Who has Biden exempted from his vaccine mandate? – Part Three


Why does Biden’s vaccine mandate not apply to welfare recipients and others?

The Hill explores the reasons why Biden won’t force his vaccine mandate on welfare recipients and others.

On Sept. 9, President Biden declared that all companies with more than 100 employees must “ensure their workforces are fully vaccinated or show a negative test at least once a week.”

According to Biden’s federal vaccine mandate, any company that does not comply will face a fine of $14,000 per case.

During his speech, Biden also declared that “all nursing home workers who treat patients on Medicare and Medicaid” and that “those who work in hospitals, home healthcare facilities, or other medical facilities” as well as “all executive branch federal employees” and “federal contractors” must get vaccinated.

If these Americans choose not to get vaccinated, they will lose their livelihoods. As Biden said, “This is not about freedom or personal choice.”

But Biden’s federal vaccine mandate does not apply to Americans on welfare, illegal immigrants, members of Congress, U.S. Postal Service employees and several other groups.

This is not only unfair, but it flies in the face of Biden’s goal “to require more Americans to be vaccinated, to combat those blocking public health.”

So, per Biden’s edict, Americans who work at a company that employs more than 100 people have no choice but to get vaccinated. The same standard applies to the health care workers who have heroically put their lives on the line treating COVID-19 patients.

But for reasons unexplained, Biden refuses to mandate vaccines for the 59 million Americans who receive welfare benefits.

Put another way, Biden is mandating that the Americans who supply most of the tax revenue to pay for America’s welfare system be vaccinated or lose employment. But the beneficiaries of the welfare state are exempt.

This is even more flummoxing given that data shows Medicaid recipients are among the least vaccinated.

(Read about regional disparities at The Hill)

In the real world, the elderly are among those who remain at higher risk (2% rather than 1.15% for those over 80)

If the elderly remain at higher risk and if greater numbers of the elderly remain unvaccinated, then why not mandate vaccinating those on welfare? Does it have any thing to do with the fact that a person can catch COVID-19 after being vaccinated? Does it have to do with the many high-profile cases where people have died after being vaccinated? Or does Biden fear losing this segment of votes if he pushes the matter?

 

A pop quiz on Dementia Joe


Traitor or Patriot pop quiz

With a massive hat tip to Ed Bonderenka, here is a pop quiz that may help you decide whether Dementia Joe is a traitor or a patriot.

First study these questions and links and then take the quiz below.

  1. Consider that Joe Biden opened the national border to unchecked masses (including those who oppose the Constitution) and promised all aid and succor. Does that make him a: Traitor or Patriot?
  2. Consider that Joe Biden abandoned citizens in a foreign country who were under the assumption that they had the protection of the American government. Does that make him a: Traitor or Patriot?
  3. Consider that Joe Biden revealed to an enemy the names of persons allied with the United States exposing them to retribution and murder. Does that make him a: Traitor or Patriot?
  4. Consider that Joe Biden transferred much of the wealth and advanced weaponry to avowed enemies of the United States. Does that make him a: Traitor or Patriot?
  5. Consider that Joe Biden outsourced the protection of American citizens to an organization that is a declared enemy, resulting in their death. Does that make him a: Traitor or Patriot?
  6. Consider that Joe Biden encouraged corporations and required government agencies to demand that those in their employ or under their authority receive an injection of a substance that has demonstrably injured many who have received it. Does that make him a: Traitor or Patriot?
  7. Consider that Joe Biden restricted the production of energy nationally, placing the country in the grip of foreign producers. Does that make him a: Traitor or Patriot?
  8. Consider that Joe Biden removed restraints and sanctions on a nation whose national motto is “Death to America,” allowing them to proceed with developing nuclear weapons. Does that make him a: Traitor or Patriot?
  9. Consider that Joe Biden removed the focus from the defense of America and its national interest and placed it on the protection and promotion of moral degenerates. Does that make him a: Traitor or Patriot?
  10. Consider that Joe Biden promoted and enacted policies that destroyed or harmed the legal businesses of citizens while protecting the interests of multinational corporations. Does that make him a: Traitor or Patriot?
  11. Consider that Joe Biden released from custody/jail/prison murderers and rapists who then go on to murder and oppress American citizens, both home and abroad (in local communities or foreign countries). Does that make him a: Traitor or Patriot?

Take Quiz

 

Crazy things happen regarding Joe Biden’s border crisis


Joe Biden Diverts Healthcare Cash to Help Illegal Migrants

Breitbart reports that the Biden administration has diverted Healthcare monies from Obamacare to help illegal aliens.

BidenDivertsPresident Joe Biden has taken $2 billion from Americans’ healthcare programs to help deliver migrant youths and children to their illegal-migrant parents throughout the United States, press reports say.

“The Department of Health and Human Services [HHS] has diverted more than $2 billion meant for other health initiatives toward covering the cost of caring for unaccompanied immigrant children,” Politico reported May 15. The article continued:

The redirected funds include $850 million that Congress originally allocated to rebuild the nation’s Strategic National Stockpile, the emergency medical reserve strained by the Covid-19 response. Another $850 million is being taken from a pot intended to help expand coronavirus testing, according to three people with knowledge of the matter.

(continued)

In addition to transferring money from the Strategic National Stockpile and Covid-19 testing, HHS also has pulled roughly $436 million from a range of existing health initiatives across the department.

The program costs are expected to reach almost $9 billion by October according to a leaked report in the New York Times.

The transfer of funding to the growing population of more than 50,000 foreign children and youths means fewer resources for lower-profile American kids, as their diverse American parents are damaged by the Chinese virus, cheap labor migration, job losses, housing costs, drugs, or homelessness.

The Politico report follows the leak of a government report to the May 10 New York Times.  The leaked report showed how the HHS agency expects to spend almost $9 billion by October to implement Biden’s decision to import the youths and children of U.S.-based illegal migrants.

“Current projections show [a] preliminary budget estimate of $8.6b for FY21,” said the briefing for officials in HHS. It continued:

With existing resources, a shortfall (of 366m) occurs in May and grows quickly through July with an overall project shortfall in excess of $4 billion

(continued)

OMB approved an additional transfer from HHS resources to the UC [UAC] programing the amount of $850 million this week. This funding is not reflecting in this morning balance — will be added once [the] execution process is complete. There may be [an] additional $846.5 million available in future weeks. This will mitigate but not fully resolve the project budget shortfall.

The HHS spending does not including spending — or diverted resources — at other agencies, such as the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

(Read more on HHS and Republican actions at Breitbart)

I can’t believe that Biden tries to blame Trump for the rush of youths at the border

I will have to thank Breitbart for the following tweet; however, I have even more thanks to the Republicans who responded to Mayorkas in the tweets after that.



ICE Director admits that agency does not track illegals released into interior

One America News Network informs us on how the Biden administration ICE director has released illegal aliens into the interior of America without tracking them (many infected with COVID-19).

BorderActing Director of the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Tae Johnson made a shocking confession about the agency’s handling of illegal immigrants when he recently testified before the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security.

Iowa Rep. Ashley Hinson said Johnson admitted during his testimony that ICE is not tracking illegal immigrants once they have arrived in the U.S. She also learned the agency is uncertain to how many illegal immigrants are currently in Iowa or planning to go there.

Hinson was one of the lawmakers who recently participated in the subcommittee hearing with Johnson. She took to Twitter this week to express her disapproval of the Biden Administration’s return to the catch and release method.

(Read more on Republican, Democrat, and LA Times actions at One America News Network)

If we have pockets of COVID-19 flash up, we will know why

If COVID-19 goes from controlled to uncontrolled in areas known for accepting illegal aliens, we will know what happened. 

However, if the disease proves to be less deadly than promoted by the leftist press, the real issue may be economic. Hopefully, we can overcome that.


 

Most say they are better off now than four years ago


Americans consistently share that they are better off than when under Obama when asked specifics

Gallup News reports that people feel better off under Trump/Pence than they did under Obama/Biden.

During his presidential campaign in 1980, Ronald Reagan asked Americans, “Are you better off today than you were four years ago?” Since then, this question has served as a key standard that sitting presidents running for reelection have been held to.

Gallup’s most recent survey found a clear majority of registered voters (56%) saying they are better off now than they were four years ago, while 32% said they are worse off.
BetterUnderTrump

(Read more at Gallup News)

Why don’t we hear this? Maybe because the Democrats in the press and in the House are raising such a fit

SanFranNanSomehow, this has not seen the light of day with idiots like Nancy Pelosi are trying to invoke the 25th Amendment in order to distract us from this and the major news that President Trump indicates AG Barr has enough evidence to charge Obama admin officials — including Obama and Biden — with spying on his campaign.

President Trump and Vice President Biden: Who shows the most transparency?


Do you remember the claims of transparency from Obama?

Do you remember how President Obama promised to be the most transparent administration and then proceeded to keep the American people in the dark on drone strikes and also earned this rebuke from Slate:

ObamaWinkThe watchdogs shouldn’t be fooled so easily. In March 2010, the Associated Press found that, under Obama, 17 major agencies were 50 percent more likely to deny FOIA (Freedom Of Information Act) requests than under Bush. The following year, the presidents of two journalism societies— Association of Health Care Journalists and Society of Professional Journalists—called out President Obama for muzzling scientists in much the same way President Bush had. Last September, Bloomberg News tested Obama’s pledge by filing FOIA requests for the 2011 travel records of top officials at 57 agencies. Only about half responded. In fact, this president has prosecuted more whistleblowers under the Espionage Act than all prior administrations combined. And an analysis released Monday by the Associated Press found that the administration censored more FOIA requests on national security grounds last year than in any other year since President Obama took office.

Even when members of his own party ask questions, the Obama White House throws down an iron curtain. After demanding answers about the government response to the BP oil spill, Democratic Arizona Rep. Raúl M. Grijalva sent a long letter to Obama expressing disappointment with the “unjustifiable” redactions he received, “including entire pages blacked out in the middle of pertinent e-mail conversations.”

One of the most glaring examples of Obama’s failure on transparency is his response to the “Fast and Furious” fiasco—the botched attempt by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives to find Mexican drug lords by tracking guns smuggled from the United States into Mexico. The debacle came to light when ATF whistleblowers met with investigators working for Sen. Grassley. Grassley sent a letter to the Department of Justice demanding answers; not realizing Grassley already had documents that laid out the operation, officials at Justice responded with false and misleading information that violated federal law. When Grassley pressed the issue, the Justice Department retracted its initial response but refused to say anything more, which has resulted in multiple hearings and subpoenas.

The storyline is classic Washington: Whistleblowers run to Congress about bad behavior; Congress demands answers; the White House throws up a wall. But where is the outrage, especially from the very groups who are supposed to be holding the government accountable? It doesn’t exist. Writing about Fast and Furious for the Huffington Post, Danielle Brian of the Project on Government Oversight mused whether the entire inquiry being led by Republicans was merely “partisanship” run amok. Wouldn’t it have been more logical for her to ask why Democrats hadn’t joined Republicans in demanding that the White House respond?

(Read more at Slate)

Take these exceptions in mind after reading the Slate excerpt

Because Slate seems to come from a baseline of a 1990’s-era journalist (aka media branch of the Democrat party), the author somehow did not include the following easily-documented considerations in the above assessment (as negative as it already is):

  1. Obama made moves to exclude Fox News from the White House Press briefings, never took an interview with Fox or any conservative outlet, and regularly bashed Fox News in his comments.
  2. In 2009,Obama wiretapped James Rosen of Fox News and other journalists while using the Department of Justice to take phone records of 20 Associated Press reporters.
  3. Often, Obama went for months between press briefings.
  4. By 2013, Obama had pursued criminal charges in eight cases against whistleblowers (not just “more,” but five more than all previous presidents combined).
  5. Obama used executive privilege to shield AG Holder from Congressional investigation and press scrutiny over the Fast and Furious gun running scandal and the Islamic State intelligence scandal.
  6. Other scandals (such as the IRS scandal, the Flynn counterintelligence probe, and the immigration enforcement scandal which lead to DACA) were kept off the books and potential offenders were allowed to retire.

Current “watchdogs” for transparency cite material disproven by the Mueller probe

Because sites like the Sunlight Foundation include complaints that Trump will not disclose “Trump campaign official contacts with Russian nationals” after the Robert Mueller’s report debunked Russia dossier, I will not consider them as anything but another branch of the Democrat propaganda machine.

On the other hand, when you consider the complaint that The Baltimore Sun levels that 78% of FOIA requests come back redacted (while admitting that FOIA requests went up during one year of the Trump administration by 30,000) and compare that to the fact that Obama totally denied a record 77% of FOIA requests — who is the more transparent of the two?

Whose administration did Biden belong to?

Trump answers five times more questions than Biden

Townhall points out the gap in question-answering bouts between President Trump and the former Vice President.

Donald Trump
President Donald Trump speaks during a news conference at the White House in Washington, Thursday, Sept. 10, 2020.

President Trump is a little busy these days, bringing peace to the Middle East and overseeing the country through a global pandemic and a spate of leftist violence, and, yet, the president still managed to field 867 more questions than Democratic nominee Joe Biden did during the same time period beginning mid-July.

According to The New York Post, President Trump answered roughly five times the number of questions from reporters than Democratic nominee Joe Biden did from July 19 to Sept. 15, according to a review of the candidates’ appearances. The president also answered questions using his brain, not a teleprompter, and didn’t rely on staff members to call upon friendly reporters asking planted questions.

(Via The Post)

Trump answered a total of 1,141 questions from a Washington press corps that he maintains is openly hostile to his administration, while Biden responded to just 274 questions from local networks and liberal cable news channels like CNN and MSNBC.

During the week of Aug. 9, the president took 196 questions from journalists while Biden answered just three.

Biden has repeatedly dodged questions from embeds covering his campaign and rejected “Fox News Sunday” anchor Chris Wallace’s request for an interview in July after Trump sat for a hard-hitting interrogation with him. …

Biden took zero questions from reporters during an eight-day period in late July and early August, according to the data.

After formally introducing Kamala Harris as his vice president on Aug. 12, the septuagenarian candidate sat for just one interview — with People magazine — over another nine-day period.

Even after significantly ramping up his travel following months of total isolation in his Delaware basement, the former vice president continues to spurn questions from reporters covering his events.

Joe Biden’s cognitive health is a big concern for voters who worry the candidate is too old mentally and physically to fulfill the duties and demands of the office of the president. Voters also worry the 77-year-old candidate is a Trojan horse for far-left radicals. One needs to look no further than Biden’s running mate, Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA) — who has the most liberal voting record in the US Senate, a Senate with Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren in it — to know this concern is well justified. It also doesn’t allay fears that the Biden team refers to Kamala as “day one ready,” and Kamala herself has called a Biden presidency a  “Harris administration.”

(Read more at Townhall)

Only the audience of main stream media news would miss the disparity between Trump and Biden

Because every type of media draws a specific type of viewer, those who remain as the audience to main stream media news probably do not care that Trump answers more questions. They don’t care that Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates, and Israel were brought to the table under the guidance of teams from President Trump. They could not care less that Serbia and Kosovo were directed to the peace table by teams from President Trump.

They don’t know that coronavirus cases have dropped (even though this information comes from compiled reports that, individually, may be weeks or months old before it gets included in the CDC report).

All they know is “Orange man bad.”

Here’s a question for Biden and Harris: Why did you bail out these thugs?

Townhall provides us with a partial list of the thugs bailed out by Kamala Harris and the Biden campaign.

Biden Harris RiotersWhen leftists first began rioting, beating up bystanders, burning down businesses, looting stores, and vandalizing property, Kamala Harris and Biden campaign staff members touted their donations to the Minnesota Freedom Fund (MFF). The left-wing fund bails out rioters so that violent thugs and agitators can return to the streets and resume terrorizing American cities. No wonder the violence is never-ending.

The Daily Caller reports that court documents show a man bailed out by the MFF in July stands accused of sexually assaulting an eight-year-old girl. In June, the MFF provided support to a man accused of stomping and robbing a victim in Minneapolis on May 25, the day George Floyd died in police custody. The Daily Caller also reports that court documents show the MFF helped bail out a man in August accused of assaulting a 71-year-old woman while burglarizing her home. No telling what other violent criminals Harris and the Biden camp have returned to the streets.

Harris, Joe Biden’s running mate, called on her supporters to contribute to the Minnesota Freedom Fund so that more violent thugs can victimize the innocent. Harris said the quiet part out loud recently, describing a Biden presidency as a “Harris administration.” Even the Biden campaign seems to be promoting the open secret that Harris will be running the show should Biden win in November.

“If you’re able to, chip in now to the @MNFreedomFund to help post bail for those protesting on the ground in Minnesota,” Sen. Harris (D-CA) tweeted on June 1, as violence erupted in Minneapolis. Harris has the most liberal voting record in the US Senate, and that’s a Senate with Elizebeth Warren and Bernie Sanders in it.

(continued)

While the Biden campaign pretends to oppose the leftist violence, like the shooting of two deputies in Los Angeles last weekend, Harris and the Biden team are doing all they can to ensure the violence continues.

(Read more at Townhall)

Both the Biden and Harris campaigns are neck deep in Antifa and BLM lawlessness

By both Harris and Biden’s staff bailing out rioters and by both of these Democrats never condemning Antifa or BLM by name, they continue to hold a stain across their faces.

They need to wash their faces.  Now.

Critical things to know about the coronavirus (hype)


Their diagnostics have shown themselves to be questionable

A COVID-19 positive testing might not mean you had COVID-19. It could indicate you had a cold, SARS, MERS, or any other coronavirus

The following information from the Centers for Disease Control seems to counter the narrative of COVID-19 being the deadly disease that the experts have a handle on expertly identifying:

A positive test result shows you may have antibodies from an infection with the virus that causes COVID-19. However, there is a chance a positive result means that you have antibodies from an infection with a virus from the same family of viruses (called coronaviruses), such as the one that causes the common cold.

These are some of the diseases that may cause a false positive for COVID-19

The National Foundation for Infectious Disease says that the coronaviruses include:

  • Novel Coronavirus (COVID-19)
  • Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS)
  • Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS)
  • A large group of viruses that cause diseases in animals and humans

The CDC’s death count has been inflated

The CDC has admitted that it over-counted the COVID-19 death count

As the CDC web site also states that excess deaths have been attributed to COVID-19.

Estimates of excess deaths can provide information about the burden of mortality potentially related to the COVID-19 pandemic, including deaths that are directly or indirectly attributed to COVID-19. Excess deaths are typically defined as the difference between the observed numbers of deaths in specific time periods and expected numbers of deaths in the same time periods. This visualization provides weekly estimates of excess deaths by the jurisdiction in which the death occurred. Weekly counts of deaths are compared with historical trends to determine whether the number of deaths is significantly higher than expected.

Counts of deaths from all causes of death, including COVID-19, are presented. As some deaths due to COVID-19 may be assigned to other causes of deaths (for example, if COVID-19 was not diagnosed or not mentioned on the death certificate), tracking all-cause mortality can provide information about whether an excess number of deaths is observed, even when COVID-19 mortality may be undercounted. Additionally, deaths from all causes excluding COVID-19 were also estimated. Comparing these two sets of estimates — excess deaths with and without COVID-19 — can provide insight about how many excess deaths are identified as due to COVID-19, and how many excess deaths are reported as due to other causes of death. These deaths could represent misclassified COVID-19 deaths, or potentially could be indirectly related to the COVID-19 pandemic (e.g., deaths from other causes occurring in the context of health care shortages or overburdened health care systems).

As of June 3, 2020, additional information on weekly counts of deaths by cause of death has been added to this release. Similar to all causes of death, these weekly counts can be compared to values from the same weeks in prior years to determine whether recent increases have occurred for specific causes of death. The causes shown here were chosen based on analyses of the most prevalent comorbid conditions reported on death certificates where COVID-19 was listed as a cause of death (see https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htm#Comorbidities). Cause of death counts are based on the underlying cause of death, and presented for Respiratory diseases, Circulatory diseases, Malignant neoplasms, and Alzheimer disease and dementia. Deaths due to external causes (i.e. injuries) or unknown causes are excluded. For more detail, see the Technical Notes.  Weekly counts of deaths were also added by age for all causes.

Estimates of excess deaths can be calculated in a variety of ways, and will vary depending on the methodology and assumptions about how many deaths are expected to occur. Estimates of excess deaths presented in this webpage were calculated using Farrington surveillance algorithms (1). A range of values for the number of excess deaths was calculated as the difference between the observed count and one of two thresholds (either the average expected count or the upper bound of the 95% CI), by week and jurisdiction.

Provisional death counts are weighted to account for incomplete data. However, data for the most recent week(s) are still likely to be incomplete. Weights are based on completeness of provisional data in prior years, but the timeliness of data may have changed in 2020 relative to prior years, so the resulting weighted estimates may be too high in some jurisdictions and too low in others. As more information about the accuracy of the weighted estimates is obtained, further refinements to the weights may be made, which will impact the estimates. Any changes to the methods or weighting algorithm will be noted in the Technical Notes when they occur. More detail about the methods, weighting, data, and limitations can be found in the Technical Notes.

This visualization includes several different estimates:

  • Number of excess deaths: A range of estimates for the number of excess deaths was calculated as the difference between the observed count and one of two thresholds (either the average expected count or the upper bound of the 95% CI), by week and jurisdiction. Negative values, where the observed count fell below the threshold, were set to zero.
  • Percent excess: The percent excess was defined as the number of excess deaths divided by the threshold.
  • Total number of excess deaths:The total number of excess deaths in each jurisdiction was calculated by summing the excess deaths in each week, from February 1, 2020 to present. Similarly, the total number of excess deaths for the US overall was computed as a sum of jurisdiction-specific numbers of excess deaths (with negative values set to zero), and not directly estimated using the Farrington surveillance algorithms.

The “fact checkers” at USA Today would like for us to believe that the CDC COVID-19 counts are under counted

The lying or lazy and ignorant “fact checkers” at USA Today would have you believe that the CDC has under counted its death counts.

Theories have circulated that the government’s system for counting COVID-19 deaths causes inflation in the total number of deaths.

At issue in many cases is the federal guidance for those filling out death certificates. The guidance specifies: “COVID-19 should be reported on the death certificate for all decedents where the disease caused or is assumed to have caused or contributed to the death.”

Some have interpreted that to mean that deaths will be reported as related to COVID-19 when a person has actually died from something else.

On April 8, Dr. Scott Jensen, a Republican state senator and Minnesota family physician, said on Fox News’ “The Ingraham Angle” that the method of gathering statistics could be “misleading.”

(Read more of their untruths at USA Today)

The Democrat riots have had an effect

Two weeks after the Floyd George riots, over 200 Houston police officers are under quarantine

Houston ABC affiliate KTRK reports that 200 police who endured protesters shouting in their faces have self-quarantined.

The Houston Police Department is dealing with a huge spike in officers quarantined after exposure to COVID-19.

On May 1, HPD had 41 officers in quarantine. A month later on June 1, there were 54. The number increased to 207 officers by Monday. Of those, 178 tested positive. Chief Art Acevedo said none are seriously ill and their absence is not affecting police response, at least not yet.

The increase comes just weeks after large police reform protests in Houston, while COVID-19 cases skyrocketed across the state simultaneously. Acevedo suggests re-opening has more to do with the HPD coronavirus spike than protest exposure.

“We opened up the state very quickly, especially bars and, you know, I can’t control what people do off duty,” Acevedo said. “Then we had the protests. I would venture to guess… the protests went on all over the country and in most cities they haven’t seen the uptick that we’ve seen here.”

The Houston Police Officer’s Union doesn’t share the chief’s optimism.

“We saw a huge spike in cases right after the protest,” HPOU President Joe Gamaldi told ABC13. “We absolutely support the right to peacefully protest, but going into large crowds is not following the best medical advice. I just don’t believe reasonable people think this wasn’t caused by the protests and certainly that’s not what our officers believe.”

Gamaldi said officers who need worker’s compensation care are receiving it and officers are getting the assistance from HPD they require.

Acevedo hears the concerns about his own exposure to the virus. He was seen frequently during the protests without a mask in the midst of massive crowds.

(Read more at KTRK)

The Democrat election narrative requires fear

The past four months of Media reports and Democrat sound bites have been light on facts and heavy on fear

From the day in January when President Trump stopped travel from China (and had Democrats calling him “xenophobe,” “racist,” and “hate monger” for closing our borders to coronavirus), the word from both the Democrats and the press has been one of fear.

Of course, greater minds than mine have recognized this manipulation of the American psyche through raw fear. However, you have to admit that Democrats have become masters of manipulating their voting populace through fear, whether it comes from fear of a moderate candidate that would be abandoned by the young vote or fear of another term for President Trump, they have it down.


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


  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


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.