow four- to 10-fold, if not more. A month is a lot of time in an epidemic.
GAZETTE: How does this virus compare to SARS as far as its death rate?
LIPSITCH: We don’t know. Of the diagnosed cases of SARS, about 10 percent of them died. By comparison, seasonal flu is about a tenth of a percent or lower. This one, we don’t know either the numerator or the denominator for that calculation. Not enough cases have been diagnosed to know how many people have been infected even to an order of magnitude. There were probably some deaths that weren’t attributed to this virus. Maybe not that many, but some, especially in places that weren’t looking for them at the time. So I think we just don’t know. It doesn’t look like it’s as bad as SARS, which is very good from one perspective, but it also means that it may be more challenging to control if the overall spectrum of illness is milder, because it’s harder to recognize and isolate cases.

(Read more at The Harvard Gazette)

If you read this with a discerning eye, it shows how little we knew

As you read through the above interview, note how much dodges the question. A few questions honestly answer with “we don’t know” or “why worry?” From this lack of information, those in the political and media drove a panic in the nation.

China lied on the coronavirus. It put everyone at risk.

The Washington Post comments on the lies of the Communist Chinese Party on coronavirus.

Compared with the response in some previous outbreaks, including severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) in 2003 and swine flu in 2009, biomedical detective work got underway quickly in China in December, when people began to suffer a pneumonia-like illness. Chinese researchers isolated the new coronavirus, sequenced its genetic code and prepared reagents for diagnostics. But during all the weeks of this activity in December, Beijing largely kept the lid on information. It did not alert the public until well into January. The thought police were still on the beat, even as the virus spread.

The common reactions of Chinese leaders to crisis — strict secrecy, media censorship, desperate attempts to protect “stability” and slavish adherence to central authority — were evident throughout the early period of the crisis, according to a detailed insider account published by the China Media Project. On Dec. 30, this account says, the Wuhan Health Commission “issued an order to hospitals, clinics and other healthcare units strictly prohibiting the release of any information about treatment of this new disease.”

The account says that while Chinese officials informed the World Health Organization of a new coronavirus outbreak, “they did not inform their own people, but instead maintained strict secrecy.” A free press might have made a difference — it might have at least raised questions about people’s illnesses. But such a press does not exist in China.

(Read more at the Washington Post)

While the press generally wants to forget the Chinese connection in this virus, we cannot ignore it

Additionally, we should not ignore the words of Nancy Pelosi as she encouraged people to join her in San Francisco’s Chinatown as she clearly did not employ social distancing.

World Health Organization tells the world, ‘Coronavirus is not transmissible between humans’

The New York Times reported in a 23 January 2020 article that the World Health Organization claimed that coronavirus could not be transmitted from one human to another.

The World Health Organization on Thursday decided not to declare the Wuhan coronavirus outbreak a global emergency, despite the spread of the dangerous respiratory infection from China to at least five other countries.

Although the disease has reached beyond China, the number of cases in other countries is still relatively small, and the disease does not seem to be spreading within those countries, agency officials said. Of more than 800 cases now reported, the wide majority — and all the 25 deaths — have been in China, according to Chinese officials.

“At this time, there is no evidence of human-to-human transmission outside China,” Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, the W.H.O.’s director general, said at a news conference in Geneva. “That doesn’t mean it won’t happen.”

“Make no mistake,” he added. “This is an emergency in China, but it has not yet become a global health emergency. It may yet become one.”

The committee weighing the decision was divided, its chairman, Dr. Didier Houssin, said during the briefing. Some members felt the course of the outbreak warranted an emergency declaration now, but others said it that was too soon to decide, citing the limited number of cases in countries outside China as well as the country’s efforts to contain the virus.

(Read more at the New York Times)

The money that we have poured into the WHO meant nothing; however, the loyalty of the WHO to a communist country obviously was more important than life

We should never again believe the words coming out of the WHO; therefore, we should never again devote our dollars to their support.

In an example of incomplete information, Townhall suggested why the world shut down for the Wuhan Coronavirus, but not MERS, swine flu, SARS, or Ebola

Townhall suggested a few reasons for why the world shut down for coronavirus and not for the more deadly diseases that occurred during the Obama administration.

So, for a virus that isn’t as lethal as say Ebola, why did we have to lock it down? Why didn’t we do so for the SARS or MERS outbreaks? FiveThirtyEight broke it down:

If the name didn’t give it away, SARS was caused by a virus similar to the one that causes COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, but it didn’t have nearly the same impact. This is in spite of having a relatively high case fatality rate of 9.6 percent, compared to the current estimate for COVID-19: 1.4 percent.

Another respiratory illness caused by a coronavirus, Middle East Respiratory Syndrome, or MERS, has an even higher case fatality rate of 34 percent. But it’s also led to fewer deaths than what we’ve already seen from COVID-19: As of January 2020, there have been 2,519 cases of MERS and 866 associated deaths from the infection.

SARS and MERS didn’t cause the same level of devastation that COVID-19 has largely because they aren’t as easily transmitted. Rather than moving by casual, person-to-person transmission, SARS and MERS spread from much closer contact, between family members or health care workers and patients (or, in the case of MERS, from camels to people directly). These viruses also aren’t spread through presymptomatic transmission, meaning infected people don’t spread it before they have symptoms. Once people got sick, they typically stayed home or were hospitalized, making it harder for them to spread the virus around.

As for Swine Flu, FiveThirtyEight noted that Swine Flu spread easily, though it was not as contagious as COVID-19 and not nearly as deadly, preventing our health care system from being overwhelmed:

“The 2009 pandemic, the H1N1 swine flu, that [disease] spread very, very well, but the fatality rate was quite low, and that’s the reason why it wasn’t dubbed as a particularly serious pandemic,” said Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and a member of the White House’s coronavirus task force, in a February livestream.

Even with such a low case fatality rate, the swine flu had a high overall death toll due in part to how easily it spread. With an even higher case fatality rate and perhaps even a higher rate of transmission, COVID-19 has required drastic measures to prevent its spread.

What about Ebola, a disease with a mortality rate that can reach as high as 90 percent? Again, a highly lethal virus, perhaps the deadliest on this list, but blessedly hard to contract. It doesn’t spread like the flu:

Similar to MERS and SARS, Ebola is not easily transmittable. Infected people don’t spread the virus until they start showing symptoms, and even then the virus is hard to catch because it is spread through direct contact with the bodily fluid of an infected person, like blood, sweat, and urine, rather than through the kind of particles produced when someone sneezes or speaks. Unless you’re nursing patients (either at home or in a hospital setting) or tending to their body after they’ve died, it’s unlikely you’d acquire the infection.

Ebola also tends to cause pretty severe and identifiable symptoms, such as fever and fatigue followed by vomiting and diarrhea. Not only can infected people not spread the virus until they’re sick, but once they become sick, they’ll know it.

“If you want to see illnesses which are controllable, they all have transmission very much tied to symptoms, and this includes SARS and Ebola,” said William Hanage, an epidemiologist at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. “If you’re in an Ebola zone, you can be pretty sure whether or not the person you’re talking to is a potentially risky contact.”

This makes it easier to isolate infected individuals and protect health care workers to limit the spread, which is what occurred in the 2014-2016 outbreak. It’s a striking difference from COVID-19, which we know can be spread without any symptoms at all, and even when people get sick, some people might have symptoms so mild that they’re not sure they have COVID-19 in the first place.

(Read more at Townhall)

I will respectfully disagree with Townhall. We shut down due to misinformation and a lack of information

From poor information, people took guesses to be facts. For example, Harris County Judge Lina Hidalgo took the projections by Dallas County Judge Clay Jenkins who said 583,000 would die in Texas (since he took the then-current projections of COVID ACT NOW as gospel). Now the projections are that there will be 1,000 deaths in Texas (refer below). We are not near that, but people still give some of this too much consideration.

  1. The mortality rate has fallen far below the projections

The model showed 6,000 would die in Texas. Now it’s 1K. What’s changed?

The San Antonio Express News asks why the models on the coronavirus mortality rates have changed so much.

A revised model suggests Texas could have 5,000 fewer COVID-19 deaths than previously estimated.

The Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, a global health research organization at the University of Washington School of Medicine, is forecasting that Texas will have 957 deaths by Aug. 4, 2020. IHME models have been used by the White House.

That model had previously forecast around 6,000 deaths. Then 4,000, and now just under 1,000, said Dr. Peter Hotez, professor and dean for the National School of Tropical Medicine at the Baylor College of Medicine.

(Read more at the Express News)

If you continue to read, the “expert” suggests our quarantine worked

However, if that is the case, why does Sweden have a lower coronavirus mortality rate than Michigan (when both have the same population and Sweden never quarantined)?

New York coronavirus general population mortality rate falls to 0.5%

The Hill points out that antibody testing has shown coronavirus infection rates in New York state may currently be at 14% and at 20% in New York City while the mortality rate for coronavirus has fallen to 0.5% for the general population of New York.

Preliminary data shows about 13.9 percent of the population of New York state — about 2.7 million people — have at some point been infected with the coronavirus.

About 3,000 people were randomly tested at grocery stores and other public locations to allow officials to get a broader sense of how widely the virus has spread in New York and how many people might now have immunity.

In New York City, 21 percent of residents had antibodies for coronavirus, compared with 3.6 percent in upstate New York, 16.7 percent in Long Island and 11.7 percent in the Westchester and Rockland area.

“They were infected three weeks ago, four weeks ago, five weeks ago, six weeks ago. But they had the virus, they developed the antibodies and they are now recovered,” Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) said Thursday.

The data indicates the COVID-19 death rate in New York is about 0.5 percent. The tests were conducted over a two-day period in 19 counties and 40 localities.

(Read more at The Hill)

If the mortality rate is this low, it would seem to be newsworthy

If the mortality rate had been found to be this low under a Democrat administration, it likely would be newsworthy.

Antibody testing currently points toward a 0.5% mortality rate from coronavirus

A 23 April 2020 Townhall article brings out how antibody testing in New York now indicates that the coronavirus mortality rate should be adjusted down to 0.5% for the general population.

There is simply no other way to state this.

Nearly everything we’ve been told about models, rates of infection, deaths, and recoveries was inaccurate.

I’m not here to argue that it was malfeasance or ignorance — both are unacceptable. But the one thing that Governor Andrew Cuomo’s stunning announcement made clear on Thursday is that there are some pretty shocking — and what should be — reassuring truths.

Cuomo announced that antibody testing in New York state, which only began four days previous, was already demonstrating that at minimum 13.9% of New Yorkers, had COVID-19 late stage antibodies.

The implication of this is a shockwave to the system.

With a population of 19,540,500 the findings point out that over 2,500,000 New Yorkers had the virus and have recovered. Keep in mind that as of this writing that only 263,000 New Yorkers have currently confirmed cases. Also as of this writing New York has reported 19,543 fatalities.

We’ve been told that the true death rate is 7.4% in New York. We were told there would be hundreds of thousands dead. We were told that this was worse than the flu, which has still recorded more deaths to date in this past flu season—even though the CDC instructed medical personnel to start counting influenza, heart disease, pulmonary, respiratory, drug overdose, and possibly even car crash deaths as COVID-19 deaths.

We were told that we had to upend an economy, go into solitary confinement, and divorce ourselves from normal life because this would rage beyond any previous pandemic. We were told that this virus with 846,000 current confirmed cases was worse than the H1N1 that broke out on Obama’s watch that infected 60,000,000 people. (We were conveniently not told that Obama had authorized $3.7 million U.S. tax dollars to be used at the Wuhan Institute of Virology to utilize corona viruses in bats in 2015 — but that’s yet another deception of omission.)

But none of these “truths” turned out to be so.

The death rate in New York State isn’t 7.4%, it is actually .75%. The recently ended influenza season numbers from the CDC indicate possibly 56,000,000 cases of flu, 740,000 hospitalizations, and 62,000 deaths. Under the current count from the Johns Hopkins Dashboard in this five month stretch CoVid19 has racked up 845,959 confirmed cases, 122,000 hospitalizations and 46,972 deaths.

A couple of other observations are extremely relevant. To begin with the flu — which has no vaccine but rather a randomized version of a shot designed to help develop antibodies to fight the version of the flu that “smart people” *think* will be the primary version that particular year — has remedies that physicians prescribe in primary care on an as needed basis. So we’re not accustomed to thinking that the flu is this deadly killer that all of life must be shut down to prevent. CoVid19 had no known treatments at the beginning of the breakout, and for political reasons—and possibly financially incentivized ones to boot—the most effective treatment for CoVid19 became a political football. Even the supposed “negative” trials that were reported on this past weekend, had cherry picked subjects that were mostly late stage victims of the virus. As Dr. Vladimir Zelenko pointed out on my show this week, doing so created the negative outcomes “purposefully & by design.” When used under a physician’s care, in the primary care basis, and early on after testing or onset of symptoms, the hydroxycholoroquine, azithromycin, & zinc cocktail reduced the rates of deaths and long term infectious stages. Zelenko’s numbers to date: 1,450 patients treated, two deaths, four ventilator cases (all fully recovered,) and all others recovered. Zelenko and other physicians using the treatment are releasing the world’s largest Meta-study to date within the next few days that will examine more than 2,000 confirmed cases.

The antibody numbers from Cuomo also scream one other harsh reality. The virus was in America long before January.

(Read more at Townhall)

  1. Sweden dealt with coronavirus by not locking down

As documented in a New York Times opinion piece of 28 April 2020, we find that Sweden never locked down and had fairly low coronavirus mortality rates.

… In case you’ve missed it, Sweden has taken a radically different approach in dealing with the coronavirus. It has essentially opted for a strategy of “herd immunity” through exposure.

This strategy posits that most people under age 65 who get the coronavirus — if they do not have major pre-existing medical conditions — will either experience it as a typical or tough flu, or completely asymptomatically, and the number who will get so sick that they require hospitalization or emergency care will reliably be less than the number of beds needed to care for them.

So, if you do your best to shelter and sequester all of those over 65 and those with serious pre-existing conditions — notably heart and lung disease and diabetes — and let much of the rest of the population circulate and get exposed and become naturally immune, once about 60 percent of your population has gone through this you’ll have herd immunity and the viral transmission will be blocked. (This assumes that immunity for some period of time results from exposure, as most experts think it will.)

After all, herd immunity is our goal — either from vaccination or from enough people building natural immunity. Those are the only ways to achieve it.

The upside of Sweden’s strategy — if it works — is that your economy does not take such a deep hit from lockdowns. It is unlike the strategy of suppression pursued in cities across America right now — as well as around the globe — where, when the lockdown is over, your population largely has not developed immunity and so most everyone remains vulnerable to the virus, and to a second wave in the fall.

Think of the challenge of New York City. Its hospitals would have been overwhelmed by the sudden crush of patients, so the months of lockdown of millions will surely, and vitally, have saved lives. But it has come at huge cost to jobs and businesses and with little progress to herd immunity — and with the prospect that the virus can come roaring back as soon as the lockdown is lifted, unless there is Chinese-level testing, tracking, tracing and quarantining those carrying the infection. And even that might not work.

Now think of Stockholm. Anders Tegnell, chief epidemiologist at Sweden’s Public Health Agency — the nation’s top infectious disease official and architect of Sweden’s coronavirus response, said in an interview published in USA Today on Tuesday: “We think that up to 25 percent people in Stockholm have been exposed to coronavirus and are possibly immune. A recent survey from one of our hospitals in Stockholm found that 27 percent of staff there are immune. We think that most of those are immune from transmission in society, not the workplace. We could reach herd immunity in Stockholm within a matter of weeks.”

Tegnell explains that Sweden is not just blithely letting all Swedes get the disease to achieve herd immunity, but rather is pursuing a designed strategy for the most sustainable way to navigate through this pandemic. So colleges and high schools are closed, but kindergarten through grade nine are open, as are many restaurants, stores and businesses.

But the government has also issued social-distancing guidelines, which many people are abiding by, encouraged working from home and discouraged nonessential travel. Most important, it has encouraged everyone over 70 to stay at home and banned gatherings of more than 50 people and visits to nursing homes.

The result, so far, Tegnell noted, has been a gradual building of herd immunity among those least vulnerable while the country has avoided mass unemployment and an overwhelming of the hospital system.

(Read more at the New York Times)

Additionally, a study discussed in the Wall Street Journal backs this up

When you consider that scientists mentioned by the Wall Street Journal seem to indicate that lock downs don’t help, you begin to wonder why we have subjected ourselves to this jail time without cause.

  1. Democrats use the coronavirus to kill parts of our economy

Report: 2,500 oil and gas workers in Texas lose their jobs in a 10-day period

The Houston Chronicle points out that 2,500 oil and gas workers in Texas lost their jobs in one 10-day period.

WeveBeenHadTexas Workforce Commission information shows that the oil and natural gas industry shed another 2,500 jobs over the past 10 days, according to a report from the Houston Chronicle.

The report shows 13 companies laid off 2,525 people. The service sector, which includes drilling rig operators, hydraulic fracturing crews and manufacturing, took the hardest hit, according to the Chronicle. The report blames record low oil prices and the coronavirus pandemic hurting demand for products and services.

The layoffs, according to the Chronicle article, included:

  • Houston-based NexTier Oilfield Services — 1,041 employees working at its headquarters, another Houston office and field offices in the Permian Basin and Eagle Ford Shale.
  • Midland oil-field service company ProPetro Service — 584 layoffs in the Permian Basin where losses now total 584 layoffs.
  • Houston oil-field service company Baker Hughes — 184 jobs cut after merging operations at two locations in Houston.

The report also states U.S. Silica laying off 105 people in Midland; Fort Worth-based Black Mountain Sand laying off 87; and Ohio-based Covia laying off 82 people.

Among the fuel distributors, the Midland office of tanker truck hauler Sun Coast Resources reported laying off 70 people from its Midland truck yard while the fuel distribution arm of Sunoco cut 55 jobs from its Odessa truck yard, according to the Chronicle article.

(Read more at the Houston Chronicle)

The Democrat hate for the oil/gas industry surely doesn’t need an introduction

After years of blogging on Al Gore, Maxine Waters, and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, surely there should not be a need for explaining why Democrats would love to tank the oil/gas industry.

Farmers say they may have to kill and discard baby pigs as slaughterhouses close and the industry faces losing $5 billion

The Business Insider reports in a 14 April 2020 article that farmers have been forced to kill pigs once meat packing plants have been closed due to coronavirus.

Hog farmers are struggling in the face of absent workers, shuttered pork packaging plants, and a loss of buyers in restaurants and international markets due to the coronavirus pandemic.

The result is a glut of excess hogs, making it more expensive to sell pigs to be made into pork than to simply kill the animals.

The National Pork Producers Council (NPPC) said on Tuesday that farmers will lose almost $37 per hog and almost $5 billion collectively for every hog marketed for the rest of 2020, citing economists Dr. Dermot Hayes and Dr. Steve Meyer. Prior to the coronavirus pandemic, the NPPC said analysts predicted farmers would earn roughly $10 per hog.

On a call with reporters, NPPC President Howard Roth said that euthanizing is going to start coming up in farmers’ discussions “absent immediate and significant government intervention,” Star Tribune’s Adam Belz tweeted. According to Roth, the number of baby pigs being euthanized will “soar dramatically” without intervention.

“Hogs are backing up on farms with nowhere to go, leaving farmers with tragic choices to make,” Roth said in a statement. “Dairy producers can dump milk. Fruit and vegetable growers can dump produce. But, hog farmers have nowhere to move their hogs.”

The NPPC is asking that the federal government purchase more than $1 billion in backed-up meat supply, which the USDA can use to supply food banks. The organization is also seeking equitable direct payments to pork producers and to allow family farms to take out emergency loans offered by the Small Business Administration.

(Read more at the Business Insider)

Considering the pork that was stuffed into the PPP, why didn’t Pelosi help the pork farmers?

It would just seem natural that Pelosi, such a lover of pork, would help the pork industry. However, her parts of the Paycheck Protection Plan put greater restrictions on the USDA and swine raising industry.

Farmers fear USDA’s $19B in coronavirus aid won’t ‘scratch the surface’

A 28 April 2020 United Press article points out how the monies set aside to aid the cattle industry will likely be vastly insufficient. Thanks, Democrats.

As the federal government prepares to distribute an unprecedented $19 billion in aid to farmers struggling through the coronavirus pandemic, farm industry experts say it won’t be enough.

“That $19 billion helps,” said Pat Westhoff, director of the Food and Agricultural Policy Research Institute at the University of Minnesota. “But if things deteriorate further, that may not even scratch the surface for what people are going to need to get through this.”

The issue is especially severe among livestock producers, Westhoff said.

That sector is facing an immediate crisis because the widespread closure of meat packing plants because of outbreaks of the virus makes it impossible for many farmers to sell all their animals.

“It’s a mess,” said Jim Petrik, a South Dakota rancher who raises cattle and hogs. “Almost all our local plants are out. It’s going to be a bloodbath for producers.”

Hog producers are losing money every day. The National Pork Producers Council on April 17 released a “conservative” estimate that hog farmers would lose a collective $5 billion in 2020.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture has allocated $1.6 billion in aid for the hog industry.

(Read more at the United Press)

For the Democrat’s supposed empathy for those in “food deserts,” there was no planning in Pelosi’s stimulus (Kennedy Center, etc) for food

If Democrats really cared about the poor inner city people within “food deserts,” why didn’t they arrange to get the soon-to-be-wasted beef, pork, and vegetables from the farms with some compensation to the farmers?

Farmers plow crops under

In an 11 April 2020 New York Times article, we find how farmers have felt forced to destroy the crops they spent their recent lives at growing and harvesting.

In Wisconsin and Ohio, farmers are dumping thousands of gallons of fresh milk into lagoons and manure pits. An Idaho farmer has dug huge ditches to bury 1 million pounds of onions. And in South Florida, a region that supplies much of the Eastern half of the United States with produce, tractors are crisscrossing bean and cabbage fields, plowing perfectly ripe vegetables back into the soil.

After weeks of concern about shortages in grocery stores and mad scrambles to find the last box of pasta or toilet paper roll, many of the nation’s largest farms are struggling with another ghastly effect of the pandemic. They are being forced to destroy tens of millions of pounds of fresh food that they can no longer sell.

The closing of restaurants, hotels and schools has left some farmers with no buyers for more than half their crops. And even as retailers see spikes in food sales to Americans who are now eating nearly every meal at home, the increases are not enough to absorb all of the perishable food that was planted weeks ago and intended for schools and businesses.

The amount of waste is staggering. The nation’s largest dairy cooperative, Dairy Farmers of America, estimates that farmers are dumping as many as 3.7 million gallons of milk each day. A single chicken processor is smashing 750,000 unhatched eggs every week.

Many farmers say they have donated part of the surplus to food banks and Meals on Wheels programs, which have been overwhelmed with demand. But there is only so much perishable food that charities with limited numbers of refrigerators and volunteers can absorb.

And the costs of harvesting, processing and then transporting produce and milk to food banks or other areas of need would put further financial strain on farms that have seen half their paying customers disappear. Exporting much of the excess food is not feasible either, farmers say, because many international customers are also struggling through the pandemic and recent currency fluctuations make exports unprofitable.

“It’s heartbreaking,” said Paul Allen, co-owner of R.C. Hatton, who has had to destroy millions of pounds of beans and cabbage at his farms in South Florida and Georgia.

The widespread destruction of fresh food — at a time when many Americans are hurting financially and millions are suddenly out of work — is an especially dystopian turn of events, even by the standards of a global pandemic. It reflects the profound economic uncertainty wrought by the virus and how difficult it has been for huge sectors of the economy, like agriculture, to adjust to such a sudden change in how they must operate.

Even as Mr. Allen and other farmers have been plowing fresh vegetables into the soil, they have had to plant the same crop again, hoping the economy will have restarted by the time the next batch of vegetables is ready to harvest. But if the food service industry remains closed, then those crops, too, may have to be destroyed.

(Read more at the New York Times)

Blame this on the Democrats that forced social distancing on everyone

Every action has a reaction, even when you don’t think about the action. Sorry about that, Little Lina Hildago.

About 20% of bars and restaurants will not re-open

Business Insider reports that almost 20% of bars and restaurants will remain closed.

UBS predicts that up to one in five restaurants in the US could close permanently because of the coronavirus pandemic.

On Wednesday, UBS analyst Dennis Geiger referenced the National Restaurant Association saying that about 3% of restaurants in the US have already closed permanently.

That would mean 30,000 restaurants have already shuttered, based on the NRA’s estimate of more than 1 million restaurants in the US. According to Geiger, the carnage is far from over.

“Closer to 20% is possible considering the health and overleverage of independent owners and select franchisees across casual dining in particular,” Geiger wrote in Wednesday’s note.

If one in five American restaurants closes, it would result in about 200,000 locations permanently shuttering. The industry employs 15.6 million people in the US, according to the NRA.

The NRA surveyed more than 4,000 restaurant owners and operators last week. About 11% said that they anticipate they would permanently close within the next 30 days.

A JPMorgan Chase Institute analysis of 597,000 small businesses from February to October 2015 found that half of restaurants had a cash buffer large enough to support more than 16 days of business. The other half would go out of business before 16 days were over if they were not bringing in money.

Roger Lipton, a restaurant industry analyst, investor, and adviser who recently wrote a blog post about the upcoming “restaurant apocalypse,” told Business Insider that the restaurant industry was facing an unexpected and unprecedented challenge.

(Read more at the Business Insider)

  1. Democrats won’t follow their own directives

Beaumont mayor defends nail salon visit during her own stay at home order

The Beaumont Enterprise reported in a 22 April 2020 article that the Beaumont mayor defended her violation of her own stay-at-home order.

BeaumontMayorBeaumont Mayor Becky Ames left Tuesday’s City Council meeting to find her phone flooded with text messages and angry social media criticism after a picture surfaced of her getting service at a local nail salon.

A cropped version of the photo first appeared on a local blog, saying Ames went to have her nails done on Monday.

Nail and hair salons are among the businesses ordered to close across Beaumont during the coronavirus pandemic.

Ames, who signed the stay-at-home orders on March 27, acknowledged that the photo could make people think she was getting a manicure.

Noting that there is no nail technician in the photograph, however, the mayor insisted that she did not violate any of the stay-at-home orders.

Violating the restriction is punishable by a fine of up to $2,000.

“I did not do anything wrong,” she told The Enterprise. “I would not be upset with anyone who I found out did this.”

Ames said she’d stopped in to pick up acetone to soak off artificial “dip” nails after they’d grown out and become painful. She said she felt she could not take them off herself.

“Six weeks ago or more, I went to get a manicure and ended up getting the powder nails for the first time. I loved it and it looked great, but as they grew out I started looking like a witch,” she said. “I tried to take them off and texted the lady that did them, who is the owner of the salon, to ask what to do.”

Ames said the salon owner told her the shop wasn’t open, but that she would mix up some solution for pickup. The photograph was taken, she said, while Ames was soaking her nails to learn how to take them off.

The photo shows Ames, wearing a face mask, with her fingertips in a bowl.

The mayor said she stopped by the salon Tuesday, not Monday, and was there for about 10 minutes before going straight to the Beaumont City Council meeting. She said she was able to remove half of the dip nails during that time.

(Read more at the Beaumont Enterprise)

Who cares why you did it?

This is the normal for Democrats: one standard for the masses and carte blanche for the rulers.

Lina Hidalgo gathers masses to Montrose to encourage Democrats to complete census soon after issuing a “Stay-Home, Work Safe” order

As originally posted at this blog, the Houston Chronicle reported on an 1 April 2020 rally (yes, an April Fool’s rally) by Lina Hidalgo where she gathered hundreds in Montrose and encouraged them to fill out their census.

Texas’ biggest counties and cities, including Houston, Dallas, San Antonio and Austin, are shouldering that burden on their own, officials said during a launch event at the Children’s Museum Monday.

LenaHidalgoNotSocialDistancing
Lina Hidalgo (hypocrite and Democrat) not enforcing social distancing

“We are doing everything we can to make sure that folks participate, said Harris County Judge Lina Hidalgo. She called Census 2020 a crucial moment “to live up to that right that we have…to be counted.”

MoreThan20Democrats
More lack of social distancing among the crowd in this predominantly Democrat area

Amid heightened tensions for immigrants under the Trump administration, Hidalgo made an impassioned plea, in the Spanish version of her remarks, to prospective participants to set aside any fears about filling out the form.

NotSocialDistancing
Packed like sardines for this Montrose event with Lina Hidalgo

“The Census is very safe, I want to make that very clear, that under penalty of prison or fine, nobody can share your personal information from the Census — not ICE, the FBI, no organization or federal agency can access your personal information about the Census,” she said in Spanish.

AnotherFailureToSocialDistance
These Democrats send us home from jobs for weeks on end, empty our jails, but do not practice social distancing or limit their crowds to less than 10.

(Read the tripe at the Houston Chronicle)

What happened to the crisis?

Something tells me that the crisis might only be in the media, unless you are a Democrat who needs to rally the troops.

Chicago mayor defends getting haircut after her $500 stay-at-home violation fines: ‘I am the face of the city’

BizPacReview reported in a 7 April 2020 article how the mayor of Chicago decided to defend her getting a haircut after issuing a stay-at-home order with a $500 fine for violation of that order.

SG-chicago-mayor-lori-lightfoot-haircut
Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot

Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot defended getting a haircut in defiance of her state’s stay-at-home order.

The Democrat insisted that she’s “the face of this city” who needs to look good for her adoring fans. So it’s okay that she broke her own rules against people leaving their homes unnecessarily.

Hairstylists and barbers are not on Illinois’ list of essential businesses and must be closed during the coronavirus outbreak.

A defensive Mayor Lightfoot said: “The woman who cut my hair had a mask and gloves on, so I am practicing what I’m preaching.”

For the record, the Facebook photo of Lightfoot with her hairstylist shows that neither wore a face mask, and they stood just inches from each other.

In a recent public service announcement, Lightfoot urged Chicagoans to stay home to save lives. She told women: “Getting your roots done is not essential.”

(Read more at BizPacReview)

I have news for Chicago’s mayor, she was not elected for her looks

While I have reviewed her political stances and, therefore, cannot determine why anyone might want to elect her, whether or not she had a haircut would not make a difference in most people’s vote.

  1. Democrats and those who benefit from the crisis have bumped the numbers

Drug overdose, head trauma deaths added to coronavirus death toll

The Daily Wire pointed out that drug overdose, heart attack, head trauma, and other death causes have been lumped into the coronavirus death toll.

A 37-year-old California man who died of a drug overdose has been added to the novel coronavirus death toll.

Though the death of the unidentified man was caused by a drug overdose, he also tested positive for the novel coronavirus, which was coded as a “significant continuing condition,” according to Ventura County spokeswoman Ashley Bautista, VA Star reported Thursday.

“Ventura County’s coronavirus death toll increased to 16 on Thursday as county officials reported two additional deaths, including a 37-year-old man,” the report said.

“The man died as a result of a drug overdose while infected with COVID-19, a significant contributing condition, according to county spokeswoman Ashley Bautista. He is the youngest victim to die from the virus yet in the county,” VA Star added.

Last month, a 61-year-old Pennsylvania man who died from a head injury and tested positive for COVID-19 was added to the coronavirus death toll, too.

“Lehigh County Coroner Eric Minnich confirmed the patient died Friday night at St. Luke’s University Hospital in Fountain Hill,” Lehigh Valley Live reported. “He said the primary cause of the man’s death was a head injury from a fall at home, but that the virus was listed as a contributing factor to his death.”

Earlier this month, leading voice on the White House Coronavirus Task Force Dr. Deborah Birx explained that COVID-19 deaths in the United States have “very liberal” recording guidance, noting that anyone who tests positive for the virus and dies would be included in their numbers of coronavirus deaths.

“I think in this country, we are taking a very liberal approach to mortality. And I think the reporting here has been pretty straightforward over the last five to six weeks,” she said, adding, “If someone dies with COVID-19, we are counting that.”

“There are other countries, that if you have a pre-existing condition, and let’s say the virus called you to go to the ICU (intensive care unit) and then have a heart or kidney problem,” she added. “Some countries are recording that as a kidney issue, or a heart issue, and not a COVID-19 death.” In the U.S., Dr. Birx suggested, “we’re still recording it” as a COVID-19 death.

Pennsylvania has had to remove hundreds of coronavirus deaths from its official death count, following questions of accuracy and highlighted discrepancies by area coroners.

(Read more at the Daily Wire)

The Democrats do not care about the overdoses, just about promoting their cause

Currently, the Democrats’ cause is showing how bad the coronavirus crisis has become under Trump (even when it takes fabrication by the Democrats).

Democrats add thousands of untested people to the coronavirus mortality totals from New York City

The New York Times provided a 14 April 2020 article saying that New York City inflated the coronavirus death count by potential thousands.

New York City, already a world epicenter of the coronavis outbreak, sharply increased its death toll by more than 3,700 victims on Tuesday, after officials said they were now including people who had never tested positive for the virus but were presumed to have died of it.

The new figures, released by the city’s Health Department, drove up the number of people killed in New York City to more than 10,000, and appeared to increase the overall United States death count by 17 percent to more than 26,000.

(Read more at the New York Times)

Follow the money

Considering all of the federal money going into the coffers of the New York City medical community, there is little question as to why they expand these numbers.

Dr. Birx: “Unlike some countries, if someone dies with COVID-19, we are counting that as a COVID-19 death.”

In an 8 April 2020 article by Real Clear Politics, we find that Dr. Birx has admitted to inflating the coronavirus mortality rate numbers.

At Tuesday’s White House coronavirus press conference, task force member Dr. Deborah Birx said that while some countries are reporting coronavirus fatality numbers differently, in the U.S. you are counted as a victim of the pandemic if you die while testing positive for the virus, even if something else causes your death.

: DR. DEBORAH BIRX: So, I think in this country we’ve taken a very liberal approach to mortality. And I think the reporting here has been pretty straightforward over the last five to six weeks. Prior to that when there wasn’t testing in January and February that’s a very different situation and unknown.

There are other countries that if you had a preexisting condition and let’s say the virus caused you to go to the ICU and then have a heart or kidney problem some countries are recording as a heart issue or a kidney issue and not a COVID-19 death. Right now we are still recording it and we will I mean the great thing about having forms that come in and a form that has the ability to market as COVID-19 infection the intent is right now that those if someone dies with COVID-19 we are counting that as a COVID-19 death.

(See the video at Real Clear Politics)

This not only shows the dishonesty of the Democrats, but also the back room deals being made within the medical community

Admittedly, the people in leadership of the medical community leadership do usually not actually continue to practice medicine.

  1. Democrats have used the coronavirus to push their agenda

New Orleans Mayor issues coronavirus order allowing ban on sale, transportation of firearms

Breitbart reports on the action of the New Orleans Mayor as she works to restrict the ability of citizens to protect themselves during this crisis.

NewOrleansMayorLaToyaCantrellNew Orleans Mayor LaToya Cantrell (D) signed a coronavirus emergency order last week allowing her to ban the sale and transportation of firearms.

She signed a follow-up proclamation on March 16, 2020, further emphasizing her emergency powers to “suspend or limit the sale, dispensing, or transportation, of alcoholic beverages.”

The declaration declaring the mayor’s power to restrict gun sales and transportation says she is “empowered, if necessary, to suspend or limit the sale of alcoholic beverages, firearms, explosives, and combustibles.”

On March 16, 2020, the Second Amendment Foundation responded to Cantrell’s claims of emergency powers over firearms by reminding her that they sued over Second Amendment infringement following Hurricane Katrina and will do so during the era of coronavirus if needed.

(Read more at Breitbart)

What could the reason for this ban be, other than symbolic?

This does not stop any law-abiding gun owner from protecting his or her property. However, it might keep a cash-strapped gun owner from paying his or her mortgage or rent in the event that there have been coronavirus-related layoffs. Additionally, it would prevent a law-abiding person from buying a firearm in a time of need.

However, there will be criminals in New Orleans with new guns. There may be coyotes selling an array of firearms not available legally and LaToya will not have a thing to say about it.

Still, now that she has pulled this little stunt, she will later produce a Mike-Bloomberg-esque commercial claiming that she stood up to the National Rifle Association.

Nancy Pelosi added these items to the first coronavirus relief bill

As originally posted on this blog, according to Politico, these are some of the Democrat priorities that held up aid to Americans due to the coronavirus situation:

  • $20 million for the Bureau of Reclamation
  • $25 million for the Kennedy Center
  • $25 billion for ravaged transit agencies
  • $26 million for overtime for TSA employees
  • $20 million to help the TSA to buy new swabs for detecting explosives
  • $31 million for “bio-surveillance of wildlife”
  • $45 million to help the Agricultural Marketing Service grade commodities like beef, eggs and, well, pork
  • $100 million for NASA construction and environmental compliance
  • $100 million for the Legal Services Corporation
  • $300 million for the National Endowment for the Arts
  • $300 million for the National Endowment for the Humanities
  • $300 million for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting
  • The Postal Service got $25 billion, plus $11 billion worth of debt forgiveness and $15 billion in new borrowing authority
  • And so much more …

If this does not illustrate the Democrat lust for power, …

If this does not illustrate the Democrat lust for power, then little other (other than a lobbiest with a wad of bills) would.

Democrats have used the coronavirus to release convicts

As first posted on this blog, Dallas Sheriff Marian Brown was reported by Dallas Fox affiliate KDFW in a 16 April 2020 article to have released 1,000 prisonsers due to her fears of a coronavirus outbreak.

Jails across the country are seeing more and more inmates and workers infected. In Dallas County, there is an effort to control the spread by releasing some inmates.

The Dallas County Sheriff’s Office has confirmed 42 positive cases of COVID-19 in inmates. That’s 30 more than were reported this past week. Another 16 detention officers and deputies have contracted the virus, although two of those officers have returned to work.

About a thousand inmates have been released from the Dallas County jail to help reduce the risk of transmission of COVID-19 inside the facility. Inmate advocacy groups applaud the move, but still have concerns.

Tiara Cooper, formerly incarcerated at Lew Sterrett, now advocates for inmates with live free faith in Texas. She says they would still like to see more inmates released to allow for more distancing inside the jail.

She also said there’s concern for newly released inmates and the communities they return to. She worries some inmates may have been exposed to the virus and of those released, she says many will end up homeless or return to communities with an already high number of COVID-19 cases.

“My hope for the people that are being released is that they be tested as soon as possible and that they have those direct services that are needed and necessary in this hour,” Cooper said.

A spokesman for the sheriff’s office says inmates are screened before being released and if there’s a possibility that person has been exposed to COVID-19, he or she is provided instructions by Parkland Hospital medical staff about what they need to do when they get out.

(Read more at KDFW)

If two inmates from Harris County were released and both committed new felonies, what will happen with these 1,000?

Recently, I documented two cases where social-justice Judge Jennifer Gaut and County Judge Lina Hidalgo each released a felon and both of those felons committed new offenses. With this in mind, what will likely happen in Dallas?

  1. Democrats have weaponized the coronavirus

New York Magazine‘s Olivia Nuzzi closes the coronavirus briefing with a clownish question

Breitbart reports that the New York Magazine‘s Olivia Nuzzi closed out the 27 April 2020 coronavirus briefing with a politically-charged question.

A writer with the leftwing New York Magazine asked President Donald Trump at a coronavirus briefing at the White House on Monday if he deserves to be re-elected given the fact that more Americans have died from the virus than did in the Vietnam war.

According to the National Archives, 58,220 Americans died fighting in the Vietnam War. The number of deaths from coronavirus as of April 25 was 52,459, according to the Statista website.

Olivia Nuzzi asked Trump, “If an American president loses more Americans over the course of six weeks than died in the entirety of the Vietnam War, does he deserve to be re-elected?”

(Read more at Breitbart)

As we have observed from the beginning of the Trump administration, there is no reporting

From the beginning of the Trump administration, there has been in the range of 98% negative propaganda from the Democrats that remain employed in the main stream media. For that reason, I do not read their papers and magazines unless their articles come up through an online search.

Governor Whitmer appoints committee to research the racism of coronavirus

The Detroit News ran a 9 April 2020 article on how Governor Whitmer has appointed a committee to research how coronavirus has been racist. This should garner at least a few Democrat votes.

Gov. Gretchen Whitmer said Thursday she is appointing a coronavirus task force to recommend ways to address the racial disparities in the occurrence of the disease COVID-19 among Michiganians.

She noted that over 40% of deaths due to COVID-19 in Michigan have been among African Americans, although African Americans make up 14% of the state’s population. About 31% of deaths have been among whites, 24% of unknown race and 3% among individuals of multiple races.

The trend has also played out nationally, with one in three patients requiring hospitalization in the first month of the COVID-19 epidemic were African American, according to hospital data released by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

“This virus is holding up a mirror to our society and reminding us of the deep inequities in our country — from basic lack of access to care, to access to transportation, to lack of protections in the work place,” Whitmer said during a press briefing.

“These inequities have that hit people of color and vulnerable communities the hardest.”

(Read more at the Detroit News)

While there may be racial issues with how people approach medical issues or are treated at hospitals, germs don’t discern race

While I hope there are no cases of racism at hosptials and I hope that people of all races will seek medical help when it is needed, we don’t need to find out whether germs are racist. There is no racism among germs.

However, as with the following article, there may be payoffs between Democrats.

Michigan Governor Whitmer cancels contract with two Democrat-linked firms that she tapped to track coronavirus

Britain’s Daily Mail points out how Governor Whitmer was forced to backtrack after getting caught in a scandalous deal with two Democrat-linked companies.

  • Democratic Governor Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan’s administration abruptly canceled a contract with a firm tapped to help carrying out contact tracing
  • The firm was going to help track down contacts of infected people
  • The contract was worth $200,000 but Whitmer’s administration has admitted it circumvented the process by which state contracts are normally awarded
  • Republicans complained the company is owned by a Democratic consultant who planned to use software developed by a firm with ties to Democratic campaigns
  • Mike Kolehouse, a Democratic political consultant tweeted: ‘I hope he gets coronavirus ASAP. Can someone do the country a favor and cough on that man?’

The Democratic Governor of Michigan, Gretchen Whitmer, has announced she is to rescind a state contract on tracking the spread of coronavirus that had been awarded to a Democratic consulting firm.

Whitmer’s decision to hire a Democratic political firm to run a public health project drew an immediate backlash after it was announced on Monday.

The firm, Great Lakes Community Engagement, is run by Mike Kolehouse, a Democratic political consultant who had made unsavory comments about President Trump in recent weeks.

Kolehouse wrote in a tweet regarding Trump in March: ‘I hope he gets coronavirus ASAP. Can someone do the country a favor and cough on that man?’

The consultancy firm had planned to use software that is also used by a Democratic data firm that is also working to help get the governor reelected.

The contract was worth $200,000 over an eight-week period, but Whitmer’s administration has now admitted that it circumvented the process by which state contracts are normally awarded.

Republican’s then weighed in and accused the governor of surreptitiously obtaining data that might be useful for her political campaign under the guise of a healthcare project.

(Read more at the Daily Mail)

Flashback: 2010 and doctors start dropping out of the system due issues with Obamacare

Featured

Flashback: 2010 and doctors start dropping out of the system due to the strains of Obamacare

__

The New York Times: As Medicaid Payments shrink, patients are abandoned

Shortly after Democrats passed the Affordable Care Act in 2010 (adding paperwork requirements for doctors and reducing payment made by Medicaid), doctors began dropping out, as chronicled by a 16 March 2010 article in the New York Times.

Carol Y. Vliet’s cancer returned with a fury last summer, the tumors metastasizing to her brain, liver, kidneys and throat.

As she began a punishing regimen of chemotherapy and radiation, Mrs. Vliet found a measure of comfort in her monthly appointments with her primary care physician, Dr. Saed J. Sahouri, who had been monitoring her health for nearly two years.

ObamacareUnaffordable-1She was devastated, therefore, when Dr. Sahouri informed her a few months later that he could no longer see her because, like a growing number of doctors, he had stopped taking patients with Medicaid.

Dr. Sahouri said that his reimbursements from Medicaid were so low — often no more than $25 per office visit — that he was losing money every time a patient walked in his exam room.

The final insult, he said, came when Michigan cut those payments by 8 percent last year to help close a gaping budget shortfall.

“My office manager was telling me to do this for a long time, and I resisted,” Dr. Sahouri said. “But after a while you realize that we’re really losing money on seeing those patients, not even breaking even. We were starting to lose more and more money, month after month.”

(Read more at the a 16 March 2010 article in the New York Times)

Now that we have become accustomed to being shackled by Obamacare, how much better would our response have been had these doctors not retired

Although Governor Abbott fast-tracked measures to allow out-of-state doctors and nurses to practice in Texas and President Trump encouraged retired healthcare workers to return to work, wouldn’t these measures be less necessary had Obamacare never been pushed through on a Democrat party-line vote?

Nancy Pelosi calls President Trump “a coward” & then invokes God


Nancy Pelosi calls President Trump a coward & then invokes God

As reported by Yahoo News on 6 December 2019, Nancy Pelosi reacted violently to a question from James Rosen of Sinclair News. Possibly in response to the observed Trump Derangement Syndrome observed by the reporter, that reporter asked, “Do you hate President Trump?” In response, the following came:

SanFranNanI think the president is a coward when it comes to helping our kids who are afraid of gun violence.

I think he is cruel when he doesn’t deal with helping our “Dreamers.” I think he’s in denial about the climate crisis. However, that is about the election. Take it up in the election. This is about the Constitution of the United States and the facts that lead to the president’s violation of his oath of office.

As a Catholic, I resent you using the word “hate” in a sentence that addresses me. I don’t hate anyone. I was raised in a way that is a heart full of love and always pray for the president. And I still pray for the president. I pray for the president all the time. So don’t mess with me when it comes to words like that.

So she says that she does not hate; however, what do her actions say?

First, take the actions within this presser

Even if we limit our attention to this presser, we see that she called the President a “coward” for not accepting gun control measures. In truth, no gun control law has made people more safe (otherwise, Chicago would be one of the safest cities in the nation — rather than one of the leading murder capitals). Therefore, her calling the President a “coward” was nothing but an empty insult.

Regarding empty insults, Jesus said (but the emphasis is mine):

But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother shall be guilty before the court; and whoever says to his brother, ‘ You good-for-nothing,’ shall be guilty before the supreme court; and whoever says, ‘You fool,’ shall be guilty enough to go into the fiery hell. (Matthew 5:22 NASB)

In addition to endangering herself of fiery hell by assigning an empty insult to the President, Ms. Pelosi went on to mix in several lies. First, she accused him of cruelty regarding “our Dreamers.” The problem is that the last President originally repeatedly said that he could not change immigration law. Then he changed it by executive fiat (also known as abuse of power). No laws were passed to accommodate this new class of non-citizens (although Trump offered a deal that the Democrats and Pelosi rejected). Hence, she cannot honestly claim that Trump alone has acted cruelly toward the Dreamers.

Regarding the third accusation by Pelosi (on how Trump has been denying climate change), since AOC’s Chief of Staff admitted that their climate change initiative was only introduced as a means to introduce socialism, we can all afford to deny “climate change” or “global smarming” or whatever junk science name Democrats decide to assign to their smoke and mirrors.

Consider her actions for and against the powerless

By asking you to consider her actions regarding the powerless, I primarily speak of the unborn. Her side calls them “fetuses” and uses other euphemisms. However, more to the point, her party has recently promoted full-term abortion. And though we cannot blame her for the over 45 million babies killed in the US between 1973 and 2015, Democrats cannot be held blameless. Therefore, for Pelosi to claim her Catholic faith while not renouncing her commitment to abortion means denying the core of the following Biblical mandates:

You shall not afflict any widow or orphan. If you afflict him at all, and if he does cry out to Me, I will surely hear his cry; (Exodus 22:22‭-‬23 NASB)

You have seen it, for You have beheld mischief and vexation to take it into Your hand. The unfortunate commits himself to You; You have been the helper of the orphan. (Psalms 10:14 NASB)

A father of the fatherless and a judge for the widows, Is God in His holy habitation. God makes a home for the lonely; He leads out the prisoners into prosperity, Only the rebellious dwell in a parched land. (Psalms 68:5‭-‬6 NASB)

The Lord protects the strangers; He supports the fatherless and the widow, But He thwarts the way of the wicked. (Psalms 146:9 NASB)

Open your mouth for the mute, For the rights of all the unfortunate. Open your mouth, judge righteously, And defend the rights of the afflicted and needy. (Proverbs 31:8‭-‬9 NASB)

Learn to do good; Seek justice, Reprove the ruthless, Defend the orphan, Plead for the widow. (Isaiah 1:17 NASB)

Honor widows who are widows indeed; (1 Timothy 5:3 NASB)

Pure and undefiled religion in the sight of our God and Father is this: to visit orphans and widows in their distress, and to keep oneself unstained by the world. (James 1:27 NASB)

but whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to stumble, it would be better for him to have a heavy millstone hung around his neck, and to be drowned in the depth of the sea. (Matthew 18:6 NASB)

By asking you to consider her actions regarding the powerless, I also could be talking about her lack of action in support of the poor of America. That is, the people who the Democrats have forgotten in their headlong rush to accommodate illegal aliens. Admittedly, while we will always have poor in America, opportunities for the poor have reduced with the Democrat’s drive to aid the illegal aliens through sanctuary cities, Democrat policies, and other initiatives.

In the current context of her presser, I might also refer to the President the United States of America. As soon as the Democrats voted for the impeachment procedures, we knew that:

Consider her position as a Democrat

The Democrats — the party who booed God and removed reference to Him from their party platform — this is the party that Nancy Pelosi leads. Therefore, this is the party that might have some Christian influence were she as much of a Christian as she claims. In her position in the “party of the “nones” and the party whose most recent President sued religious organizations to force them to violate their consciences — she could make a difference.

That is, she could make a difference if she were a true follower of the Church.

Give the devil his due, she does make one right references

Pelosi does correctly note that Christians should pray for their leaders, for we are told:

First of all, then, I urge that entreaties and prayers, petitions and thanksgivings, be made on behalf of all men, for kings and all who are in authority, so that we may lead a tranquil and quiet life in all godliness and dignity. (1 Timothy 2:1‭-‬2 NASB)

However, as we know of Satan when he came to tempt Jesus, he came misquoting and then ignoring the central points to scripture (Mark 4:1-11).

PelosiOnAbortionAdditionally, while we know that Christians are saved by grace (Ephesians 2:8-9), we also know that faith without works is worthless (James 2:18-26). Therefore, Nancy Pelosi’s proclamation of Christian love, prayer, and faith without any proof of it within her professional life seems pretty useless.

Transsexual stories not in the news


‘Hundreds’ of young trans people seeking help to return to original sex

If we jump across the Atlantic to Sky News, we can read of the many children who want to return to their original sex after transsexual treatment.

Hundreds of young transgender people are seeking help to return to their original sex, a woman who is setting up a charity has told Sky News.

CharlieEvans

Charlie Evans, 28, was born female but identified as male for nearly 10 years before detransitioning.

The number of young people seeking gender transition is at an all-time high but we hear very little, if anything, about those who may come to regret their decision.

There is currently no data to reflect the number who may be unhappy in their new gender or who may opt to detransition to their biological sex.

Charlie detransitioned and went public with her story last year – and said she was stunned by the number of people she discovered in a similar position.

“I’m in communication with 19 and 20-year-olds who have had full gender reassignment surgery who wish they hadn’t, and their dysphoria hasn’t been relieved, they don’t feel better for it,” she says.

“They don’t know what their options are now.”

(Read more at Sky News)

Although this article says “there is no data …” on how many are unhappy with their new gender, there are a number of studies that say otherwise

Consider the following data:

  • At least 12 studies indicate that slightly over 90% of children with gender dysphoria will grow out of the condition by puberty and more by adulthood
  • Most children experiencing gender dysphoria also have other psychological issues
  • A survey conducted in 2010 by the National Center for Transgender Equality and the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force – neither of them members of the vast rightwing conspiracy – revealed that 41 percent of transgendered Americans have attempted suicide. This is a rate more than 25 times higher than the population at large.
  • Even secular media sources are talking more about the lies behind this industry. However, mass media news and reality shows still paint it as somewhat glamorous.
  • Surgery won’t reassign sex, because our sex is determined when we were in the womb. Sex is binary, either male or female. Identities are in our thoughts or feelings.
  • Surgery only masculinizes or feminizes someone’s outward appearance. People aren’t born in the wrong body. It is biologically impossible to change one’s sex.
  • There are at least 6500 genes which are expressed differently in men and women which will continue to function as the sex someone is born as.
  • The facts of biology won’t be changed by your feelings or even the fact that you can get a surgery which they call “reassignment.”
  • Up to 20% have regret, even after the operations, according to over 100 international medical studies. The reality of the expected results does not meet the mind’s expectations, which caused a 44-year-old woman in Belgium to request euthanasia after the surgery because she was psychologically distraught. “I was ready to celebrate my new birth. But when I looked in the mirror, I was disgusted with myself,” said Nancy Verheist (birth name) who wanted to be known as Nathan. They granted the euthanasia.
  • A study from 2016 Centers for Medicare and Medicaid indicated there were no meaningful improvements to the quality of life for those who had transitioned.
  • Suicidal thoughts don’t reduce if the person had them before. Or they become a new reality.
  • Body-identity Integrity Disorder (BIID) is when people want to cut off healthy body parts. For instance, someone who identifies as an amputee but has all his/her body parts would not be allowed surgery to remove body parts to become an amputee. Their feelings are ignored while those wanting to “change” their sex are not. Therefore, the medical doctors willing to do these reassignments ignore the facts above to make money off gender dysphoria or BIID, and therefore are probably violating the Hippocratic Oath of “Do no harm.” Remember this in case you need to sue the doctor later if you have regrets. But they’ll make you sign paperwork to prevent that because they know.
  • There is an institute in Belgrade who does gender re-re-assignment for those who regret previous surgeries and want to return to their biological sex.
  • Harvard professor Jerome Kagan, with 40 years of studying children, says parents who are particularly affirming of their children’s cross-sex identification ultimately have outcomes in health and well-being which are worst.
  • Another lie is once you change you’ll be happy. The stories of those formerly in the LGBTQ choice proves otherwise.

(Hat tip to the podcasts of Bryan Fischer, Abraham Hamilton, and Bishop E. W. Jackson)

Puberty Blockers Linked to Thousands of Deaths – Liberty Counsel

According to Liberty Counsel and the Food & Drug Administration, thousands of deaths in the United States can be linked to puberty blockers.

Drugs that are being used as a puberty blocker in gender-confused youth have been linked to tens of thousands of serious reactions and thousands of deaths, as well as other serious medical issues, according to Food & Drug Administration (FDA) data.

lupron

The FDA has now documented over 41,000 adverse reactions suffered by patients who took Leuprolide Acetate, known as Lupron, which is used as a hormone blocker. There have been 25,645 reactions considered “serious,” including 6,379 deaths.

Lupron is traditionally used for treatment of prostate cancer as it inhibits the flow of testosterone over the prostate. The drug is clinically approved for treatment of precocious puberty, a condition where children start their pubertal processes at an abnormally early age and the blocker is administered for a short time until the proper age. However, it is being prescribed off-label for use in children who have been diagnosed with gender dysphoria, despite the lack of formal FDA approval for that purpose and the absence of any peer-reviewed studies done on the drug’s long-term effects.

Lupron and synthetic hormones have been documented to contribute to physical problems such as blood clots and other cardiovascular complications, brittle bones and faulty joints, altered psyches, and permanent sterilization. Yet many of the long-term repercussions will not be felt for years.

Despite these serious issues, sales of Lupron were approximately $669 million in 2017 in the United States alone.

In an interview with The Christian Post, Dr. Michael Laidlaw, a California-based pediatric endocrinologist, stated that he knows of no other psychological condition that is treated by administering hormones out of alignment from their normal levels. When injected into a physically healthy body, the drug interrupts a normally-functioning endocrine system and causes a condition where the male testes or the female ovaries produce little or no sex hormones.

Currently doctors are giving testosterone to gender-confused girls as young as eight years old and teen girls as young as 13 are having their breasts removed via mastectomy procedures. Boys the age of 17 can have penises the developmental age of a nine-year-old’s or lose sexual sensation all together due to hormone blockers.

Dr. Laidlaw said, “Gender dysphoria is not an endocrine condition, but is a psychological one and should, therefore, be treated with proper psychological care. But it becomes an endocrine condition once you start using puberty blockers and giving cross-sex hormones to kids. There have been few physicians willing to stand up and say, ‘We need to question this, there is something wrong here. Why are we using cancer drugs on kids without cancer and stopping normal puberty?” Laidlaw said.

(Read more at Liberty Counsel)

Because of the physical harm and death being dealt on children, this seems to be a mass case of Munchhausen Syndrome by Proxy

Be certain that children between 3 and 15 are too young to make decisions that will:

  • Cut their life expectancy dramatically,
  • Prevent them from ever having children,
  • Increase their chances of contracting cancer, becoming clinically depressed, and otherwise being burdened, and
  • Will leave physical and mental scars.

Therefore, I would suggest that the above article provides evidence that liberals in the US have begun experiencing Munchhausen Syndrome by Proxy. That is, these parents — to the detriment of their children — have sought attention by forcing their children to take the position of a gender dysphoric.

If that is not the case, then they have — en masse — taken on the advise of greedy, soulless, and un-Hippocratic doctors.

Court will decide who writes law: SCOTUS or Congress

Does SCOTUS get to rewrite Title VII in its own image?

Although the Washington Post wants to make the recent Supreme Court inductees the center of the story, the real topic centers on whether the jurists on the Supreme Court adhere to originalism or believe the Constitution has become a living document. Still, the Washington Post says:

SCOTUSdecidesOnLGBTQ

The Supreme Court appeared divided Tuesday about whether federal discrimination laws protect gay and transgender workers, and President Trump’s appointments to the court could play the pivotal roles in deciding the outcome.

The issue, one of the most significant facing the court this term, concerns the reach of ­Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which, besides protecting against workplace discrimination because of race, religion and other characteristics, also prohibits discrimination “because of sex.” The court has since interpreted that definition to include discriminating on the basis of sex stereotypes.

The arguments touched on some of the most controversial issues of the day — whether it would mean the end of single-sex bathrooms, whether men should be able to compete on female athletic teams, whether dress codes for men and women would become a thing of the past.

The word “transgender” made its first appearance in a Supreme Court argument, as did “cisgender” — the term for a person whose gender identity matches how they were identified at birth — and the gender-ambiguous character “Pat” from “Saturday Night Live” skits that aired during the 1990s. Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., whose questions in court gave no signal about his views on the case, was careful with pronouns, at one point using the neutral “they” to refer to an individual.

Lawyers for the gay and transgender individuals challenging their firings seemed to pitch their arguments to Justice Neil M. Gorsuch, a conservative who advocates a close textual reading of statutes. During the sexual orientation arguments, he pushed lawyers for the government and the employers to acknowledge that sex seemed to be at least a “contributing cause” to the terminations.

The Post is right to say “transgender” made its first appearance, because the concept does not appear in the original law

Title VII was written to deal with discrimination between males and females. Those who wrote that law did not have any concept of transsexualism in their minds as they framed the Civil Rights Act of 1964. So, if the current Supreme Court stretches the definition of “sex” to include transsexuals (much as the 1973 Supreme Court invented the right to abort babies from a stretching of the Fourteenth and Ninth Amendments), then we will have experienced another writing of law via judicial fiat.

Oddly, since the constitution states that Congress has the sole authority creating law, how can this be? One answer might be that Senators and Representatives are lazy and do not want to take on the tough subjects that the appointed-for-life justices seem willing to burden us with.

When John Roberts saved the Affordable Care Act by effectively rewriting it from the bench, Democrats breathed a sigh of relief because their failing healthcare law had a little more life. Republicans wiped the sweat from their brow because they did not have to risk being called racist for standing against the first African-American president.

When Henry Blackmun wrote the majority decision for Roe, he not only enabled the American holocaust (which, unlike Germany’s holocaust, was carried out against our own children), but also absolved the sexual revolution of its responsibility and enabled Margaret Sanger’s racism.

Telephonic phishing scams


The Social Security phishing scam

After a blog post on Social Security phishing at the Arlin Report, I determined that I should blog about those pesky scammers who try to sneak your social security number and name from you. Problem is that, after trying and failing to get the Houston Police Department to investigate either of the last two scammers who had left messages for me, I threw the recordings away.

Malware phishing data conceptHowever, having felt a challenge from the Arlin Report post, I determined that I would start on a post as soon as I got another message from a scammer. True to form, I got one that very day (2 October 2019).

The text of this most recent scam follows:

As we have received against your social security number by the federal crime and investigation department. We need to talk to you as soon as possible. Again, this call is from Social Security Administration. Number to reach department is 516-530-7087. I repeat, it’s 516-530-7087. Thank you.

For the audio, click here.

Things noted and maybe erroneously extrapolated from this and other scam calls

There are several things that I noted in the above message (or at least assume that I noted):

  1. One change that I observed happening after my first scam call (which obviously cannot be demonstrated here, due to my having deleted files) was the transition from a real voice to an artificial voice. I guess someone got caught via their voice print.
  2. Still,one of the hallmarks of criminality flourishes in this message: errors.  Errors abound in the message. Try looking up a “federal crime and investigation department.” (It doesn’t exist.) Ask anyone if the Social Security Administration (SSA) will communicate via any method other than mail. (The SSA will not call you or send you emails. The SSA will only communicate by letter.)
  3. To reiterate the central error: the SSA does not have to contact you to get your Social Security number (SSN). They have it. However, even if they did need to contact you, they would do it by mail.
  4. Sometimes, the scammers are not just after your SSN, name, and address.  At these times, they bank on your curiosity and other emotions to just gather other information.

Therefore, calling these scammers would be a bad idea, since these calls may be blindly blasted out and calling them provides them your phone number (especially your cell phone number). Additionally, many times, the number called can be a pay-by-the-minute phone number that will charge to your phone number.

Because we are emotional creatures, there is the “call-back” scam

phishing-scamsAs suggested above, some criminals either use a one-ring tactic or some sort of emotional ploy to get the mark (you and me) to call them back. Sometimes, they pretend to be stranded relatives. Sometimes they pretend that our credit cards are going to be charged for some reason.

Hence, we get scam calls like the following:

That we have renewed your antivirus security for the upcoming one year and we have charged you $399 and within 24 hours, you will see a charge from VTech solution. If you want to cancel the subscription and want a refund then please call on this. Number one, 239-932-2091 cancellation should be done within the 48 Hours upon receiving this confirmation call. Thank you. This is David Williams customer relationship manager.

For the audio, click here.

If you like the scams made available thanks to Social Security and emotional manipulation, just wait for greater federal involvement in healthcare

If you think that it is bad enough with the current crop of social security and the emotion-related scams, just wait until the U.S. government starts expanding Obamacare. That will provide another fertile field for the scammers to plow (since the ACA was sold to us with the promise that it would save each family $2500, but ended quadrupling most of our rates), many of us will be fearful of possible glitches in the system.

Thanks, Obama. Future thanks to Warren, Sanders, and Pelosi.

Don’t Like Obamacare? You have more Who Agree


Would the Times report this as “Most Paper Still Un-crumpled?”

Rising Numbers of Americans Do Not Like the Affordable Care Act

According to a 25 May 2016 OneNewsNow article, an increasing number of people surveyed do not like Obamacare. That article further explains:

“The survey from the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation indicates that about half of ObamaCare enrollees (52 percent) describe their plan as ‘good.’ The percentage of those saying ‘not so good’ or ‘poor’ is higher this year (31 percent) than it was last year (21 percent in 2015) and the year before (20 percent in 2014).

‘I’ve seen this survey spun both ways,’ says Hadley Heath Manning, director of health policy at Independent Women’s Forum. ‘But certainly it should concern us that so many people give their plans a poor rating, because that is obviously dissatisfaction.’

Manning says this gels with findings from Gallup and other polling companies or organizations.

‘We know from various surveys that about half of Americans would like to see the Affordable Care Act repealed,’ she continues. ‘Americans can’t seem to agree on what they believe the solution should be, but we do see a slim majority of people typically reporting that they don’t believe that the Affordable Care Act is the right solution – and that can easily link up with other surveys like this one from Kaiser showing that about the same number of people are dissatisfied in their personal experience.’

Meanwhile, Manning says there are various ways to try to gauge satisfaction.

‘Whether that is in terms of the value and the quality that people perceive in their ACA-compliant plans, or especially when it comes to the cost that individuals and employers are facing in the health insurance markets, they seem to be dissatisfied largely as a result of ever-increasing costs.’

Twenty percent of Democrats say they were negatively affected by the Affordable Care Act. Sixteen percent of Republicans say they benefited from the ACA.”

The Los Angeles Times Reports Liberally

In contrast, the surely-never-biased Los Angeles Times uses the following headline to bury the lede:

Obamacare is helping millions get needed healthcare, new survey finds

While never mentioning the rising dissatisfaction with the ACA, they do say:

“The findings paralleled a recent nationwide survey by the nonprofit Kaiser Family Foundation, which found that two-thirds of people in a marketplace plan created through the law rated their coverage ‘excellent’ or ‘good.’

Unlike the new report, the Kaiser survey did not include people newly enrolled in Medicaid through the law, which is often called Obamacare.

The high marks are not universal, cautioned fund Vice President Sara Collins, the report’s lead author.

Indeed, some consumers who had coverage before the health law was implemented have seen their premiums and deductibles increase as insurers have absorbed millions of new consumers, many of whom could not obtain health insurance previously because they had a pre-existing medical condition.”

Obamacare Continues to Crumble


 Illinois Obamacare Exchange Has “Crippling Losses”

In a 2 March 2016 article, the Blaze reports how the Affordable Care Act (ACA) has experienced losses that may soon end its operation:

“A major Chicago-based health co-op designed to work under Obamacare rules is suffering what’s described as ‘crippling’ losses.

Land of Lincoln Health, initially heralded by small businesses as an alternative to large insurers, totaled $90.8 million in losses for 2015, Crain’s Business Journal reported. That’s far worse than the $17.7 million lost in 2014.

Health care co-ops have been collapsing across the country. But a co-op heralded as a model for the industry in President Barack Obama’s home state provides another demonstration of problems with the Affordable Care Act, the president’s signature legislative accomplishment.

Land of Lincoln was one of 23 co-ops across the country launched after Obamacare was passed and the only one started in Illinois. Twelve of these co-ops closed as of early this year.”

Blue Cross in NM leaves Obamacare exchange

An 27 August 2015 Washington Examiner article begins:

“Blue Cross and Blue Shield in New Mexico will leave the Obamacare exchange because of high costs and an unwillingness from regulators to charge higher premiums.

The insurer announced the decision Thursday, saying that the prices it charged for health insurance in 2014 and 2015 did not cover its costs and caused the insurer to lose $19 million last year.

The decision could have lasting ramifications if other insurers decide to also exit the Obamacare exchanges. If the cost of insurance becomes too high for insurers, then they could opt out of the Obamacare marketplaces, potentially restricting the types of plans offered by the marketplace, if any at all.

The reason for Blue Cross and Blue Shield’s exit appears to be a disagreement over insurance rates.”

Aetna Drops Obamacare

On 7 January 2016, Breitbart opened an article with:

“On Tuesday, Aetna, the third largest health insurance company in the country, announced it was quitting America’s Health Insurance Plan,(AHIP), the powerful lobbying group for the health insurance industry. The company is the second to leave the group, after UnitedHealthCare quit the group in June.

At the time, UnitedHealthCare said its interests, and the interests of its customers, were “no longer best represented by AHIP.” A health care executive, when asked about Aetna’s decision, told The Hill newspaper, “There’s a sense that AHIP has become a one-trick pony for the Obama administration,” especially in relation to advancing ObamaCare.

Earlier this year, AHIP announced the departure of its long-time CEO, Karen Ignagni. She was replaced by Marilyn Tavenner, who oversaw the implementation of ObamaCare as administrator for the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Tavenner was the federal official charged with rolling out the ObamaCare website in October 2013.

The disastrous rollout of the ObamaCare website, which drew criticism even from Democrat backers of the law, certainly hasn’t damaged the career prospects of Ms. Tavenner. A larger problem for members of AHIP, however, could be that Ms. Tavenner currently receives $162,000 a year in retirement benefits from Hospital Corporation of America.

The health insurance industry is often on the opposite of hospitals on many policy issues. Although Ms. Tavenner likely earns far more from AHIP than her pension from HCA–Tavenner’s predecessor Ignagni earned $2 million a year–it is still a potentially significant conflict of interest for the head of an insurance lobbying association.
Another possible bone of contention is that Ignagni left AHIP to become CEO of EmblemHealth, itself a health insurance company and competitor to Aetna and UnitedHealth. Emblem is a smaller, regional, health insurance company based in New York State.”

CBO estimates of Obamacare signups drop 40% 

The Hill’s  25 January 2016 article provides the following insight:

“ObamaCare will enroll significantly fewer people than expected in 2016, ending the year with about 13 million customers, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) said Monday.

The figure, which was included in an expansive budget report, is a decline of about 40 percent from last year’s enrollment prediction of about 20 million people.

The latest projections confirm the Obama administration’s previous assessment that fewer people are signing up as the marketplace closes in on its third enrollment season — the final one under President Obama.

The new report also underscores the challenges facing the incoming administration in reducing the uninsured rate after 2017. While the healthcare law has led to a historic low in the uninsured population, officials have struggled to further reduce that figure this year.

Federal health officials had already warned that they were expecting fewer sign-ups this year, a disclosure that caused tremors among insurance companies that remain anxious about the marketplace overall.

Many of the uninsured people who opt out of coverage on the exchanges are now expected to purchase insurance ‘directly from an insurer instead,’ the CBO said.

The smaller enrollment tally will not likely mean a substantial decrease in costs, however.

Though it predicts fewer customers, the budget office says the number of people receiving subsidies will be higher than expected. About 11 million people are expected to receive subsidies this year, compared to 8 million people in 2015.”

Karin Zosel, former executive director of Get Covered Illinois

Obamacare Top Official Bails after 5 months

A 14 August 2015 Chicago Tribune article announces, but does not explain, the sudden resignation of the top Chicago-area ACA administrator:

“The top official in Illinois overseeing health insurance plans through Obamacare has left her job after just five months, raising questions about who will oversee the program as thousands of residents prepare to sign up for the third year of enrollment this fall.

Karin Zosel departed Aug. 7 as executive director of Get Covered Illinois, the state’s Department of Insurance confirmed Friday.

Zosel took a job as vice president for institutional advancement at MacMurray College, a private college near Springfield with about 500 students, according to a press release issued this week by the college. She previously worked at MacMurray as director of annual giving for about a year before taking the job with Get Covered Illinois in March.

Zosel was not fired or asked to leave, said Alissandra Calderon, spokeswoman for the Illinois Department of Insurance.

‘Karin Zosel has been instrumental in leading Get Covered Illinois for the past six months,’ Calderon said in a statement. ‘We appreciate her leadership throughout her time with Get Covered Illinois and wish her well in her new endeavor.’

Zosel declined to say why she left her state post after five months. During that time, she was paid $49,218.25.

‘What I can say is that I am grateful to have had the opportunity to serve Illinois residents and help position Get Covered Illinois to continue providing consumers with the tools and resources they need to access affordable, quality health coverage,’ she wrote in an email.

She added that she felt “very passionately” about the mission of higher education and was ‘thrilled to have the opportunity’ to return to MacMurray College.

This marks the latest disruption to the organization created to promote health insurance sold under the federal Affordable Care Act. Last month, Get Covered Illinois eliminated most of its staff in a move the group attributed to decreased federal funding.

Fifteen positions were eliminated, and the Department of Insurance absorbed the program, which had been part of the governor’s office.”

In light of the last paragraph quoted, one has to wonder whether this was a resignation or a forced downsizing due to Obamacare’s failing record.

New York’s Largest Obamacare Exchange Fails

A 17 November 2015 Hot Air article explored the collapse of New York’s largest ACA exchange as follows:

“Like so many other dominoes in the Obamacare chain, New Republican went broke in record time and is being shut down by state regulators at the end of this month. They are unable to meet their financial obligations and health care providers are being stuck with the bill.

New York hospitals and doctors are worried they may be left holding the bag for millions of dollars owed to them by Health Republic, the financially troubled health insurer regulators are shutting down Nov. 30.

Hospitals are owed more than $160 million, according to the Healthcare Association of New York State — HANYS for short, a hospital trade group. Syracuse’s three hospitals are owed $2.2 million.

The state Medical Society is surveying doctors to find out how much they are owed. It estimates the insurer owes doctors “tens of millions of dollars.”

Things have gotten bad enough that state regulators have actually told Health Republic to stop making payments to the health care providers in order to facilitate “an orderly shutdown.” To say that doctors and hospital administrators who are already operating under strained budgets are in a bit of a panic is an understatement.

The big questions running around the state government at this point seem to have nothing to do with the fact that the Obamacare model as fallen flat on its face as it has in so many other states. Right now they’re scrambling to figure out who is going to wind up paying for this mess. The hospitals and health care provider networks have sent an urgent request for the state government to set up a “special guarantee fund” which would pay all the claims which Health Republic won’t be making good on. The insurance industry is opposing that, since none of the other providers who remain in the private market are being offered any such protection.

And yet, the costs are going to have to be covered someplace. That means one of two things when looked at from the ten thousand foot level. Either the state will reimburse all the costs or the hospitals will have to eat them and make up the difference from their future customers. Either way the result is the same: the taxpayers and consumers are going to foot the bill for this, and they’re talking about a tab that adds up to more than $160M, not counting any new receipts which come in for the month of November. Even for a fairly wide spread of territory across a single state, that’s one heck of a bite.”

Obamacare Officials Admit More Obamacare Exchanges will Fail

In a 28 August 2015 Daily Caller article, a reporter prodded a governmental official to admit that more ACA exchanges will fail:

“Federal officials admitted for the first time Monday that the collapse of the largest and most costly of nearly two dozen Obamacare-funded health insurance co-ops may not be the program’s last failure.

The admission followed the collapse Friday of Health Republic of New York after regulators ordered the co-op ‘to cease writing new health insurance policies,’ leaving 155,000 customers scrambling to find new coverage by the end of the year.

‘If a co-op has solvency issues, and we cannot rule out that others may this year, we will work with the states so that consumers have affordable options on the marketplace,’ said Department of Health and Hhuman Services spokesman Aaron Albright. ‘As a startup business, we recognize not all will succeed.’ Albright is a spokesman for the department’s Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), which administers Obamacare.”

UnitedHealthCare Considers Leaving Obamacare

A 19 November 2015 Headline and Global News article describes the exit of UnitedHealthCare from the ACA:

“UnitedHealthcare, the U.S.’s largest health insurer, says that it is considering quitting Obamacare in 2017, just a month after the company said that it planned to expand its presence in the Affordable Care Act’s online marketplace.

‘We cannot sustain these losses,’ UnitedHealthcare CEO Stephen Hemsley said in an investor call Thursday morning, according to Maine’s NPR News. ‘We can’t really subsidize a marketplace that doesn’t appear at the moment to be sustaining itself.’

The company said that it is lowering its earnings forecast for the year and expects to make $425 million less than previously estimated, according to Fortune. UnitedHealthcare is also scaling back marketing efforts designed to convince current enrollees to register under plans it is selling on the federal health care marketplace this year.

‘In recent weeks, growth expectations for individual exchange participation have tempered industrywide, co-operatives have failed, and market data has signaled higher risks and more difficulties while our own claims experience has deteriorated, so we are taking this proactive step,’ Hemsley wrote in a news release.

The insurer is evaluating the viability of the Obamacare marketplace ‘and will determine during the first half of 2016 to what extent it can continue to serve the public exchange markets in 2017,’ UnitedHealthcare said in the statement.

UnitedHealthcare only covered some 550,000 of the 9.9 million people who had insurance through the U.S and state-run insurance markets as of June 30, according to Bloomberg.

However, the nation’s largest insurance company opting out of Obamacare would be a significant blow to President Obama’s signature policy achievement and could indicate that the exchange is not as viable an enterprise as once thought, Sheryl Skolnick, an analyst at Mizuho Securities, told Bloomberg.”

Problems caused by Obamacare

Obamacare leaves middle-income Ohioans struggling

A 20 December 2015 Cleveland News article explains how the ACA has burdened the middle class:

“In October, federal health officials visited Cleveland to trumpet good news about the Affordable Care Act: Insurance premiums were dropping 6.3 percent in Northeast Ohio, making it easier for consumers to afford coverage on the federal exchange.

But the decrease in premiums was only part of the story.

A Plain Dealer analysis of plans offered through healthcare.gov, the exchange website, shows that deductibles, co-pays, and co-insurance expenses are putting up significant barriers to accessing medical care, particularly for middle-income earners.

The average deductible for a silver-level plan – among the most affordable options for someone with medical needs – is $3,561 in Cuyahoga County for a 40-year-old male earning $30,000, according to the analysis. The maximum annual out-of-pocket expense for that individual averages $6,277.

The analysis spotlights the challenges of Northeast Ohio residents who earn too much to qualify for the law’s cost-sharing subsidies but too little to pay the out-of-pocket costs that come with most plans. A $30,000 annual income for a one-person household is just above the income limit – 250 percent of the federal poverty level – to qualify for those subsidies. For a family of four, the limit for cost-sharing subsidies in 2015 was $60,625.

For individuals and families making more than those amounts, the Affordable Care Act, commonly known as Obamacare, presents a frustrating conundrum: They might be able to buy insurance, but that doesn’t mean they can afford to access medical services.

‘Some people are buying insurance that, because of these high deductibles, it’s just too expensive for them to actually use it,’ said Rachel DeGolia, an enrollment navigator with the Cuyahoga Health Access Partnership. ”

Obamacare Fails the Poor and Middle Class

In a 4 March 2015 CNN article, ways that the ACA fails the poor and middle class are explored:

New figures indicate that about 11 million people have signed up for health insurance during this latest sign-up period of Obamacare, of which about half will be from the uninsured population, based on previous estimates. Once again, the supporters of the law celebrate with proclamations that “it’s working.” One could say that assessment is true, if the definition of “working” means enrolling people into anything called health insurance.

To be sure, the law’s implementation is progressing, but there is no cause for celebration. It is indeed true that millions of Americans are now newly enrolled into health insurance, but it is disingenuous to tout this as a great success. An estimated 71% of the new insurance arises through Medicaid, using 2014 calculations based on analysis by Haislmaier and Gonshorowski of data from the Centers for Medicaid and Medicare.

The harsh reality awaiting these low-income Americans is undeniable: according to 2013 data from a 2014 Merritt Hawkins study, 55% of doctors already refuse new Medicaid patients. According to the HSC Health Tracking Physician Survey, 2008, the percentage of doctors that refuse new Medicaid patients dwarf by about 8 to 10 times the percentage that refuses new private insurance patients.

Such “insurance” from Obamacare not only fails to provide access to doctors, but research in the top medical journals such as Cancer, American Journal of Cardiology, Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation and Annals of Surgery, show that Medicaid beneficiaries suffer worse outcomes than similar patients with private insurance … all at an added cost of another $800 billion by CBO estimates to taxpayers after the decade.

The law already forced termination of health insurance for millions of Americans estimated as 4.7 million by the Associated Press — insurance they personally had chosen to buy. The Congressional Budget Office now projects that a stunning 10 million Americans will be forced off their chosen employer-based health insurance by 2021 — a tenfold increase in the number that was initially projected back in 2011, at the onset of the law.

Along with that forced change of coverage, many suddenly find themselves without access to their chosen doctors.

Despite the assertion that the law increases insurance choices, the Obamacare exchanges do quite the opposite for those dependent on them and their government’s subsidies. McKinsey reported 68% of Obamacare insurance options only cover narrow or very narrow provider networks, double that of the previous year.

For cancer care, the majority of America’s best hospitals in the National Comprehensive Cancer Network are not covered in most of their states’ exchange plans. The “narrow network” strategy is about to hit even more Americans in 2015, as Obamacare exchanges from California to New Hampshire further restrict access to top doctors and hospitals in an attempt to quell insurance premium increases caused by the law itself, according to an analysis by the Los Angeles Times.

More doctors than ever already refuse Medicaid and Medicare due to inadequate payments for care, and that will only accelerate as government lowers reimbursements. Less appreciated is that inadequate payments to doctors by government insurance substantially increase private insurance premiums.

Back in 2008, a shortfall of over $88 billion of payment from Medicaid and Medicare beneficiaries added more than $1,500 extra per year in premiums and $1,800 extra in total out-of-pocket costs to every family of four with private insurance.

Obamacare Explained

Here is an expandable version (if you cannot read the illustration above.

The above illustration came from a 17 November 2015 Forbes article.