Vaccinated Deaths

This is the latest offer. These clots are impossible to explain away.
By Steve Kirsch


FEBRUARY 28, 2022
This is the end of February and I have not caught covid after being fully vaccinated
and boosted. I have however seen many that were fully vaccinated still catch covid when Omicron first hit. I don’t think (my opinion) that the vaccine fully matches (protects) up
to the omicron variant. That is why I still use mask protection indoors in public places. Having worked in manufacturing for many years in a somewhat hazardous environment.
I am used to wearing N95 masks and other PPE and understand how they work.
They would not let me work in that environment (work rules) and not (protect your lungs) mask up. Something to think about when everyone runs around screaming about masks. Aaron Redding

I want everyone to know that every time they have been offered to see evidence of harm, they refuse to see it. I’m posting this to establish a public record that they were informed and offered the evidence and took no action.

This is extremely important evidence that has been in the public domain
for a while that they have been willfully ignoring. I don’t expect a reply anytime soon because every time they have indicated that they aren’t interested in evidence showing they are killing people. They don’t want to see it.I don’t expect a reply because the videos and tissue samples would be impossible to explain. All of this information has been known for months (since at least Feb. 4 when Hirschman appeared on Stew Peters and a few days later on my channel). Has Richard Hirschman ever been contacted? Of course not!
They will prefer to just ignore the issue and pretend it isn’t happening.
Or perhaps they can claim it is rare since it only happens in up to 90% of cases
(they define rare as less than 100% of cases).
In Hirschman’s case, it’s gone from 65% of his cases to now over 83% of his cases.
Check out just one of the videos (just 60 seconds; it’s a must see) that I want them to see. This is from embalmer Richard Hirschman who is seeing these clots in over 40% of the cases he embalms. This is taken from an artery in a man who died after — the COVID vaccination. 

Richard is seeing these clots now in 83% of the 35 cases that he did this month. 
I formally filed a complaint with the HHS Inspector General today
I reported these people to the HHS Inspector General today.
Dr. Ryan Cole on these telltale blood clots in vaccinated people
Watch this video at the 40 minute mark where Dr. Cole explains that these clots are caused by the spike protein which is why the body can’t break them down. I’m mentioned in the video a couple of times. Watch it for around 7 minutes to get the full story. 

People who get vaccinated are at markedly higher risk of dying, permanent disability, and also brain diseases such as Alzheimer’s. My email to the FDA and CDC is one more piece of additional evidence showing people at the FDA and CDC are uninterested in seeing any evidence showing the vaccines are killing people.
There is simply no way to explain the video above.
Bhakdi/Burkhardt pathology results show 93% of people who died after being vaccinated were killed by the vaccine
The vaccine was implicated in 93% of the deaths in the patients they examined.
What’s troubling is the coroner didn’t implicate the vaccine in any of those deaths.

SUMMARY
The vaccines are bad news. Fifteen bodies were examined
(all died from 7 days to 6 months after vaccination; ages 28 to 95). 
The coroner or the public prosecutor didn’t associate the vaccine as the cause of death in any of the cases. However, further examination revealed that the vaccine was implicated in the deaths of 14 of the 15 cases. The most attacked organ was the heart (in all of the people who died), but other organs were attacked as well. The implications are potentially enormous resulting in millions of deaths. The vaccines should be immediately halted.
No need to worry. It is doubtful that anything will happen because the work wasn’t published in a peer-reviewed journal so will be ignored by the scientific community.
That’s just the way it works.

The paper
I got an email recently from Mike Yeadon, former VP of Pfizer,
who urged me to check out this video
He wrote me this email on 12/24/21:
https://www.bitchute.com/video/fHIT55iM4Zv9/
Steve,
This is about the worst 15min I’ve ever seen.
Mass covid19 vaccination is leading to mass murder.
Mike 
The video references this paper, posted on December 10, 2021, On COVID vaccines: why they cannot work, and irrefutable evidence of their causative role in deaths after vaccination by Sucharit Bhakdi, MD and Arne Burkhardt, MD. 
It has been getting a lot of attention lately.
Check out the number of likes and retweets… just in the first 3 hours!!!!

The authors did an autopsy in 15 patients who died (from 7 days to 6 months) after receiving the COVID vaccine. These were all cases where the coroner ruled as NOT being caused by the vaccine.
They discovered that in 14 of the 15 patients there was widespread evidence of the body attacking itself, something that is never seen before. The heart was attacked in all 14 cases.
A number of salient aspects dominated in all affected tissues of all cases:
inflammatory events in small blood vessels (endotheliitis), characterized by an abundance of T-lymphocytes and sequestered, dead endothelial cells within the vessel lumen; the extensive perivascular accumulation of T-lymphocytes; a massive lymphocytic infiltration of surrounding non-lymphatic organs or tissue with T-lymphocytes. Lymphocytic infiltration occasionally occurred in combination with intense lymphocytic activation and follicle formation. Where these were present, they were usually accompanied by tissue destruction.

Here’s the video presentation of the results.
VAERS as well as other independent studies (e.g., see this vaccine injury paper)
shows the vaccines are killing people and that cardiac events were highly elevated.
This study is consistent with those results.
This work independently validates the analysis of Peter Schimacher who showed a minimum of 30% to 40% of the deaths after vaccine were caused by the vaccine.

Reactions from a level-headed scientist (name withheld to protect him from attack)
If the autopsy findings are confirmed by other pathologists with additional samples, and if they are combined with the findings of Dr. Hoffe (>60% inoculant recipients have elevated D-dimer tests and evidence of clotting) and Dr. Cole (increase in cancers after inoculation, including twenty-fold increase in uterine cancer), we are seeing a disaster of unimaginable proportions.  The conclusion (if supported by further data) is that essentially EVERY inoculant recipient suffers damage, with more damage after each shot.  Given the seriousness of the types of damage (autoimmune diseases, cancer, re-emergent dormant infections, clotting/strokes, cardiac damage, etc.), these effects will translate into lifespan reduction, which should be counted as deaths from the inoculations

So, in the USA, where ~200M people have been fully inoculated, the number of deaths
will not be the 10,000 or so reported in VAERS, or the 150,000+ scaled-up deaths from VAERS but could be closer to tens of millions when the inoculation effects play out!
What the above three findings (Burkhart, Hoffe, Cole, and I suspect many others who have not yet come forward) show is that the post-inoculation effects are not rare events (as reported by the media-gov’t), but are in actuality frequent events.  They may be, in fact, universal, with the severity and damage different for each recipient
The question in my mind is whether it is possible to reverse these inoculation-based adverse events.  
Can the innate immune system be fully restored?  Can the micro clotting be reversed? 
Can the autoimmunity be reversed? 
 
I have seen a wide spectrum of opinions on whether this is possible,
none of which is overly convincing. 
Are we headed for the situation where the ~30% unvaxxed will be devoting their lives to operating whatever is left of the economic infrastructure and serving as caretakers for the vaxxed?
I realize the above sounds extreme, and maybe when more data are gathered from myriad credible sources the results and conclusions may change, but right now the above data seem to synchronize with the demonstrated underlying mechanisms of damage.  Additionally, we seem to be doubling down on inoculations, with a fourth booster being proposed for Israel, and the UK suggesting quarterly boosters.
Dr. Ryan Cole’s reaction

Background of two of the scientists behind the study
Dr. Bhakdi has spent his life practicing, teaching and researching medical microbiology and infectious diseases. He chaired the Institute of Medical Microbiology and Hygiene at the Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Germany, from 1990 until his retirement in 2012. He has published over 300 research articles in the fields of immunology, bacteriology, virology and parasitology, and served from 1990 to 2012 as Editor-in-Chief of Medical Microbiology and Immunology, one of the first scientific journals of this field that was founded by Robert Koch in 1887.
Dr. Arne Burkhardt is a pathologist who has taught at the Universities of Hamburg, Berne and Tübingen. He was invited for visiting professorships/study visits in Japan (Nihon University), the United States (Brookhaven National Institute), Korea, Sweden, Malaysia and Turkey. He headed the Institute of Pathology in Reutlingen for 18 years. Subsequently, he worked as an independent practicing pathologist with consulting contracts with laboratories in the US. Burkhardt has published more than 150 scientific articles in German and international scientific journals as well as contributions to handbooks in German, English and Japanese. Over many years he has audited and certified institutes of pathology in Germany.

New studies show that the COVID vaccines damage your immune system, likely permanently.
The vaccines are making it more likely you’ll be infected with Omicron 90 days after you are fully vaccinated. To keep vaccine effectiveness high against omicron, vaccination every 30 days is needed.

Update Jan 7, 2022: The numbers in the Denmark study described below are now confirmed by government data from Germany showing that vaccinated people are 8X more likely to develop Omicron than unvaccinated people. This is not surprising since a paper from Germany showed the same thing: the more you vaccinate, the worse it gets.
Worried about Omicron? Guess what? After 90 days, the vaccine they gave you is going to make you MORE likely to get infected from Omicron, not less. The longer you stay on the vaccine treadmill, the harder to get off in the future and the easier you’ll make it for the virus.
In short, we’ve been lied to about the vaccine. It is protecting you less and less over time. While you may get a benefit for earlier variants, the benefit for other variants (and likely other diseases) is going to be negative. In short, you are getting a short term benefit against Delta, but at the expense of a degradation of your overall immunity to everything else.
These vaccines may help you win the war against a variant that may soon be rare, but the price you pay is that you make your immunity to everything else worse. It’s a dumb tradeoff (especially since early treatments work so well). But the people making the laws won’t believe any of the science referenced in this article, so it will continue.
Alix Mayer alerted me to this game changing tweet about a study in Denmark which instantly went viral as you can see from the number of retweets:
Ezra Levant @ezralevant
Holy moly. This study shows that after three months the vaccine effectiveness of Pfizer & Moderna against Omicron is actually negative. Pfizer customers are 76.5% more likely and Moderna customers are 39.3% more likely to be infected than unvaxxed people.
medrxiv.org/content/10.110…

Image
I want to tell you what this really means and how it is being attacked.

Summary: Refuse to comply with mandates. Now.
This paper means we will need to inject people every 30 days if we want to “protect” them. Based on the harm that the vaccines do to our immune system, it’s likely that the needed interval will shorten with each booster.
If people don’t get boosted as required, they will be MORE vulnerable to Delta and Omicron than if they weren’t vaccinated. That’s what NEGATIVE vaccine efficacy means. It doesn’t mean the protection wears off (like we were told). It means the OPPOSITE of what you were told: it means the vaccine helps the virus to infect you
(by suppressing your immune system, probably permanently each time we are injected according to Dr. Ryan Cole). It means we were lied to.

In short, the vaccine is like a heroin addiction: once you’ve had a taste of it, you are hooked: you have to continue it for life if you want protection. If you stop it, you’re a sitting duck for the virus.
What’s worse is our government is mandating this now. In light of this paper, they will change the vaccine mandates to force you to get vaccinated every month or you will be fired from your job. Their next move could well be to make it illegal not to be vaccinated. This seems like where things are headed based on what is happening in other countries where they are quickly stripping away your rights to do anything without a vaccination.
And we have no clue what monthly (and later weekly) vaccination will do to your body. This has never been tested.
My advice is simple. If you have been vaccinated, you need to stop now. Do not get the booster.

My friend Dr. Robert Malone is fond of repeating the old adage,
“When you find yourself in a hole, stop digging.”
Sadly, most people cannot afford to lose their jobs, so they will get vaccinated and medical professionals will not speak out since doing so will cause them to lose their license.
The faster, safer, lower cost way to end the pandemic
Everyone needs to stop listening to the CDC now and start listening to people who have been saying to ditch the vaccines and aggressively promote early treatment with repurposed drugs.
The entire pandemic will end as soon as the CDC stops ignoring the existing early treatment protocols which have been available since March 2020 (Fareed and Tyson protocol was first available back then). Masking, vaccines, mandates, lockdowns, and social distancing were never needed. We could have (and still can) end the hospitalization and death with just one thing: early treatment. Just like Japan has done. But the CDC refused to listen.

What the paper said in detail:
First, the link in the tweet is to the outdated version of the paper.
 The current version can be found here.
Start at the comments, both from social media and also from Medrxiv readers.
Check out the social media portion of the comments
Here are some comments (on old and new version of the paper):
So assume the results you like (high VE for recent vaccination) are causal, but hand wave confounders at results you don’t like (negative VE for distant vaccination)? Science?
This is a superb paper, especially the careful approach to CNV calling and the Bayesian methods used throughout.
Looking at the graphs, I see both vaccines lose all effectiveness at 90 days, but worse, actually drop into strong negative effectiveness after that time.
This would mean that these vaccines *increase* one’s chances of infection after the initial 90 days “honeymoon” period. Am I getting this right?
If so, why are governments pushing third doses as Omicron is becoming dominant?

The key material is in the full PDF:
The graphs above tell the story.
Negative VE means the vaccine is helping the virus, not you.
So at 60 days, the protection is close to zero, so if you want to maintain protection,
getting vaccinated every 30 days is required.
This isn’t a vaccine at all. This is basically stimulating your immune system so it is already “geared up” to fight the virus. That’s not what a vaccine is supposed to do.
Furthermore, the negative VE after 90 days means you are hooked for life and I would guess (based on the mechanism of action), that we will need shorter and shorter dosing intervals for every booster you get (since it kills off your immune system every time).
So it could very well be monthly boosters after the 2nd dose, weekly boosters after the
3rd dose, and perhaps daily boosters after the 4th dose to maintain your “immunity.”
You can’t stop after that because if you stop, you’re in worse shape than if you never started.

The stunning conclusion of the paper:
In light of the exponential rise in Omicron cases, these findings highlight the need for massive rollout of vaccinations and booster vaccinations.
All I can say is “wow.” The people who wrote this paper are clearly drinking the Kool-Aid on their interpretation of what their study means.
They also wrote this (which is purely speculative with no data behind it as noted in the italics were my addition):
The negative estimates in the final period arguably suggest different behaviour and/or exposure patterns in the vaccinated and unvaccinated cohorts causing underestimation
of the VE. This was likely the result of Omicron spreading rapidly initially through single (super-spreading) events causing many infections among young, vaccinated individuals.

This paper should be a wakeup call: the vaccines do not work. Stop repeating the insanity.
Early treatments like the Fareed and Tyson protocol are 10X better than any new therapy, they don’t “hook you,” and they don’t cause disability or death.
If doctors started prescribing the Fareed and Tyson protocol, we’d have virtually no deaths, and few hospitalizations. But they can’t do that since medical board will take
away the licenses of any physicians who prescribe ivermectin, etc.

This is happening now.
We are in this mess because the NIH, CDC, FDA are corrupt and incompetent and they will not hold themselves accountable in an open debate. This has been going on for 20 years in the vaccine space… it’s nothing new.

The book “Evidence of harm” documents all of this.
Kirby was deliberately neutral in his presentation (being non-judgmental like reporters are supposed to be), but any neutral thinking person will side against the authorities.
Why the paper went viral
So, the reason this paper went viral is because
It is well done,
It was done by PhDs in infectious disease and epidemiology,
The results show what is really happening, and
Nobody has been able to attack the paper with a credible argument, even on Twitter.
It confirms what my team of experts has been saying about negative VE

Here are some of the ridiculous attempts to discredit the paper:
RobertNorton @robertnorton_
@ezralevant The article says that it’s not peer reviewed and is not published in any scientific journals. So without verification there are all kinds of claims out there about all kinds of things. We go by those principles that have passed peer review to separate fact and fiction.


SwingTrader @SwingTrader1114
@ezralevant It is impossible to have a negative VE. You cannot have a negative VE. The absolute lowest VE is zero, which infers no protection whatsoever. Your statement is completely false, including the data table that isn’t even in the study you cited.


Supporting evidence
The paper isn’t a fluke. There is lots of other evidence in support of the negative VE
(and not supporting their speculative explanation for it).
Here’s the data from Canada which shows that we have it backwards. We should be mandating “no vaccines” in order to keep your job and fire all the vaccinated people because these people are the most risky.
In Ontario in the last few days, cases per capita among the vaccinated have skyrocketed above cases per capita among the unvaccinatedClearly, mandates are nonsensical at this point, because the entire case for restricting unvaccinated people is their presumed higher per capita infection rate.

Here’s the UK data showing the same thing.
We need to flip around the mandates ASAP.
Robert W Malone, MD @RWMaloneMD
It looks like the U.K. data may support the vaccine-enhanced infection issue both FDA and I have raised.
Triple-Vaccinated More Than FOUR Times As Likely to Test Positive For Omicron Than Unvaccinated, Data Shows – The Daily ScepticAccording to new ONS data, the triple-vaccinated are 4.5 times more likely to test positive for Omicron than the unvaccinated. The double-vaccinated, meanwhile, are 2.3 times more likely to have Omicron.dailysceptic.org

Other supporting data:
On COVID vaccines: why they cannot work, and irrefutable evidence of their causative role in deaths after vaccination and the video about that paper. If the vaccines don’t kill you, they will leave you weaker. Over 90% of the deaths investigated after vaccination were found to have been caused by the vaccines. There is no other explanation.
The BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 reprograms both adaptive and innate immune responses
An excellent article by Jessica Rose which explains the underlying mechanism for why
we are seeing the effect that the more you vaccinate, the more you make things worse for people. The vaccine damages both your adaptive and innate immune systems.

Vaccine efficacy declines to be negative in the UK (Expose article)
Booster protection fades within 10 weeks against Omicron: UK study
Booster shots protect against symptomatic Omicron infection for about 10 weeks, study finds — which could mean more doses for some in 2022

This sub stack article looks at the Danish study (described here) and the UK data. Note that the VE numbers in the two studies are different because if you separate our Omicron, you get a very different picture of VE compared to analyses that don’t separate out VE by variant.

Dr. Ron Brown – Opinion Editorial December 23, 2021 Ontario, Canada reported 5,790 new COVID-19 cases on Thursday, December 23, 2021, setting the province’s one-day record for new cases since the beginning of the pandemic: Ontario: Case numbers | COVID-19. Thursday’s numbers include 971 unvaccinated new cases compared to 4,392 fully vaccinated new cases—a rapidly rising trend over the past several weeks clearly showing that most new cases are now occurring in fully vaccinated people.

New big data study of 145 countries show COVID vaccines makes things worse (cases and deaths), I missed this study. So did the mainstream media for some reason. 
But this study is yet another independent analysis that is difficult to refute: we have been misled by the CDC, FDA, and NIH. (You can check your area’s status on the CDC’s website.)

At-a-Glance

A new study by Kyle A. Beattie entitled “Worldwide Bayesian Causal Impact Analysis of Vaccine Administration on Deaths and Cases Associated with COVID-19: A Big Data Analysis of 145 Countries” concluded that vaccines are doing the opposite of what they were promised to do.
Rather than helping us regain our freedoms, the vaccines are associated with higher rates of COVID-19 infections and higher rates of COVID-related deaths.  In the US, the vaccines were associated with an increase of 38% in the number of COVID cases per million and an increase of 31% in the number of deaths per millions associated with COVID.

Numerous other studies have independently reached the same conclusion. The more you vaccinate, the worse things get. Beattie concludes: “These results should encourage local policy makers to make decisions based on data, not narrative, and based on local conditions, not global or national mandates”. However, based on past performance it is not expected that health authorities will react to these results in a rational fashion. 

Rather they will continue pressing their vaccine mandate for all, regardless of age or medical history. The next time you see you county health officer, President Biden, or
Boris Johnson why not ask them if they can find a mistake in this study by Kyle A. Beattie entitled Worldwide Bayesian Causal Impact Analysis of Vaccine Administration on Deaths and Cases Associated with COVID-19: A BigData Analysis of 145 Countries 
(the PDF version is here).

The study found that the COVID vaccines cause more COVID cases per million
(+38% in US) and more deaths per million associated with COVID (+31% in US).

The abstract says: The statistically significant and overwhelmingly positive causal impact after vaccine deployment on the dependent variables — total deaths and total cases per million should be highly worrisome for policy makersThey indicate a marked increase in both COVID-19 related cases and death due directly to a vaccine deployment that was originally sold to the public as the “key to gain back our freedoms.” The effect of vaccines on total cases per million and its low positive association with total vaccinations per hundred signifies a limited impact of vaccines on lowering COVID-19 associated cases.

These results should encourage local policy makers to make policy decisions based on data, not narrative, and based on local conditions, not global or national mandates. These results should also encourage policy makers to begin looking for other avenues out of the pandemic aside from mass vaccination campaigns.
In other words, we were lied to.
The vaccines are making this worse, not better. This is why we are not getting ourselves out of the hole. Mandating vaccines are making this and this is hardly the first study to reach those conclusions. These studies, all done independently, found the same thing—
the more you vaccinate, the worse things get.

The Lyons-Weiler paper
The Harvard study
The German study
The Denmark study (which shows Dr. James was right;
you have to boost every 30 days to maintain protection.
German government data (this is from The Expose)
80% of the COVID deaths in the UK are vaccinated
Lancet: 89% Of New UK COVID Cases Among Fully Vaxxed

The response to this new study by the health authorities is predictable
I think I’ve figured out the pattern and can now confidently predict how health authorities worldwide will react to this stunning result: they will ignore it. Instead, they will mandate vaccines for everyone of every age ASAP. Am I right?
My offer to share videos and blood clot tissue samples from multiple embalmers with the CDC and FDA (substack.com)

More on Brain Health:
Can COVID-19 lead to dementia?
The noise brain-health connection
Could a ketogenic diet offer brain health benefits?
The connection between air pollution and cognitive health

World Bank warns of ‘human catastrophe’ food crisis (msn.com)
https://www.reuters.com/article/fact check-study-idUSL1N2TU1SW
Ukraine round-up: Civilians trapped as fighter gives ‘last address’ (msn.com)

Ukraine’s Air Force has added about 20 more operational aircraft after influx of spare parts, senior US defense official says (msn.com)
Ukraine offers to negotiate with Russia ‘without any conditions’ to allow troops and civilians in Mariupol to evacuate (msn.com)
What has Russia and Putin said about the possible incorporation into NATO of Finland and Sweden? (msn.com)
Ukrainian marine commander in Mariupol pleas to world leaders for evacuation of civilians – Search (bing.com)
Chinese President Xi on Pandemic, Global Economy, ‘Cold War Mentality’ | Watch
Busing migrants, halting trade: Abbott bets future on divisive border plans (msn.com)
Can Texas declare a border ‘invasion’ and return migrants to Mexico? (msn.com)

Biden Is Blaming Everyone for Inflation but Himself | Opinion (msn.com)
Why Putin’s inner circle hasn’t turned on him – Search (bing.com)
Israeli warplanes strike Gaza after rocket attack (msn.com)
Russian soldiers exposed to radiation – Search (bing.com)

Meet Putin’s biggest threat – Search (bing.com)

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Climate Change

UN Warns Earth ‘Firmly on Track Toward an Unlivable World’ – Search (bing.com)

A new report from the UN’s top body of climate scientists is warning that temperatures will go beyond a key danger point unless countries worldwide cut greenhouse emissions faster than they are currently committed to doing.

U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said the report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change revealed “a litany of broken climate promises” by governments and corporations, accusing them of stoking global warming by clinging to harmful fossil fuels.

“It is a file of shame, cataloguing the empty pledges that put us firmly on track toward an unlivable world,” he said.

Governments agreed in the 2015 Paris accord to keep global warming well below
2 degrees Celsius (3.6 Fahrenheit) this century, ideally no more than 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 Fahrenheit). Yet temperatures have already increased by over 1.1C (2F) since pre-industrial times, resulting in measurable increases in disasters such flash floods, extreme heat, more intense hurricanes and longer-burning wildfires, putting human lives in danger and costing governments hundreds of billions of dollars to confront.

“Projected global emissions from (national pledges) place limiting global warming to
1.5C beyond reach and make it harder after 2030 to limit warming to 2C,” the panel said. In other words, the report’s co-chair, James Skea of Imperial College London, told The Associated Press: “If we continue acting as we are now, we’re not even going to limit warming to 2 degrees, never mind 1.5 degrees.”

Ongoing investments in fossil fuel infrastructure and clearing large swaths of forest for agriculture undermine the massive curbs in emissions needed to meet the Paris goal, the report found. Emissions in 2019 were about 12% higher than they were in 2010 and 54% higher than in 1990, said Skea.

The rate of growth has slowed from 2.1% per year in the early part of this century
to 1.3% per year between 2010 and 2019, the report’s authors said. But they voiced “high confidence” that unless countries step up their efforts to cut greenhouse gas emissions,
the planet will on average be 2.4C to 3.5C (4.3 to 6.3F) warmer by the end of the century — a level experts say is sure to cause severe impacts for much of the world’s population.

“Limiting warming to 1.5C requires global greenhouse gas emissions to peak before
2025 at the latest and be reduced by 43% by 2030,” he said. Such cuts would be hard to achieve without drastic, economy-wide measures, the panel acknowledged. It’s more likely that the world will pass 1.5C and efforts will then need to be made to bring temperatures back down again, including by removing vast amounts of carbon dioxide — the main greenhouse gas — from the atmosphere.

Many experts say this is unfeasible with current technologies, and even if it could be
done it would be far costlier than preventing the emissions in the first place. The report, numbering thousands of pages, doesn’t single out individual countries for blame. But the figures show much of the carbon dioxide already in the atmosphere was released by rich countries that were the first to burn coal, oil and gas beginning with the industrial revolution.

The U.N. panel said 40% of emissions since then came from Europe and North America. Just over 12% can be attributed to East Asia, which includes China. But China took over the position as world’s top emissions polluter from the United States in the mid-2000s.

Many countries and companies have used recent climate meetings to paint rosy pictures
of their emissions-cutting efforts — while continuing to invest in fossil fuels and other polluting activities, Guterres charged. “Some government and business leaders are saying one thing but doing another,” he said. “Simply put, they are lying. And the results will be catastrophic.”

The report isn’t without some hope, however.

Its authors highlight myriad ways in which the world can be brought back on track
to 2C or even, with great effort, return to 1.5C after that threshold has been passed. This could require measures such as the removal of CO2 from the atmosphere with natural or artificial means, but also potentially risky technologies such as pumping aerosols into the sky to reflect sunlight.

Among the solutions recommended are a rapid shift away from fossil fuels toward renewable energy such as increasingly cheap solar and wind power, the electrification of transport, less meat consumption, more efficient use of resources and massive financial support for poor countries unable to pay for such measures without help.

The situation is as if humanity has “gone to the doctor in a very unhealthy condition,”
and the doctor is saying “you need to change, it’s a radical change. If you don’t, you’re in trouble,” said report co-author Pete Smith, a professor of soils and global change at the University Aberdeen.

“It’s not like a diet,” Smith said. “It is a fundamental lifestyle change. It’s changing what you eat, how much you eat and getting a more active lifestyle.” One move often described as “low-hanging fruit” by scientists is to plug methane leaks from mines, wells and landfills that release the potent but short-lived greenhouse gas into the atmosphere.

A pact forged between the United States and China at last year’s U.N. climate conference in Glasgow aims to do just that. “The big message we’ve got (is that) human activities got us into this problem and human agency can actually get us out of it again,” said Skea, the panel’s co-chair.

The panel’s reports have become increasingly blunt since the first one was published in 1990, and the latest may be the last before the planet passes 1.5C of warming, Skea told
the AP. Last August, it said climate change caused by humans was “an established fact” and warned that some effects of global warming are already inevitable.

In late February, the panel published a report that outlined how further temperature increases will multiply the risk of floods, storms, drought and heat waves worldwide.
Still, the British government’s former chief science adviser David King, who wasn’t involved in writing the report, said there are too optimistic assumptions about how much CO2 the world can afford to emit.

“We don’t actually have a remaining carbon budget to burn,” said King, who now chairs the Climate Crisis Advisory Group. “It’s just the reverse. We’ve already done too much in the way of putting greenhouse gases up there,” he said, arguing that the IPCC’s calculation omits new risks and potentially self-reinforcing effects already happening, such as the increased absorption of heat into the oceans from sea ice loss and the release of methane as permafrost melts.

Such warnings were echoed by U.N. chief Guterres, citing scientists’ warnings that
the planet is moving “perilously close to tipping points that could lead to cascading and irreversible climate impacts.” “But high-emitting governments and corporations are not just turning a blind eye; they are adding fuel to the flames,” he said, calling for an end to further coal, oil and gas extraction.

“Investing in new fossil fuels infrastructure is moral and economic madness.”
Vulnerable nations said the report showed big polluters have to step up their efforts before the next U.N. climate summit in Egypt this fall. “We are looking to the G-20, to the world’s biggest emitters, to set ambitious targets ahead of COP27, and to reach those targets – by investing in renewables, cutting out coal and fossil fuel subsidies,” said Tina Stege, climate envoy for the Marshall Islands.

“It’s long past time to deliver on promises made.”

image.png
Climate change: Another challenge in a troubled world.
By Vivian Blevins – April 13, 2022

Vivian B. Blevins, Ph.D., a graduate of The Ohio State University, served as a
community college president for 15 years in Kentucky, Texas, California, and Missouri before returning to Ohio to teach telecommunication employees from around the country and students at Edison State Community College and to work with veterans. Viewpoints expressed in the article are the work of the author. The Daily Advocate does not endorse these viewpoints nor the independent activities of the author.

A headline in the April 5, 2022, issue of the Dayton Daily News indicated “U.N.:
Earth ‘firmly on track toward an unlivable world.’” When I was president of Lee College from 1986 to 1992 in Baytown, Texas, a suburb of Houston, Exxon had one of the world’s largest refineries there as well as a chemical plant.

I still recall the smells and the air pollutants dispersed regularly (and I’m sure in compliance with federal standards) and my son Lance’s discovery of malformed small animal life in the streams in his neighborhood. I met frequently with other presidents in the Gulf Coast area, and early on I made the mistake of saying, “This area is obviously heavily polluted because I can smell it in the air.”

In response, a very powerful and long-established president said, “Dr. Blevins, that is
the smell of money,” And he gave me a look that said, “Keep your mouth shut and you might be successful here. Otherwise….” I had recently completed my first presidency
in the coalfields of southeastern Kentucky, so I certainly understood the need for a
major source of employment which mining coal provided there.

I knew as well that coal mining was responsible for the success of all the support
services — and jobs — that an industry requires: schools, grocery stores, pharmacies, libraries, and medical facilities.
I also understood the dangers of coal mining, not only in terms of mining accidents but silicosis, aka Black Lung, as I had watched my father-in-law die from the disease and knew that kind of smothering death is a dear price to pay for a job in mining coal.

United Nations Secretary General Antonio Guterra’s bleak comments, based on a report
from its intergovernmental climate panel, is a subject difficult for many Americans to even notice among the news stories on the war in Ukraine, the Supreme Court wrangling, and food/gas prices. According to Associated Press reporters Frank Jordans and Seth Berenstein, Gueterra indicated that governments and corporations have “stoked global warming by clinging to harmful fossil fuels.” They quote him as saying of the multi-page report, “It is a file of shame, cataloguing the empty pledges that put us firmly on track for an unlivable world.”

It’s difficult, if not impossible unless they are directly impacted, for Americans to think
of the “increases in disasters such as flash floods, extreme heat, more intense hurricanes and longer=burning wildfires.”

This is true to acknowledge even if we know our employment is contributing to global warming. Yes, we care about persons impacted by these natural disasters — or are they man-made disasters? We pray for them and donate to the myriad groups that attempt to alleviate their personal and financial pain even as we wonder why our income tax dollars are not being used to address these issues in a competent fashion.

Jordans and Berenstein write that “the solutions recommended are a rapid shift away from fossil fuels toward renewable energy such as increasingly cheap solar and wind power, the electrification of transport, less meat consumption, more efficient use of resources and massive support for poor countries unable to pay for such measures
without help.”

As a pragmatist, a problem solver, I believe these are good suggestions and doable with leadership and money, but I would follow them up with a few questions: Who is going to be paying for the “massive support for poor countries?” We are aware of tax loopholes and outright fraud that keep some individuals and corporations from paying any taxes or only token amounts as we faithfully pay our own local tax bills that have rather long itemized lists for schools, parks, libraries, cities, etc.

· We need such lists with our state and federal tax bills.
Are your lips snarled yet, or are you laughing aloud? We’d like to have electric cars, but since the cost is prohibitive for most of us, I guess we’ll just need to keep driving our old gas-guzzling, polluting ones.

· Will retraining be provided and by whom to move Americans from current employment in fields that support fossil fuels? Will these individuals be relocated at a distance from their extended families and support systems?

· Yes, we can eat less meat and that is easy for those of us who are not fans of meat.
What about those who earn their living raising beef cattle, hogs, and other meat sources?
What about those who process meat for the marketplace? How will we provide for the uprooting, retraining, and placement for these groups?

· We should all be able to get on board with “more efficient use of resources.” We control the thermostats in our homes; our use of water; our buying choices of food, clothing, furniture, vehicles; our use of gasoline to a degree unless our jobs absolutely require travel and carpooling is impossible; the size of homes we build/buy; the items we recycle, etc.

A solution posed is the development of a way to remove “vast amounts of carbon dioxide- the main greenhouse gas- from the atmosphere.” Maybe some of these folks who are currently spending millions on little sight-seeing trips to outer space could pay appropriate taxes, and we could get scientists collaborating on this proposed solution.

As a start, I think we all could do what we can and spend less time bickering and more time using our critical thinking skills to solve problems in our homes, our workplaces,
our cities, our states, and our country.
In conclusion, I’ve recently been rereading Ray Bradbury’s stories in The Illustrated Man, and the predictions in his fiction seem strangely timely.

image.png
In this July 20, 2013 file photo, a plant that produces ethanol 
is next to a cornfield near Coon Rapids, Iowa.  
  (AP Photo/Charlie Riedel, File)

New process should be significantly more efficient, too
By Kevin Spak

Scientists: We Can Make Ethanol Without Corn

(NEWSER) – Could ethanol someday essentially be produced out of thin air?
A group of scientists has published research in Nature detailing a new method of making ethanol out of carbon monoxide gas, instead of corn or sugarcane, Reuters reports.
Researchers saturated water with the gas, then zapped it with a novel device featuring two electrodes, one made of what they’re calling “oxide-derived copper,” to convert it into fuel. “I emphasize that these are just laboratory experiments today,” lead researcher Matthew Kanan says. He expects to have a prototype device ready in two to three years.

The environmental implications are profound. Critics of ethanol say it drives up food prices and consumes loads of land and water. It can take more than 800 gallons of water to grow enough corn to make 3 gallons of ethanol, Phys.org points out.
What’s more, researchers envision a two-step process in which the carbon monoxide is derived from carbon dioxide in the air, providing an “economic incentive” for scrubbing carbon from the atmosphere, the MIT Technology Review reports. The new process could also work on a far smaller scale than biomass methods; the Review envisions rooftop solar panels generating fuel that’s kept in water heater-sized tanks.
(More on the toll ethanol takes on the environment here.)

Ethanol: It’s Not What You Think it is, or is it? – Part 1

image.png

Concord Hymn

Ralph Waldo Emerson – 1803-1882

By the rude bridge that arched the flood,
Their flag to April’s breeze unfurled,
Here once the embattled farmers stood,
And fired the shot heard round the world.

The foe long since in silence slept.
Alike the conqueror silent sleeps;
And Time the ruined bridge has swept
Down the dark stream which seaward creeps.

On this green bank, by this soft stream,
We set to-day a votive stone;
That memory may their deed redeem,
When, like our sires, our sons are gone.

Spirit, that made those heroes dare
To die, and leave their children free,
Bid Time and Nature gently spare
The shaft we raise to them and thee.

MBS threatened to move Saudi Arabia closer to Russia and China to punish Biden for ostracizing him, report says (msn.com)
Biden torched for doubling down on inflation blame game: ‘You can’t message a disaster,’ Brenberg says (msn.com)
BLM silent when confronted with data showing massive 2020 spike in Black murders victims (msn.com)
The House playing field is coming into focus. And it’s not a pretty picture for Democrats
Catastrophic Results Ahead: UN warns Earth ‘firmly on track toward an unlivable world’
There’s Something Different About Clouds in Antarctica, And It Could Be Important
This city has seen the biggest reduction in snowfall over the years, data shows
To be a great power, here’s the stance China should take with Russia (msn.com)
UN Warns Earth ‘Firmly on Track Toward an Unlivable World’ – Search (bing.com)
Abbott’s border policy cost the U.S. almost $9 billion in just 10 days (msn.com) 
Democrats Blew It On Immigration, Now They’re Making It Worse (msn.com)
A 4 billion-year-old comet 80 miles wide is headed toward Earth (msn.com)
The Memo: Left and right accuse Biden of failing to meet the moment (msn.com)
Canada’s inflation rate jumps to new 31-year high of 6.7% (msn.com)
Putin Threatens World With New Nuclear-Capable Missile (msn.com)
Europeans are terrified of nuclear war — and should be (msn.com)
Los Angeles progressives are being mugged by reality (msn.com)
Coastal cities are sinking faster than sea-level rise (msn.com)
Watch the World Economy Crumble (msn.com)

‼FORMER NATO ANALYST CHALLENGES SOME OF THE GLOBALISTS’ CLAIMS + LIES ABOUT THE 2014–2022 UNDECLARED WAR BETWEEN GLOBALIST UKRAINE (a loyal NWO puppet of the KAMALA–Biden Globalist Regime)

AND ANTI–GLOBALIST RUSSIA 🎯 👍 💯

– –Pray for Peace!🙏– –‼- ——- 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GEIFwLKlq1Q

Lindsey Stirling in the snow
Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

The Southern Border Fiasco

A group of migrant families walk along the border wall between the U.S. and Mexico after crossing into the U.S. 

Biden is intentionally ignoring immigration law because
he thinks vetting migrants is racist: Sen. Kennedy (msn.com)

U.S. plans to lift COVID-19 border expulsion policy known as Title 42 – CBS News 

By Camilo Montoya-Galvez

Record numbers of Cubans, Nicaraguans and Colombians reach U.S. border.
The Biden administration is expected to lift in May the pandemic-era emergency rule known as Title 42, which has allowed U.S. immigration authorities to quickly expel immigrants and asylum-seekers to stop the spread of COVID-19. The rule has blocked nearly 2 million people from crossing the border since it was enacted during the Trump administration. CBS News immigration reporter Camilo Montoya-Galvez joined Meg Oliver and Tanya Rivero to discuss.
A 22-year high in apprehensions along the U.S.-Mexico border in March was partly fueled by record arrivals of migrants from Cuba, Nicaragua, Colombia and Ukraine, Department of Homeland Security (DHS) figures released this week show. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) processed migrants 221,303 times along the southern border in March,
a 33% jump from February and the highest tally since 2000, according to agency statistics.

CBP said 159,900 encounters in March represented unique migrants, citing a 28% rate of repeat border crossings. The spike in migrant arrivals was also partly driven by a 33% increase in apprehensions of single adults, who accounted for 169,062 — or 76% — of all border encounters. Arrivals of migrant parents and children traveling as families and unaccompanied minors also increased, rising to 37,818 and 14,167, respectively.
Arrests of Mexican migrants, the majority of whom are single adults, rose by 22% from February, increasing to 87,388. Arrivals of migrants from Guatemala, Honduras and
El Salvador also increased, but on a smaller scale, rising to 21,355, 16,063 and 8,387, respectively.
U.S. authorities recorded encountering a historic number of migrants from countries beyond Mexico and Central America’s Northern Triangle, who made up nearly 40%
of all border encounters last month.
U.S. border officials processed 32,141 Cuban migrants, an all-time high that doubled February’s tally and made Cuba the second largest source of migration to the U.S. southern border in March, only behind Mexico.
Just over 16,000 Nicaraguans and 15,144 Colombians entered U.S. border custody
last month — records for both nationalities. The two countries were the fifth- and sixth-
largest migrant sending countries last month, overtaking other Latin American nations like El Salvador and Venezuela.

“There’s no precedent for this,” Adam Isacson, a migration policy analyst for the Washington Office on Latin America, told CBS News. “This change in nationalities is remarkable.”
The number of Ukrainians processed at the U.S.-Mexico border also spiked in March to 3,274, a 1,103% jump from February, when 272 Ukrainians entered U.S. custody there. Ukraine became the ninth largest source of migrants to the U.S. border, surpassing some Western Hemisphere nations like Haiti and Brazil.
Because they need visas to fly to the U.S., thousands of Ukrainians have been flying to Mexico to seek entry along the U.S. border since Russia invaded Ukraine. U.S. authorities at official border crossings have been directed to consider allowing Ukrainians to enter the country on humanitarian grounds.

Roughly 96% of the Ukrainians encountered along the southern border in March were processed at ports of entry, as opposed to arrested by Border Patrol for entering the country illegally, according to CBP data.
The sharp increase in migrant arrivals from countries outside of Mexico and Central America’s Northern Triangle will pose major operational and political challenges for the Biden administration, which is set to lift in late May a pandemic-era rule that allows U.S. officials to rapidly expel border-crossers, experts said.
“This is a continuation of the trend that started last year for people from multiple countries beyond Central America and Mexico to reach the U.S.-Mexico border, but it’s becoming much more accentuated and much more complicated,” Andrew Selee, president of the Migration Policy Institute, told CBS News.

Selee noted the U.S. currently can’t carry out large-scale deportations to Cuba and Nicaragua due to strained relationships with those countries’ authoritarian governments. That means migrants from those countries are allowed to stay in the U.S. while their asylum cases are reviewed, a process that can take years.
While Mexico accepts the returns of its citizens and migrants from Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador who are expelled by the U.S. under the pandemic-era Title 42 rule, it generally does not allow the U.S. to expel migrants from other countries to its territory. 

In March, 81% of U.S. apprehensions of migrants from Mexico and Central America’s Northern Triangle along the southern border resulted in expulsions under Title 42, according to CBP data. Conversely, just 2% of the apprehensions of migrants from other countries led to expulsions.

Since it was instituted by the Trump administration in March 2020:
 Title 42 has allowed U.S. officials along the Mexican border carry out over 1.8 million expulsions of migrants, 75% of which have occurred under President Biden, government statistics show.

But earlier this month, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) said
Title 42 was no longer needed to curb coronavirus outbreaks inside migrant holding
facilities because of increased vaccination rates and improving pandemic conditions.
The CDC said it would terminate the policy on May 23.
The CDC’s decision triggered swift backlash from Republicans, who have accused the Biden administration of being too lenient on migrants. But it has also alarmed centrist Democrats, many of whom feel that an even bigger spike in border arrivals could harm their chances of being reelected in November.

image.png

In fiscal year 2021, CBP recorded processing migrants over 1.7 million times along the Mexican border, a record. Six months into fiscal year 2022, the agency has already recorded over 1 million migrant arrivals.
In March, CBP processed an average of 7,000 migrants per day along the southern border. But DHS officials are preparing for that number to increase to 12,000 or even 18,000 when Title 42 ends, an unprecedented scenario that would overwhelm the already strained U.S. border processing capacity.
While Republicans and some Democrats have said the administration is not ready for
Title 42’s termination, DHS officials said they’re preparing by mobilizing hundreds of border agents, expanding capacity at processing facilities and securing additional buses and aircraft to process migrants. 

Homeland Security Secretary Mayorkas has said that when Title 42 is lifted, migrants will have a chance to seek U.S. asylum. Those who don’t qualify for asylum, however, will be swiftly deported, he has said.
But Isacson, the policy analyst, said the U.S. will continue to struggle to carry out deportations of migrants who are not from Mexico or Central America after Title 42 is lifted. Historically, the pre-pandemic deportation tool available to border officials, known as expedited removal, has only been used on Mexican and Central American migrants who don’t ask for asylum or who fail to establish credible fear of persecution.

Isacson said the number of migrants from countries outside of Mexico and Central America heading north will continue to remain high as long as travel options remain
open and there are sophisticated networks of smugglers facilitating their journey to the
U.S. Cubans, he noted, are first flying to Nicaragua, where they enjoy visa-free travel, and then heading to the U.S. Nicaraguans are trekking through Central America and Mexico to reach the border. And Colombians are flying to Mexico because they don’t need visas to get there, before traveling to the Arizona border.
“I think the real growth in migrant arrivals for a while is going to be from any country that’s hard to return people to and reasonably easy to get to the United States from,” Isacson said.  Seventh bus of illegal immigrants en route from Texas to US Capitol in Washington: Gov. Greg Abbott (msn.com)
The southern border is expected to see an unprecedented humanitarian and security crisis due to President Joe Biden’s plans to end the pandemic policy of turning away migrants known as Title 42. Biden’s decision has been met with fury from Republicans and even some Democrats who have accused the White House of setting up the U.S. immigration system for failure.

image.png
CARTELS REPORTEDLY SET FIRE TO TRUCKS AT BORDER TO FORCE BRIDGE REOPENING
Economic apocalypse? 6 in 10 small businesses fear inflation will ruin them | WREG.com
POLL: Economic Apocalypse? Small Businesses Fear Inflation Will Ruin Them – YouTube
Kudlow: Biden admin does not care one whit about economic growth and prosperity
China says it’ll ‘strengthen strategic cooperation’ with Russia no matter what (msn.com)
Pentagon official resigns, sounds alarm about US losing technological edge (msn.com)
What’s behind China’s plans to increase coordination with Russia – Search (bing.com)
Democrats sound the alarm as White House plans to scrap Title 42 (msn.com)
White House defends Title 42 termination as ‘return’ to immigration ‘standard’
as more Dems buck Biden (msn.com)

US plans to lift border policy known as Title 42.

Here’s what to know about Title 42.

Original Author: Anna Giaritelli

Original Location: EXPLAINED: Title 42, the policy at the center of the border debate
One week after President Trump declared a national emergency over the coronavirus pandemic on March 13, 2020, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention invoked Title 42 of the Public Health Service Act of 1944, giving it the ability to deny the admission of goods and people who pose a risk of spreading a communicable disease.
By invoking Title 42, the CDC recommended to U.S. Customs and Border Protection that all noncitizens seeking asylum at ports of entry and those who crossed illegally between the ports be immediately expelled back into Mexico. The change meant Border Patrol agents would not take people into custody, further risking the spread of the coronavirus in law enforcement facilities.

Carrying out Title 42
The temporary policy was put into effect March 21, 2020, and could be renewed after
60 days. The CDC has renewed it for two years, and in that time, the United States has expelled 1.6 million people through the authority, though some were turned away more than once.
The Trump administration enforced Title 42 to a greater extent than the Biden administration has. Under Trump, virtually all illegal immigrants were expelled
to Mexico or their home country.
Expulsions became more complicated in late 2020, when people from countries beyond Mexico and Central America began crossing the border at higher rates than ever seen in the Border Patrol’s 98-year history. Because the Mexican government refused to accept back migrants from countries beyond Central America, the U.S. was forced to take them into custody.
Some Mexican states refused to accept back migrants traveling with a family member if the child was over 7 years old. In response, Border Patrol stopped immediately expelling those families.
Families unable to be returned south of the border must be taken into Border Patrol custody. Once they are processed, families are turned over to Immigration and Customs Enforcement. ICE used to hold families at its family residential centers for up to 20 days before it would have to release them due to a court ruling. Because 1.5 million cases are pending before the 500 judges of the U.S. immigration court system, having cases resolved in 20 days is impossible. The Biden administration has also ceased using family residential centers, opting to release families immediately.

Biden slows expulsions
When Biden took office in January 2021, his administration barred the Border Patrol
from turning away children who showed up at the border without a parent, known as unaccompanied minors.
He also immediately halted deportations for 100 days, suspended border wall construction, and vowed to rescind initiatives that turned away asylum-seekers at the nation’s borders — moves that sent a signal to the world that likely prompted many to travel to the U.S. In addition, the pandemic has had the harshest economic effect on Latin American nations, leading more people to flee.
The Biden administration announced in early April that it would end Title 42 on May 23. However, the decision to go forward raises the prospect of further chaos at the border before the midterm elections.

img
Nancy Pelosi + Baltimore Mob = Drug Cartel | Nancy Pelosi net worth 2022 (bing.com)

Where Democrats and Republicans stand
Immigrant activists and Democrats have fought Title 42 because it prevents migrants
from making asylum claims. In addition, migrants who return to Mexico face extremely dangerous situations, being preyed upon by cartels, and living in terrible conditions, often outside in tents, according to the Washington Office on Latin America, a research and advocacy human rights organization.
The expulsions also mean those who illegally cross the border cannot be detained and
thus referred for prosecution and face the consequences, which can serve as a deterrent. Recidivism, or the rate at which people cross the border multiple times, has tripled under Title 42.
Republicans have long opposed ending Title 42, warning that without a mechanism to expel people immediately, more will come, and U.S. border agents will be overwhelmed and lose control of the border to migrants and the cartels. In 2021, more than 2 million people were stopped while attempting to enter the U.S. from Mexico illegally in 2021, an astronomical figure compared to recent years. In a 21-state lawsuit filed in Louisiana, Republican attorneys general argued that the Biden administration failed to consider the impact undoing Title 42 would have on them.
Opponents, including the American Civil Liberties Union, sued the Trump administration for expelling migrant families before without allowing them to seek asylum.

Build Back Better Bust: Massive Spending Halted.
But Democrats are increasingly speaking out against the Biden administration’s plans ahead of the election. Five Senate Democrats joined six Republicans in April to introduce
a bill that would require a 60-day delay before Title 4 can end. The bill would also require the Department of Homeland Security to submit a plan to Congress for winding down the policy without creating disaster.

Health policy used for immigration purposes
Theresa Cardinal Brown, the managing director of immigration and cross-border policy
at the Bipartisan Policy Center, noted that Title 42 has been used as a border management policy, not a health protocol.
“In legal terms, Title 42 is a health policy, issued under public health authorities,”
Brown wrote in an email. “In practical terms, because it only applies to migrants entering from Mexico or Canada without documents, it has been used to manage migration at the U.S.-Mexico border since it was put in place in March 2020 which makes it an immigration policy as well.”

Immigration restrictionism group Numbers
USA Vice President Chris Chmielenski views Title 42 as an immigration policy
because it “dictates who can come to the U.S., who can’t come, and who can stay.”
“The intent of Congress in passing Title 42 was to give clear authority to the Surgeon General to decide who can come and who can’t come during a global health crisis to best serve the interests of the citizens,” Chmielenski wrote in an email. “Immigration policy, first and foremost, should serve the interests of U.S. citizens.”
DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas has maintained that Title 42 “is not an immigration authority, but rather a public health authority.”

What will happen when Title 42 ends?
The major question is how the Biden administration will prepare for and respond to
Title 42 ending on May 23. The Biden administration is said to be concerned that walking back Title 42 could prompt a “mass migration event.”
Between 5,000 and 7,000 noncitizens have been encountered attempting to cross the border illegally each day over the past year. The DHS is specifically concerned that Mexican cartels will take advantage of the forthcoming change in border policy and attempt to push as many people into the country as possible. The DHS is planning for a worst-case scenario of 18,000 people a day in the six weeks following May 23, far beyond the 1,000 that the Obama administration had said would constitute a crisis.
A further escalation of illegal immigration and the potential for mass releases of illegal immigrants into the interior of the U.S. would further damage Biden’s standing months ahead of the midterm elections, adding to problems for Democrats.

More than 283,000 migrants who illegally crossed the border from Mexico between October 2020 and September 2021 were let into the U.S. despite Biden administration’s claims that it was immediately turning away adults and families. Border Patrol agents were so overwhelmed with the volume of illegal immigrants showing up this year that they started releasing migrants en masse into communities without providing  them the legal documents that mandate they appear before an immigration judge about their unlawful entry. Of the 283,000 releases, about 95,000 noncitizens were released without inputting them into tracking systems.
The DHS has shared that it is working with the State, Health and Human Services, and Justice departments to move personnel to the border, but it has not shared any details of its plans besides bullet points.

Is there a quick fix?
Once Title 42 ends, people who are apprehended illegally crossing the border or deemed inadmissible for entry at the ports will face one of three options, according to Brown.
The government could use a process known as expedited removal to repatriate that person to their home country, though it is contingent on that person not claiming a fear of being returned. However, it’s not clear if the Mexican government will accept non-Mexicans.
If the person did claim asylum during the expedited removal process, they would undergo an initial asylum screening called a credible fear interview and be referred to immigration court if they pass.
Others will be referred directly to immigration court and likely released into the
U.S. pending the resolution of their case. Some could be held in ICE detention facilities, though the pandemic and the Biden administration’s aversion to detaining people for civil offenses makes detention far less likely.

At present, 216,450 immigrants released into the U.S. are not in detention but are being monitored through technology programs. Fewer than 20,000 people are in detention, according to April data from the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse, a research organization at Syracuse University in New York.
Finally, some migrants may be returned to Mexico under a policy implemented during
the Trump administration, the Migrant Protection Protocols. Known informally as the “Remain in Mexico” policy, it forces asylum-seekers to go back to Mexico for weeks to months while they wait to appear in court, rather than releasing them into the U.S. 
The Biden administration unsuccessfully tried to end the policy last year, but the Supreme Court ordered it be reinstated. With so many people crossing the border from countries far beyond Central America, it makes it more challenging for the U.S. to remove those people to well over 100 countries. 
China is insulating its economy from sanctions for when it invades Taiwan: Retired Gen. Robert Spalding | Watch (msn.com)

‘Time Is Running Short’: Elizabeth Warren Says Democrats Are ‘Headed Toward Big Losses’ in November (townhall.com)
Seventh bus of illegal immigrants en route from Texas to US Capitol in Washington:
Gov. Greg Abbott (msn.com)
Despite Putin’s claims that the West’s ‘economic blitzkrieg strategy didn’t work,’
Moscow’s mayor says the city is about to lose 200,000 jobs (msn.com)
Is everything you read about the war in Ukraine true? How to identify fake news.
WATCH: Greg Abbott says he’s considering sending migrant buses to Delaware next.
Sean Hannity: Jen Psaki will fit in at MSNBC with her ‘dishonest partisan’ colleagues
Every Russian General Killed Fighting Ukraine War So Far—Full List (msn.com)
More Ukrainians Reported at U.S. Borders Despite Hazy Legal Path (msn.com)
Inflation is hollowing out the economy: Jonathan Hoenig | Fox Business Video
Most Russians say they support the military, according to this pollster :
NPR Russia Will Not Use Nuclear Weapons in Ukraine, Lavrov Says (msn.com)
Top China Experts Insist No End to Covid Zero as Deaths Grow (msn.com)
What is inflation? Here’s why prices go up, and who’s to blame (msn.com)
Yen Extends Its Longest Losing Streak in at Least 50 Years (msn.com)
Natural gas pipeline future in doubt after SCOTUS rejection (msn.com)
MSN | Outlook, Office, Skype, Bing, Breaking News, and Latest Videos
US officials heading to Solomons over China pact worries (msn.com)
26 Republican Governors announce Border Strike Force (msn.com)
12 New Weapons the US Is Adding to Its Arsenal (msn.com)
The Southern Border Fiasco – Search (bing.com)
This Is the Country That Has The Most Oil (msn.com)
Bank of America ups inflation forecast (msn.com)
Everybody’s mad at Biden (msn.com)

image.png
Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Unexpected DNA Test Results

Identical Triplets Take A DNA Test, But the Unsettling Truth Is Revealed
By Lionel Arkin – September 12, 2019

The Gorgeous Dahm Triplets
Obviously have much more in common than most siblings do, so when they decided
to take a DNA ancestry test, the triplets expected their results to be almost the same. Shockingly, something else revealed in the tests that completely stunned the sisters.

Three Times a Charm
Nicole, Erica, and Jaclyn Dahm were born on December 12, 1977, and in that order.
From the moment they came into the world, all eyes were on them.

People called them the most beautiful triplets.
The triplets were inseparable and identical. Even their parents couldn’t tell them apart. They said they looked so much alike when they were born that their parents had to mark special dot tattoos on their bottoms so they could tell them apart. Nicole has one tattoo since she was the first out of the womb. Erica has two and Jaclyn has none. The girls had
a lot more than looks in common, which proved to be confusing for friends and family.

A Triple Threat
Early on in their lives, Nicole, Erica, and Jaclyn got a lot of attention for their good looks and their identical appearance. They grew up in a small town in Jordan, Minnesota and attended the public high school in the area. The triplets could not help but completely stand out in their small midwestern town. After all, the town’s population was less than 30,000! The girls were quickly recognized by friends and modeling agents for their outstanding beauty.

Everything Times Three
Nicole, Erica, and Jaclyn did absolutely everything together when they were growing up. They were rarely recognized as individuals. In an interview — the oldest triplet Nicole shared, “We rarely had our own identity. We were always known as ‘You three’ or ‘The Triplets.’” Growing up together, they shared everything. They wore the same clothes, played with the exact same toys and had the same friends, which could sometimes be challenging and a lot to navigate.

Model Behavior
It is no surprise that the triplets got into modeling when they were young. No one could deny their beauty individually, and the fact that their good looks were multiplied by three was exceptionally intriguing and alluring. At just 16 years old, the triplets graced the cover of ‘Teen magazine. Readers could not help but gaze at their beautiful blue eyes and their long blonde hair.

The Road to Modeling
The triplets did not plan on sticking with modeling after high school. After senior year, Nicole, Jaclyn, and Erica enrolled in nursing school at the University of Minnesota. One day, while they were roaming around campus they spotted a flier advertisement for a magazine that called for “Girls of the Big Ten special edition.” The Triplets decided to try
it out and see if they had a chance at making it. They had no idea what it would lead to.

Willing to Bare It All
Once the Dahm sisters talked to the casting agent and revealed that they were triplets, everything changed. Things started moving fast and Nicole, Jaclyn, and Erica were accepted to try a test shoot. Before they decided to try modeling, all three sisters had
to make some big decisions. Would they each be willing to de-robe and bare it all for
the public? Still, they never expected to become the first triplets to grace the monthly centerfold.

They Would Have Never…
Before the shoot, the triplets never planned on modeling full time! Back in 1998, the youngest triplet Jaclyn said that she and her sisters “would never have done this as individuals.” The Dahm sisters had no idea what types of opportunities it would lead
into the future. Back in the 90s, the Dahm sisters never expected that modeling would eventually lead them to a revealing DNA test.

The Centerfold
Once the magazine came out with the triplets spread, the three sisters became real stars! All of the sudden, opportunities opened up for Nicole, Erica, and Jaclyn. The young women dropped out of nursing school to commit to pursuing careers in the entertainment industry in Los Angeles. Erica recalled, “Modeling started my life.” She continued,
“It started all three of our lives. I would never change it for the world. It created the journey that we’re still on. It’s an amazing experience that I will never give up.”

Triplets Meet World
Once the triplets moved to Los Angeles, opportunities started popping up everywhere.
The Dahm Triplets typically played the role of the unattainable and beautiful triplets. They even made it onto an episode of Boy Meets World. In the episode “The Honeymoon is Over,” the triplets played three beautiful women that live in the dorm room adjacent from Eric and Jack. The identical sisters also scored roles on Family Feud with their older sister Lisa and their father and ended up winning $10,000!

Famous Bodies
The triplets took advantage of all of their opportunities. After they won an episode of House Wars, the Dahm sisters were hired on the Fox reality show, Renovate My Family. Dr. Phil’s son, Jay McGraw was the host of the show and took a romantic interest in the middle triplet, Erica. Erica recalled, “Jay knocked on our trailer door and asked to watch
a movie…He came in, and we started talking. He made some funny jokes and from then on, I couldn’t fight it. It was love at first sight.”

The Dahm Sisters on the Doctors – Bing video
Once Erica got together with Jay McGraw, other opportunities revealed themselves to the three sisters that would lead to a surprising DNA test. Jay McGraw, Dr. Phil’s son is one of the executive producers on the popular show The Doctors. The show features a panel of doctors that discuss different medical issues on public television. Oftentimes, celebrities will be featured on the show to add to the discussions and give opinions on certain health matters.

Health Issues
Jay McGraw finally married Erica Dahm in 2006 and had a great idea to feature the triplets on his show, The Doctors. Everyone loved to watch the three sisters and had
many questions about their health and life as triplets.
Plus, all 3 sisters were easy on the eyes which always makes for great television.
The Dahm triplets started making regular appearances on the show talking about
issues ranging from fertility to motherhood.

image.png
Then The Doctors decided to try something out.

Adding Three More
The triplets helped tremendously with the show ratings, especially when they all got pregnant at the exact same time! The end of 2009 and the beginning of 2010 proved to
be big years for the show and for Erica, Jaclyn, and Nicole. The Dahm triplets literally do everything together. They even carried babies during the same time period. Fans could not help but be completely intrigued, and the producers of The Doctors took, even more, interest in the women and wanted to try something out!

An Investigation
It is crazy to think that all three sisters got pregnant within weeks of each other. In an interview, Jaclyn, the youngest Dahm sister, assured, “It must be that triplet bond. It’s weird how fortunate and lucky we’ve all been.” After a triple pregnancy, all three Dahm triplets gave birth to daughters in 2010! After Nicole, Jaclyn, and Erica had their three beautiful baby girls and got settled into motherhood, producers from The Doctors called them again in March 2017 with an interesting idea.

A Strange Request
In March 2017, the producers of the popular show The Doctors, including Jay McGraw (Dr. Phil’s son), approached the Dahm triplets about participating in a new episode of the show. This time the episode would have a different kind of theme. The Doctors wanted to team up with Lisa Guerrero, a journalist from Inside Edition to investigate how reliable an at home DNA ancestry test is. The results from the DNA completely shocked the Dahm triplets and all of the viewers.

Shocking DNA
Over the last couple years, DNA tests have become increasingly popular. The more recent advent of at-home DNA ancestry tests have completely exploded in the market. People are desperate to know about their DNA and where they really come from. That is why websites like Ancestry.com and 23andMe have become much more well known. These websites and others offer at-home DNA tests at very reasonable prices. Many companies promise to help customers find out what ethnicities they are made of.

Easy Access
Nowadays, finding out about your DNA is not so complicated. Sometimes companies like Ancestry.com and 23andMe even help customers track down long lost relatives. All you have to do is order a special saliva kit that comes to your door. In order for their triplets to find out more about their backgrounds, they have to give a sample of their saliva to one of the companies. Once the company receives the saliva, the triplets DNA is analyzed against many other genetic markers.

The Big Reveal
Just a few couple weeks after the triplets give their DNA to the company, they can find out the results of the DNA tests. Theoretically, the triplets should have almost identical DNA and The Doctors and Lisa Guerrero, the journalist from Inside Edition, were ready to see how reliable the tests were. The triplets offered a perfect way to test the validity of the saliva test. Lisa Guerrero had many suspicions about the reliability of the DNA tests.

They Never Expected This
Back when Erica, Jaclyn, and Nicole were shooting centerfold spreads, they never thought they would get an opportunity like this. They were just three young girls from a small town in Minnesota. They thought they would become nurses one day. Never in a million years did they imagine they would be modeling and guest starring on many reality TV shows. They also never thought they were on The Doctors discovering strange things about their DNA.

Surprising Results
The Dahm triplets were happy to take part in this DNA experiment.
Since the three women had wanted to be nurses in the past, they were still fascinated by genetic testing and wanted to help improve the system. But still, they did not expect to be surprised by the results of the saliva tests. Nicole, Erica, and Jaclyn submitted their saliva tests to 23andme. The results would be revealed to them in a live episode of The Doctors in March 2017.

How Could This Be?
The first of the genetic tests from 23andme was meant to show if Nicole, Erica, and Jaclyn were, in fact, identical triplets. And guess what? The Dahm triplets are identical! This was not news to anyone, especially not Erica, Nicole, and Jaclyn. It is pretty obvious that these sisters have more in common than most do. These triplets are so alike that Erica can open up Nicole’s safe because their fingerprints are so similar that they can trick technology!

A Second Test
The doctors made sure to request a second test that would show more than if the triplets were identical. The second test was meant to provide information on where the triplet’s ancestors came from and what countries they originated from. Again, Erica, Nicole, and Jaclyn expected everything to be the same. After all, the Dahm triplets were identical. Doesn’t that mean that their DNA would be the same and therefore, their genetic heritage would also be the same?

A Strange Breakdown
The results of the genetic breakdown were a bit strange, considering the Dahm triplets are identical. While the test did show that 99 percent of their DNA showed European descent, a more detailed break up of their DNA showed very different results, which proved to be confusing to the triplets and the world. For instance, the DNA test claimed that Nicole, the oldest Dahm sister, was 18 percent Irish and British while Erica was only 16 percent Irish and British.

A Bizarre Discrepancy
As the doctors on the show looked further into the results of the 23andme genetic test, there seemed to be even bigger discrepancies. When they looked at the Dahm triplet’s French and German ancestry, something did not add up. While the oldest Dahm sister Nicole seemed to have an 11 percent German and French heritage, her sister’s numbers came up totally different. Jaclyn’s results showed she was 18 percent German and French, while Erica’s said she was 22.3 percent German and French.

Something Doesn’t Match
The results were shocking even more than confusing! The last part of the DNA results took a deeper look into the Dahm triplet’s Scandinavian ancestry. Again, the results did not match up at all! For some reason, Erica and Jaclyn, the youngest sisters, both came back with the exact same results. It seemed that Erica and Jaclyn’s Scandinavian ancestry was exactly 7.4 percent. Surprisingly, Nicole’s results said that she was made up of 11.4 percent Scandinavian ancestry. Something was not right!

The Big Surprise
While the sisters sat on the live set of The Doctors, they could not control their reactions to the shocking results. Nicole was first to admit to the audience, “I’m surprised because we came from the same egg and we have the same DNA.” Dr. Travis Stork, The Doctors’ host, chimed in about the results too. The physician told the Dahm triplets and the audience that these types of genetic tests should be used for “entertainment” instead of as the real evidence of DNA heritage.

How is it Possible?
The Doctors’ host Dr. Travis Stork suggested that the saliva tests for DNA ancestry are still not advanced enough to be 100 percent correct. Dr. Travis Stork added in, “I think the answer here is that we’ve come so far in terms of genetic testing,” he continued, “but you can’t just spit in a cup and have every single answer that you are looking for.” Does this mean that Dr. Travis Stork and Journalist Guerrero don’t agree with these types of tests?

Where Do We Come From
Even though Inside Edition journalist Lisa Guerrero had some reservations about the reliability of these DNA tests, she still admitted that she would use these types of tests in the future. The journalist shared with the Dahm triplets and the audience, “It’s piqued my curiosity.” Journalist Lisa Guerrero continued, “I know I’m Latina on my mom’s side and English on my dad’s side, but I wanna know how much.” Despite not being 100 percent accurate, these tests still give great insights into ancestry.

Doctor Recommendations
Journalist Lisa Guerrero and Dr. Travis Stork both acknowledged why these tests are
so popular and fascinating to consumers. We all want to know where we come from and
what we are made of. After the triplet’s results were revealed, Lisa Guerrero said that she planned on looking into more reliable and professional testing methods. Guerrero told the audience, “I’m going to probably spend a bit more money and do it with a doctor to find out what the real results are. But isn’t it interesting?”

After DNA Testing
The Dahm triplets never expected to be surprised by the results on The Doctors. Nicole, Erica, and Jaclyn were just three identical triplets from Jordan, Minnesota. They never expected to help spread awareness about DNA ancestry testing. These three gorgeous young women have obviously come a long way from their days of modeling. Since their time on the show, things have changed quite a bit for the identical sisters. You won’t believe what they are up today.

Where Are They Now?
Nicole, Erica, and Jaclyn are still as beautiful as they were back when they were students at the University of Minnesota and they are all still more alike than ever! Not only did they each give birth to daughters within weeks of each other, a few years later, they each gave birth to sons too! Now all three sisters are married and each new mom has one daughter and one son! The Dahm triplets proved they are much more alike than the DNA test revealed.

Divorce Rumors
Since the triplets’ lives have become much more public, there have been many more rumors about them and their relationships in the news. Just as Dr. Phil and his wife Robin are often in the tabloids for being on the brink of divorce, Phil’s son Jay McGraw and his wife Erica are also subjected to divorce rumors. So, how are Jay and Erica, and are they headed for divorce? Every marriage has its ups and downs, especially for a couple that is often in the public eye.

An Expensive Affair
Jay McGraw and Erica Dahm got married on August 12, 2006, at Phil and Robin’s family home in Beverly Hills. The wedding was very elegant and the ceremony was intimate.
Jay and Erica wrote personal vows to each other and read them in front of all 400 guests. Robin, Phil’s wife was emotional after the ceremony. She said, “I looked at his father, and Phillip teared up, and I couldn’t hold it in. So, yeah, I cried then. It’s been tears of joy the entire time.”

Asking the Big Questions
When Dr. Phil’s son, Jay McGraw, decided he wanted to spend his life with Erica Dahm, he had to come up with a good way to ask the big question. Jay gave all the details on
Dr. Phil. He said, “It was a few days ago that we were in Dallas, Texas and I got down on one knee and asked her to spend the rest of her life with me.” He gave Erica a five-carat platinum and diamond ring with two green emeralds.

Bridesmaids
Most brides do not have models that look identical to them as their bridesmaids, but the Dahm sisters are used to standing out in the crowd. Obviously, that was no different on Erica Dahms wedding day when she married Jay McGraw. Erica, Nicole, and Jaclyn were dressed beautifully and totally stole the show. While Erica, wore a very sophisticated floor-length gown created for her by the designer, Chado Ralph Rucci. Nicole and Jaclyn wore beautiful bridesmaid gowns made by the designer, Bradley Bayou.

The McGraw Kids
Now Erica Dahm and Jay McGraw have two adorable children. Crazily enough,
their kids are the same age as Erica’s identical triplet sister’s kids! A couple years after Erica and Jay tied the knot, Erica gave birth to a daughter, Avery Elizabeth McGraw. One year later, Erica gave birth to her son, London Phillip McGraw in 2011. Both children seem very happy despite divorce rumors in the media. Both parents and grandparents are very involved in their children’s lives.

Dr. Phil’s Involved
Dr. Phil has been involved with Erica and Jay since the beginning. He even served as his son’s best man in his wedding to Erica. On Dr. Phil, Jay revealed his “I finally told my parents and they are absolutely ecstatic. They couldn’t be any happier. I think that they love her almost as much as I do.” When Jay told Dr. Phil about his engagement plans,
Phil was ecstatic that his son was going to marry the girl of his dreams

Jaclyn’s Main Man
Erica was not the only triplet to marry a very handsome man. Jaclyn Dahm, the youngest triplet, also married a special guy. Billy Dolan is the lucky guy who stole the heart of Jaclyn Dahm. Together they have one daughter and one son, just like Nicole and Erica Dahm. Billy and Jaclyn love to go on special vacations with Erica and Jay McGraw. Sometimes the foursome likes to travel to the beach together or go to fun concerts with each other.

Playboy’s Opportunities
Still, Nicole, Erica, and Jaclyn can not believe how far their lives have come since they were three teenagers from a small town in Minnesota. The sisters reflected in an issue of Playboy and said, “It’s something you never experience when you’re from a small town of 2,000 people, and all of the sudden you’re in a magazine all around the world,” says Erica. “It was a fun and fast ride, and the best part was my sisters doing it with me.”

Reality Stars
Now that the Dahm triplets have had their taste of the limelight, they can’t seem to get enough. The three identical sisters have been on more television shows and in more films since their Playboy debut. More recently, the Dahm triplets were in a Canadian television show Relic Hunter about a professor who tried to return ancient artifacts to museums. The sisters have said that they would also love to do more Playboy pictorials in the future.

They Have One More Skill!
Nicole, Erica, and Jaclyn are absolutely beautiful and they know how to work a kitchen! These girls have got it all. Because all three Dahm sisters love to cook, they decided to try to make some money off of their talents. The Dahm triplets — started a Youtube cooking channel where they showcased special recipes. They also started a cooking website to go with their Youtube channel. Erica, Nicole, and Jaclyn called their website and the channel TripletsGourmet – YouTube
Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Survivors Demand Answers

Nearly 100 people at this NJ school got brain tumors — a survivor demands answers
By Andrew Court   April 14, 2022

Former resident says 65 people who either attended or worked
at a N.J. high school have had rare brain tumors – CBS News

A cancer survivor is vowing to untangle the twisted mystery of why almost 100 people associated with a New Jersey high school have developed “extremely” rare malignant
brain tumors.

Al Lupiano is among the 94 former staff and students from Colonia High School in
the Woodbridge Township School District who has been stricken by the devastating diagnoses in recent years.
“I will not rest until I have answers,” Lupiano, 50, declared in an interview
with NJ.com and the Star-Ledger on Thursday. “I will uncover the truth.”
Among the others diagnosed with brain cancer was Lupiano’s younger sister,
who passed away from the disease in February at the age of 44.

Is there a possible link between Colonia High School and brain cancer? (yahoo.com)
The devoted brother promised his sister on her deathbed that he would get to the bottom of what was causing the apparent cancer cluster at Colonia High. On Tuesday — after a public push by Lupiano — local officials approved an emergency probe of the school.
“There could be a real problem here, and our residents deserve to know if there are any dangers,” Woodbridge Mayor John McCormac said in a statement. 
“We’re all concerned, and we all want to get to the bottom of this. This is definitely not normal.” Starting this weekend, various radiological assessments will be conducted across the school’s 28-acre campus, including the testing of indoor air samples for radon.

Lupiano was diagnosed with a brain tumor back in the late 1990s, at the age of 27.
He went on to recover from the disease. Last year, his wife — who also attended Colonia — was diagnosed with a rare brain tumor. On the exact same day, Lupiano’s younger sister, Angela DeCillis, another alumna of Colonia, learned that she too had brain cancer.
Lupiano promised his sister, Angela DeCillis, on her deathbed that he would get to the bottom of what was causing the apparent cancer cluster at Colonia High. The school was built back in 1967. Today, it enrolls around 1,300 students, many of whom are said to be concerned and anxious about the probe.

image.png

After his sister’s death in February, Lupiano became convinced of a link between the Colonia campus and the brain cancers that he, his wife and his sister had developed.
Last month, he started a Facebook group asking locals whether they knew of any other people associated with the school who had been stricken by similar diagnoses.

Colonia High School Brain Tumors: New Jersey Cancer Cluster | FACEBOOK.
In less than six weeks, Lupiano says, he has gathered the names of 94 people connected with the school who have developed brain tumors.
The disturbing development became headline news this week after CBS News took it national. A subsequent TikTok video discussing the medical mystery has also racked up more than 2.2 million viral views in just 24 hours.
The vast majority of those who have developed brain tumors “graduated between 1975
and 2000, although outliers have come as recently as a 2014 graduate,” according to the
Star-Ledger.
The diagnoses include “several types of primary brain tumors, including cancerous forms like glioblastoma and noncancerous yet debilitating masses such as acoustic neuromas, hemangioblastomas and meningiomas.”

“To find something like this … is a significant discovery,” Dr. Sumul Raval, one of New Jersey’s top neuro-oncologists, told the outlet. “Normally speaking, you don’t get radiation in a high school … unless something is going on in that area that we don’t know,”
Raval added, calling for an immediate investigation.
The viral TikTok video discussing the purported cancer cluster was posted Wednesday by popular personality Dr. Joe Whittington.
Whittington — a board-certified MD in California — claimed several of the brain
tumors developed by ex-Colonia High staff and students are glioblastoma multiforme —
an aggressive cancer which spreads to brain tissue.
While the exact number of former faculty and staff diagnosed with glioblastoma is not precisely known, the cancer is exceedingly rare. According to the American Association of Neurological Surgeons, glioblastoma has an incidence of 3.21 per 100,000.
Meanwhile, the TikTok video sparked panic and a range of conspiracy-theory style comments, with people claiming mold, toxic waste, asbestos and nearby cell phone
towers could all be causing the cluster.

Lupiano also spoke with CBS News on Thursday, saying he now believes ionizing
radiation must be responsible for the health issues. “What I find alarming is there’s truly only one environmental link to primary brain tumors, and that’s ionizing radiation,” he declared. “It’s not contaminated water.
It’s not air. It’s not something in soil. It’s not something done to us due to bad habits.”
The school was built back in 1967 on acres of empty land, with McCormac telling the news network he is stumped as to what could be causing the cancers.

Officials conduct a radiological survey on the school's baseball field.
Officials conduct a radiological survey on the school’s baseball field.

Lupiano has reached out to the state Department of Health, Department of Environmental Protection and the federal Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry for help — which is reportedly still in the “early stages,” according to the CBS News report. Lupiano told NJ Spotlight News that the school is located less than 12 miles from the Middlesex Sampling Plant — a site that was used, under the direction of the Manhattan Project, to crush, dry, store, package and ship uranium ore for the development of the atomic bomb.

He alleges that some contaminated soil was removed from the site when it closed down in 1967 — the same year Colonia High School was built. Lupiano is wondering whether some of that soil ended up on the school grounds. Today, Colonia enrolls approximately 1,300 students, with many said to be “anxious” about the possible cancer cluster. 
“We are looking at possible things that we can do between the town and school, and they said they will look at anything we come up with,” McCormac said.

Mystery As 100 people Associated With 1 School Develop Brain Tumors – YouTube

Survivor claims illnesses may be caused by a uranium plant which was part of the Manhattan Project and contaminated nearby soil – Newsbreak

Were 100 rare brain cancer cases at New Jersey high school linked to the first ATOMIC BOMB? 

VIDEO: Nearly 100 people at one school got brain tumors — a survivor demands answers (dennismichaellynch.com)

Medical mystery: This woman’s brain lesions led to a diagnosis that affected her entire family (inquirer.com)

Is there a possible link between Colonia High School and brain cancer?
Alfredo Quiñones-Hinojosa (Johns Hopkins) Part 1: Brain Tumors.
Alfredo Quiñones-Hinojosa (Johns Hopkins) Part 2: Brain Tumors.
Mystery as 1 school develop brain tumors – Search (bing.com)
Mystery as 1 school develop brain tumors – Bing video
iBiology – YouTube

MORE ON: BRAIN TUMOR

BONUS: Clyde Ohio Cancer Cluster – Search (bing.com)
Mother accuses doctors of ignoring her newborn’s seizures
Woman thought to have pregnancy complication really had brain tumor
Doctors told woman she was menopausal for years — she really had a tumor
Man says switching diet saved his life after he was told he had six months to live due to inoperable tumor

Must Watch: Pluto TV – Jim Allison: Breakthrough 

Synopsis:
Jim Allison: Breakthrough is the astounding, true story of one warm-hearted, 
stubborn man’s visionary quest to find a cure for cancer.
 
Today, Jim Allison is a name to be reckoned with throughout the scientific world —
a 2018 Nobel Prize winner for discovering the immune system’s role in defeating cancer — but for decades he waged a lonely struggle against the skepticism of the medical establishment and the resistance of Big Pharma.
 
Jim Allison: Breakthrough takes us into the inspiring and dramatic world of cutting-edge medicine, and into the heart of a true American pioneer, in a film that is both emotionally compelling and deeply entertaining.
James Allison, winner of the 2018 Nobel Prize in Medicine, was born on August 7, 1948 in a tiny South Texas town called Alice.  Named for the daughter of the legendary King Ranch owner, Alice has boasting rights as birthplace of a second Nobel winner, Robert F. Curl, Jr., who took the honor for chemistry in 1996. It is also where Tejano, a unique Tex-Mex musical genre, took root in the mid-1940s.  Tejano may have inspired young Jim to take up the harmonica, which he still performs at parties and events, sometimes sharing the stage with fellow Texan Willie Nelson.   

Allison’s father, Albert, was a physician and his mother, Constance, a homemaker and “positive influence” who tragically died of lymphoma when he was eleven years old. 
There were 2 older brothers, Murphy and Mike. Life was difficult for Jim following his mother’s passing.  His father, an officer in the Air Force Reserves, was often away from home, during which time he was fostered by a local family with a son about his own age.  

Even as a kid, Allison displayed a yen for science.  Encouraged by his parents, he toyed around with a Gilbert chemistry set, setting off little bombs in the woods behind their home.  A summer in a NSF-funded science-training program deepened his interest.  
After graduating from high school at sixteen, he entered the University of Texas, Austin where he would earn a B. S. Degree in microbiology (1969) and a Ph.D. in biological science (1973).  He was a member of Delta Kappa Epsilon fraternity. 

But the fierce passion which kindled his interest in curative science, was unquestionably ignited by the early passing of his mother.  His life’s path was set by the time he entered graduate school, when he convinced his PhD advisor to bring cancer study into the lab.  

It was a propitious moment. 
The immune system’s “T-cell” had recently been discovered.  A type of white blood cell,
the T is a front-line soldier in the battle to keep us healthy, its role assigned by nature to distinguish friend from foe.  Though immunology was not even a bona fide science at the time, Allison zeroed in on the immune system’s potential against cancer.

(His dissertation proposed a new approach to treating leukemia,
but decades would pass before a similar drug was patented.) 

Soon after graduation, Allison began crisscrossing the country in a quest to unlock
the mysteries of the T cell.  How do T cells work?  How do they identify an invader? 
Why can they recognize the flu virus, for example, but not cancer? 
In addition to pure knowledge, he sought institutions open to innovative research – 
not a simple matter in a profession tending toward caution and rigidity. 
His first stop was Scripps Clinic & Research Foundation in San Diego (1974-77)
where he did postdoctoral work.  

Married by now to the former Malinda Bell, the couple often joined other Texas
ex-patriots at the port city’s Stingaree bar.  He fondly remembers one night playing his harmonica until the wee hours with Willie Nelson and his band.  “I didn’t have to buy a beer for a couple of years after that,” he recalls. 

LOVE THIS VIDEO: TCU “We Fight Back” Flash Mob for Komen 🙂
Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Carter’s Double Digit Inflation

This Oct. 28, 1980, black-and-white file photo shows President Jimmy Carter, left,
and Republican Presidential candidate Ronald Reagan shake hands after debating
in the Cleveland Music Hall in Cleveland. (Madeline Drexler/AP)

Stagflation, energy crises, and ‘malaise’.
Zachary Halaschak

Inflation at highest since 1981; here’s what the government can and can’t do!!
The last time prices were increasing this quickly was in 1981 when Ronald Reagan was president, interest rates were near record highs, and the United States was embroiled in the Cold War. The country has changed significantly since the Great Inflation of the 1970s and 1980s, and today’s inflationary bout is much different — but there are some similarities between now and 1981, the last time inflation hit 8.5%.

INFLATION WAS COMING DOWN IN 1981
The inflation more than four decades ago was much more severe than it is now.
Inflation peaked in the spring of 1980 at a jaw-dropping 14.8% and subsequently began declining.
Desmond Lachman, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, pointed out that the inflation of the 1970s and 1980s was different than today in the level of severity and how much pain consumers experienced.
By 1981, inflation had been running above 2%, often much higher, for 15 years.
The U.S. experienced multiple recessions and stagflation — that is, the combination of high inflation and high unemployment, a situation that top economists at the time had thought to be impossible.
Today, in comparison, the country is coming off nearly a decade in which inflation mostly ran below the 2% target set by the Federal Reserve. And unemployment, at 3.5%, is very low by historical standards.

THE FED IS TAKING THIS ROUND OF INFLATION MORE SERIOUSLY
While Lachman believes the Fed is doing too little too late (and predicts a recession as a result), the central bank is still acting on tamping down inflation faster than it did in the Great Inflation.

INFLATION MEANS BIGGER BILLS FOR GROCERIES, GAS, AND RENT – HERE’S THE BREAKDOWN
“This thing is similar in the sense that they have let inflation get out of control, but they [are] dealing with it at a much earlier stage than they dealt with it in 1979,” Lachman told the Washington Examiner about the U.S. response to current inflationary pressures.
In 1979, President Jimmy Carter appointed Paul Volcker to lead the Fed. In order to tame the excruciatingly high inflation, Volcker acted decisively and with a heavy hand, aggressively jacking interest rates up until they crested at more than 19% in 1981.
The economy had a hard landing as a result of the sky-high interest rates.
Now, Fed officials say they are working to raise interest rates and shrink the central bank’s balance sheet to slow spending and limit inflation.
Lachman, though, said the Fed should have learned the lessons of the Great Inflation better and moved more quickly to tighten monetary policy.
Indeed, throughout most of 2021, while inflation was inching up, Fed Chairman Jerome Powell consistently messaged that the growing prices were merely “transitory” and that inflation would naturally tamp back down as the economy improved. That did not occur, and by the end of last year, Powell and other Fed officials acknowledged they were dropping the label from their assessments of the situation.

ENERGY WAS A MAJOR PROBLEM THEN AS NOW
The causes of the Great Inflation are varied, but one was the Iranian hostage crisis and subsequent oil shock.
After the Iranian Revolution in 1979, Carter announced that the U.S. was halting all incoming shipments of Iranian oil, nearly 10% of U.S. imports, to drive home the point that Iran’s oil would not be a consideration in freeing the hostages.
In a parallel move, Iran also announced an oil boycott for shipments to the U.S.
Further fueling the energy crisis was the war between Iran and Iraq that ignited in 1980. Oil production from both major exporters dropped precipitously and further contributed to the global supply shock.
Similarly, today, supply chain snarls created by the pandemic have combined with the
war in Ukraine to raise energy prices, which have soared about a third over the past year.
Ultimately, the Great Inflation and today’s inflation are attributable to excess demand created by excess government spending and too-loose monetary policy. But supply-side disruptions are more of a factor in rising prices today, said Brian Marks, executive director of the University of New Haven’s Entrepreneurship and Innovation Program.
“The prevalence of the supply-side component is more dramatic today than it was back then,” he told the Washington Examiner.

HIGH INFLATION HELPED BRING REAGAN INTO OFFICE
The country’s scorching inflation in the late 1970s was one of the main factors that cost Carter the 1980 election. Parallels can be drawn between Carter’s situation approaching the 1980 election and Democrats staring down this year’s midterm elections (and presumably President Joe Biden’s bid for a second term in 2024).
Driven by frustration with inflation — which Carter himself — acknowledged in a 1979 address subsequently known as the “malaise” speech,” and the perceived failure of the U.S. response to the hostage crisis, Reagan trounced Carter in a landslide and won a whopping 489 Electoral College votes to the sitting president’s 49.

Right now, the Senate is evenly divided, and the House has only a slight Democratic majority. Republicans smell blood in the water and, as in the 1980 election, are already using the country’s too-high inflation as a cudgel against Biden and the Democratic agenda. Polling indicates it is likely that the GOP wrests control of Congress.
A major difference between the political landscape in the 1980 election and now is that while inflation is soaring, Biden is not dealing with as weak of an economy as Carter faced. Biden has leaned heavily on the gains the economy has made (outside of the higher prices) to push back on his GOP critics.
The unemployment rate ticked down to 3.6% in March, a more aggressive drop than expected and the lowest level since right before the COVID-19 pandemic struck, when it was resting at about 3.5%. The unemployment rate has ticked down nearly every month over the past two years.

Additionally, the economy added 431,000 jobs in March after two back-to-back months
of explosive growth. Monthly job growth has averaged 562,000 jobs over the past three months. New jobless claims are also hitting multi decade lows. Still, polling indicates 
that inflation is the top economic concern for voters.

Democrat Sen. Mark Kelly: Biden admin has ‘no plan’ for Title 42 migrant surge
How rising inflation impacts businesses and families Across the United States …
McCarthy says Ukraine invasion should serve as ‘lesson’ for arming Taiwan
Zelenskyy on Mariupol: ‘With each passing day, it’s growing more unstable’
Global COVID relief “critical” to U.S. national security, Coons says
China War With U.S. on the Horizon, Chief Propagandist Says
Who lost Biden’s agenda? Democrats offer competing
theories for failure of ‘Build Back Better’ (msn.com)
Mariupol: Russia says surrender ultimatum rejected
and threatens elimination of resistance (msn.com)
Sen. Chris Coons says Putin is unleashing a ‘massacre’
and worries that Ukraine will ‘turn into Syria’

Manchin Build Back Better is Dead.

WASHINGTON — The Build Back Better Act was destined to fail.
Maybe the White House and Democratic leaders misplayed what could have been a winning hand, albeit one with no margin for error, and jeopardized the centerpiece of
their agenda.
Or perhaps rank-and-file Democrats, coupled with unanimous Republican opposition, gummed up the deal-making process in a way that Joe Biden the candidate said he was uniquely suited to surmount, but in practice as president could not. NBC News spoke to more than a dozen people involved with the legislation, and conflicting theories emerged about who is responsible for President Joe Biden’s lost legislative agenda.
The enduring tension looms over quiet discussions between the White House and congressional Democrats on a dramatically scaled-back bill, with finger-pointing about who’s to blame for the failure of the larger bill amid uncertainty about what, if anything, might actually pass ahead of November’s midterm elections.
The White House blames it on the difficulties of uniting the slimmest of Democratic majorities, including a 50-50 Senate, and media framing of the initial legislation. Moderate Democrats blame progressives for fueling unrealistic expectations. Progressives blame moderates for working against Biden. Some blame Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer or Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia. Other Democrats say leadership made a tactical error by splitting off the infrastructure bill.

And still others fault Biden and his team, saying they erred in branding Build Back Better as a big, bold, once-in-a-generation — read: expensive — piece of legislation and by trying to, as one Democrat put it, “placate everybody.” Another Democrat placed fault with the current polarized political climate, saying: “It’s the process.”
John LaBombard, the former communications director for centrist Sen. Kyrsten Sinema, D-Ariz., said part of the problem was a mismatch between “sky high” expectations and narrow margins. Democrats’ thin majorities in the House and Senate necessitated the votes of moderates who “did not campaign on big, bold, radical, progressive change,”
he said, citing Sinema, Manchin and Rep. Stephanie Murphy, D-Fla. “They’re not going to be rolled,” LaBombard said. “When we raise expectations and fail to meet them, we leave our supporters disenchanted and disappointed.”

Some Democrats, including in the administration, conceded early on that the initial
$3.5 trillion Build Back Better Act was less a realistic legislative endgame and more a blueprint of the president’s priorities — a mixture of his campaign pledges and measures aimed at drawing a contrast with Republicans It was a starting point for negotiations,
they said. But that’s not how it was sold to the public.
LaBombard, who left Sinema’s office in February to become senior vice president at the public affairs firm ROKK Solutions, said the decision to “focus on how many trillions of dollars of taxpayers’ money is going into a bill” that needed to pass on a party-line basis was not “a strategy designed to earn support from our caucus’s moderates,” even if it had “meritorious and important policies.”

Build Back Better Bust: Massive Spending Halted
After months of negotiating, the legislation was trimmed to about $2 trillion to meet the demands of centrists in both chambers and passed the House in November. Then it came to a screeching halt in December when Manchin announced his opposition to the bill.
There is now a quiet effort underway to pass some version of the president’s agenda under a legislative process known as reconciliation, which allows Democrats to circumvent Republican opposition and pass a bill along party lines. Officials said Steve Ricchetti, counselor to the president, and Louisa Terrell, the White House director of the office of legislative affairs, are having conversations with Democrats on Capitol Hill. That effort, however, has hardly been central for Congress so far this year, as the focus has been on Russia’s war in Ukraine, funding the government and confirming a Supreme Court nominee.
Democrats also expect to pass the CHIPS Act and an election security measure in coming weeks. And officials are quick to argue that even without Build Back Better, the president’s legislative accomplishments are significant — from $1.9 trillion in Covid relief to $1 trillion infrastructure bill.
“The President’s focus is on the path forward: on following unprecedented job creation he’s delivered with an economic plan for the middle class that fights inflation for the long haul, cuts the cost of prescription drugs, child care, and energy while taking on the climate crisis, and further reducing the deficit,” White House spokesperson Andrew Bates said in response to this article.

The president’s defenders also push back on the notion that he and his top aides tried too hard to please everyone in the party, pointing out that he’d pressed upon Democrats that everyone was not going to get everything they wanted.
Apart from Manchin, the one individual that seems to get the most blame is Schumer.
A senior House Democratic aide pointed to Schumer’s decision last summer — amid negotiations on a $3.5 trillion bill — to for months to not share with the White House or Speaker Nancy Pelosi a letter from Manchin, dated July 28, in which he said he would not support a bill that cost more than $1.5 trillion.
“He knew where Manchin was and he didn’t say a damn thing,” the aide, clearly still frustrated, said of Schumer.
“At the same time the House and Senate cut a stupid deal to come up with budget reconciliation at $3.5 trillion, when Chuck Schumer knew that wasn’t going to happen.

Tax and Spend DemocRats Always Gets Us in Trouble Times.
The senior House Democratic aide also criticized the White House legislative affairs operation.
Asked for comment, a Schumer spokesman referred to the majority leader’s recent remarks to reporters that there are “ongoing discussions” with Manchin and others,
and that reconciliation is still “a high priority” for Democrats.
Other people close to Schumer say he kept it secret because he was trying to change Manchin’s mind. Schumer allies note that Manchin’s views have shifted along the way
and question whether he ultimately even wanted to support the package.
“It was always going to be a tough needle to thread in a 50-50 Senate,” said Matt House,
a consultant and former communications director to Schumer. “It was made tougher by having the 50th vote seemingly uninterested in finding a path to voting yes.”

Biden tried to rebrand his Build Back Better agenda in his State of the Union address in hopes of one last shot at a bill. The White House’s hope was that the new approach would make Biden’s legislative goals clearer and less likely to turn off Americans who are wary of big, expensive bills. The president said his plan now focused on four things: lowering the cost of prescription drugs, energy and child care, and raising taxes on Americans making more than $400,000 a year.
But residual distrust and frustration on all sides hangs over the process. The White House was furious with Manchin when he backed out of negotiations in December, as were progressives who said it was exactly what they feared after Biden and Democratic leaders made the decision to break off physical infrastructure funding and pass it separately. (Moderates say they — and Biden — ran on working with Republicans and this was their opportunity.)
Indeed, despite the current attempt to salvage some of the president’s agenda, there is a recognition among Biden’s team that “their big legislative days are behind them,” another Democrat close to the White House said, given the window for passing legislation ahead of the midterms closes in just a few months and Republicans are expected to pick up seats in November.

Manchin has kept the door open to supporting a narrower bill that includes tax revenues, prescription drug savings and climate change funding. But he’s not the only Democrat the White House could struggle to get on board. And many Democrats say in retrospect the West Virginia senator’s $1.5 trillion legislative framework was far more sweeping than anything Biden might get now. “If you look at the old Manchin deal: every progressive would love to have that back,” said one Democratic operative with prominent clients
in the party.

To tackle inflation could hurt Biden’s campaign, Chuck Todd says (today.com)
“Meet the Press” moderator Chuck Todd (“Eating Crow”) joins Willie Geist on Sunday TODAY to talk about how the immigration crisis at the border, inflation and the war in Ukraine are affecting his poll numbers. Todd says it’s ironic that tax hikes, higher interest rates and more immigrant labor are what it would take to tackle inflation because they “couldn’t be a worse thing to campaign on.” Chuck Todd 2020 Election Night CoverageJoe Biden’s energy policies will prolong the current crisis, oil and gas executive says.
Gas Prices on 11/02/2020 $1.87 @ gallon.

Image result for Eating Crow

Is California, one of the bluest states in the US, at a turning point over crime, homelessness?

Red states top blue states for low taxes and best economies: List | Washington Examiner

73% of Americans Think It’s a Bad Time to Buy a Home. Here’s Why They’re Right

How the homelessness crisis hit one of California’s most affordable cities

Biden admin takes premature victory lap on Russian invasion intelligence

A 40-year bull run in the bond market is under pressure as Treasury
yields touch the ‘most important trend line of all time’ (msn.com)

Inflation is another reason you shouldn’t aim for a big tax refund

Chaos, crisis and infighting threaten Democrats in 2022.

Hispanics are abandoning Biden in droves. Here’s why

Bill Mahrer thinks California will turn Red 🙂

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

The Cannabis Question

NOVA “THE CANNABIS QUESTION”
  Wednesday, April 13, 2022, at 9 p.m. on PBS
As more U.S. states move toward legalizing cannabis, NOVA reports on
the latest science investigating the plant and its medical benefits and risks, and explores the decades of criminalization disproportionately targeting communities of color pbs.org/nova | @novapbs
 
The award-winning PBS science series, NOVA announced THE CANNABIS QUESTION,
a new film exploring our relationship with cannabis, uncovering what scientists have discovered about the plant’s effects on the body and brain, including its potential risks and medicinal benefits, and the demonization and criminalization that has disproportionately harmed communities of color over several decades.
THE CANNABIS QUESTION airs Wednesday, April 13 at 9 p.m. on PBS and will also
be available for streaming online at pbs.org/nova and via the PBS video app. More than
80 years after America ended one kind of prohibition, it is ending another. Cannabis is growing into a multi-billion-dollar industry as it moves out of the shadow of the illicit market and into newly legalized mainstream commerce. Increasingly eaten, dabbed, vaped, and smoked, cannabis is on the rise and our nation is at a crossroads.

The long-demonized plant has been decriminalized in dozens of states, legalized in many, and is frequently marketed as a medicine. Nearly fifty-five million Americans say they currently use it, and yet there’s been surprisingly little scientific investigation of the plant in the U.S.
Though many believe cannabis is benign, and even beneficial, confusion reigns as the federal government still classifies it as a Schedule 1 drug—in the same category as heroin—with no approved medical uses. Because of this classification, research that focuses on the plant’s complex chemicals—and its effects on users—has been limited.

“A majority of Americans now live in states where cannabis is legal. As more people make their own choices about cannabis use, this film explores what scientists have learned so far about the potential benefits and risks” said NOVA Co-Executive Producer Julia Cort.
“We hope THE CANNABIS QUESTION will inspire people to join the national conversation about cannabis—informed by the science, and also by the story of how the plant has been weaponized against marginalized communities, causing irreparable harm.”

THE CANNABIS QUESTION follows scientists such as Daniele Piomelli at UC Irvine and Yasmin Hurd at Mount Sinai Hospital, who are leading research on the endocannabinoid system—a collection of chemicals and receptors throughout the brain and body that help the body maintain balance, or homeostasis. In fact, the cannabinoid receptor—named after cannabis—is the most abundant receptor in the brain. These receptors bind with our own cannabis-like molecules, called endocannabinoids, regulating key functions such as appetite, cognition, memory, and emotion. The disruption of this crucial biological system can be associated with psychiatric disorders such as post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Cannabis contains over 100 cannabinoid compounds, chemicals that mimic those in our own bodies. One is THC, which produces the “high” associated with cannabis use. Another, called CBD, shows promise for treating epilepsy, opioid addiction, and anxiety.

“THE CANNABIS QUESTION is one of the first documentaries to closely examine the latest scientific research on our body’s endocannabinoid system and how cannabis engages it,” said Writer, Producer, and Director Sarah Holt. “I hope viewers will come away with an understanding of why this is one of the most important regulatory systems in our body—and anytime you use cannabis, you are engaging with it.”
The film presents the current understanding about some of the potential medical benefits of cannabis, while raising questions that require more research. Along the way, viewers hear personal stories from individuals who use it medicinally to treat ailments that include side effects from chemotherapy, PTSD, anxiety, and chronic pain—helping patients cut back on the use of opioids and other pharmaceutical drugs.

NOVA follows Stanford neuroscientist Catherine Jacobson who experimented with CBD extracts as a treatment for her son, whose chronic epilepsy was causing crippling seizures and was not controlled by pharmaceutical drugs. Her work helped pave the way for one of only a handful of FDA-approved cannabis-related drugs—Epidiolex, which can be prescribed to treat seizures. The film goes on to document several clinical trials around cannabis currently underway, including research investigating whether CBD could improve life for some children with severe autism.
When it comes to recreational use, scientists are just beginning to explore important questions about the risks that cannabis may pose to the developing brain. Scientists have learned that humans’ endocannabinoid levels are lower early in life and increase greatly during the developmental window leading into adolescence, a period when many try using cannabis.

THE CANNABIS QUESTION features a clinical study by psychologist Joanna Jacobus
who has scanned over 1,000 teenagers’ brains to decipher cognitive differences between those who use cannabis and those who don’t. Viewers also meet Cynthia Rogers, Arpana Agrawal, and Ryan Bogdan, at Washington University in St. Louis, whose research centers around prenatal exposures to cannabis and how it affects brains at the earliest stages of development. Until more data can be collected, scientists recommend caution to protect the developing brain, especially since cannabis use is increasing among pregnant women, with ads marketing it as a treatment for morning sickness and insomnia.
In addition to examining the potential health benefits and risks posed by cannabis use, NOVA traces the history of the criminalization of cannabis—a massive public health disaster causing irreparable harm—starting in 1937 when the drug became illegal in the U.S. At the time, government officials tapped into the prejudice towards Mexican immigrants, demonizing the Mexican Spanish word for cannabis—“marijuana”—and claiming it caused violent and deviant sexual acts.

In the 1970s, Richard Nixon ignored an expert panel recommending decriminalization, and declared a “war on drugs,” targeting radical youth, the poor, and especially people of color. Ultimately, the “war on drugs” would cost around a trillion dollars and contribute to a 700% increase in incarceration in under 40 years. Millions of Americans are arrested for cannabis each decade, and some 40,000 are currently in prison, mainly for possession charges.
Kassandra Frederique, executive director of the Drug Policy Alliance, explains that regardless of state-by-state legalization, cannabis is still one of the driving forces fueling mass incarceration
in the U.S., and it is disproportionately targeting communities of color. Despite the fact that government data shows usage is equal across races, more people of color are arrested for cannabis-related offenses.

The film follows the story of Sean Worsley, an Iraq War veteran from Arizona who used medical cannabis to treat PTSD. While traveling through the state of Alabama, Worsley and his wife stopped at a gas station, where police arrested the couple—who are Black—despite Sean’s carrying a medical marijuana card making it legal for him to obtain and
use cannabis in his home state.
Worsley was charged with multiple felonies  and ultimately incarcerated, kicking off a series of events so stressful he eventually suffered a stroke. Experts note Worsley’s story is a common example of how racism continues to drive the war on cannabis. For people of color, this often means a vicious cycle of arrests, incarceration, poverty, and dramatically negative effects on overall health and quality of life.
While an enormous number of Americans continue to experience the devastating effects
of criminalization, cannabis is creating a thriving wellness industry for others in legalized states—and government regulation is poised to become a major national debate.

THE CANNABIS QUESTION will be available for streaming concurrent with broadcast on all station-branded PBS platforms, including PBS.org and the PBS Video App, available on iOS, Android, Roku streaming devices, Apple TV, Android TV, Amazon Fire TV, Samsung Smart TV, Chromecast and VIZIO. PBS station members can view many series, documentaries and specials via PBS Passport. For more information about PBS Passport, visit the PBS Passport FAQ website.    Search Results for Cannabis Oil (solitarius.org)

Watch It Here:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w-dxMTDzMLY

10:16 for what conditions is it beneficial and what conditions harmful
12:44 varieties and cannabinoids 14:00 CBD for epilepsy 16:30 biochemistry
of CBD 18:40 epilepsy improvement from CBD 21:40 autism 24:30 results CBD
27:40 THC biochemistry 30:12 cognitive effects 31:15 prenatal exposure, cannabis,
effects on kids’ developmental outcomes 32:55 use of cannabis during pregnancy is increasing 33:00 cannabis broken justice system 41:00 opioids vs cannabis
42:23 cannabis risks 45:43 sleep problems and cannabis withdrawal

NOVA “The Cannabis Question” Panel Discussion and Q&A – Bing video   
NOVA: The Cannabis Question Season 48 Episode 11 – Bing video
The Cannabis Question I Full Episode I NOVA I PBS – YouTube
NOVA The Cannabis Question – video Dailymotion
NOVA: The Cannabis Question (wgbh.org)
Nova The Cannabis Question – Bing video

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Obama’s Homecoming

Obama’s Speech at the White House.

By WENDELL HUSEBØ
Former Obama official rightly slams Biden for ‘extraordinary policy mistake’ on inflation.
 Microsoft Word – Barack Obama – Farewell to Staff and Supporters.doc (americanrhetoric.com)
A couple things stick out in my mind within Obama’s homecoming speech back into the White House. He addressed Biden as Vice President then he said that was a setup and addressed him as MY President. Obama is good at working a set up and Gigs like he said when he offered up his farewell address at Andrew AFB.
When smart people thought GoodBye and Good Riddance to bad rubbish. When he made this opening comment at Andrews AFB, he told on himself in my eyes, “Michelle and I, we’ve really been milking this goodbye thing, so it behooves me to be very brief.” 
(Obama Milked his Gig for 8 years.)

Obama returns to White House to celebrate the ACA (eastbaytimes.com)

Besides Barack Obama mentioned himself 33 times during his White House
homecoming speech with President Biden on Tuesday. Obama used the words “I,” “I’m,” “me,” and “my” 33 times, according to a TVEyes transcription software search of MSNBC. More specifically, Obama used the word “I” 20 times while he spoke next to Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris.  
Obama reportedly has not visited the White House in five years. Obama was president from 2008 to 2016. During his tenure, Americans became more polarized, though he campaigned on unity (Fact Check That Statement).

Biden Mocked After Barack Obama Ignores Him at White House Reception
After the event was over, a crowd surrounded Obama while Biden appeared to wander around looking for someone or for something to do. The Republican National Committee’s research team tweeted the video and the caption “Literally No One Wants to Talk to Joe Biden” (rumble.com)  
The content of Obama’s speech was focused on the controversial passage of the Affordable Care Act, dubbed “Obamacare.” “So, when President Biden said he was not going to just celebrate the ACA but also announce actions that would make it even better, I had to show up,” Obama said.

“Members of Congress took courageous votes, including some who knew that their vote would likely cost them their seat,” Obama bragged. “And the night we passed the ACA — I’ve said it before — it was a high point of my time here, because it reminded me and reminded us of what is possible.”
Obama also offered cheer to the current Democrat White House, which has been marred by defeats: Since Biden assumed office, he has failed to pass the “Build Back Better” agenda, student loan forgiveness, the destruction of election integrity, and Supreme Court packing.
“Everybody feels frustrated sometimes about what takes place in this town.
Progress feels way too slow,” Obama said in an apparent attempt to calm angst. “But what the [ACA] shows is that, if you are driven by the core idea that together we can improve … if you stay with it and are willing to work through the obstacles and the criticism and continually improve where you fall short — you can make America better.”

Follow Wendell Husebø on Twitter and Gettr @WendellHusebø

Recent stock strength may be nothing more than a bear-market rally fueled by ‘wishful thinking’ and excess liquidity, says a Morgan Stanley investment chief (msn.com)

US mining industry ‘concerned’ Biden can’t separate China from ‘Made in America’

Recession fears and the stock market — Is it too late to play defense?

Stock Sliding: Could Michigan Pass-Rusher Fall to Texans in Draft?

The Top 10 Democratic presidential candidates for 2024.

What the Midterms Could Mean for 2024.
image.png
Governor Greg Abbott sparks fresh White House speculation with border moves
By Alex Gangitano

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) drew national attention this week by sending two buses full
of Latin American asylum applicants from the southern border to Washington, D.C., the
latest move to fuel speculation that he’s plotting a future campaign for the White House. 
Abbott largely received praise from fellow Republicans for his headline-grabbing move, and the arrival of dozens of migrants to the streets of Washington was played on conversative news networks. Abbott has also sparked further controversy at the border with the now-repealed order for state troops to step up truck inspections, which fueled extensive traffic and protests by drivers. 
The latest moves mark an audacious step into a hot-button issue that is a top animator
for Republicans by a skilled operator rumored to have grander ambitions beyond Austin.
And party insiders forecast the latest moves, while controversial, will be well received by an already amped up base.

“I think so far it’s playing well with Republicans because they clearly want their elected officials to be tough on illegal immigration, they want to make sure that security comes first,” said Brendan Steinhauser, a Texas-based GOP strategist and member of the Texas State Guard whose unit was deployed to help set up the operation to bus the migrants to Washington.
“From the people I’ve talked to, from the polling I’ve seen, from just anecdotal evidence
of where the activists are, where the voters are, they just want to see the governor and the president and future elected leaders, Congress, get tough and take action and put security first. And so I think they look at this and say, ‘he’s doing what he should be doing on that.’”
Abbott directed his state’s Division of Emergency Management to bring migrants in Texas to the nation’s capital in response to the Biden administration’s move to wind down Title 42, a sweeping border restriction policy implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic to allow for easier expulsions of migrants.

Fourteen Nicaraguan, Cuban, Venezuelan and Colombian nationals were dropped off on Thursday outside of the building that houses the Washington bureau of Fox News, which broke the story. On Wednesday, Fox News showed footage of the first bus full of migrants arriving in Washington, near the U.S. Capitol.
The migrants are all legally in the U.S. and waiting for official determination of their asylum claims. They also all voluntarily got on the bus to Washington, which the White House has repeatedly reminded the public of when asked for reaction on Abbott sending the buses.

But immigration is an issue that plays disproportionately up with Republicans. A Quinnipiac University poll from late March showed that just 9 percent of Americans
said immigration is the most important issue facing the country. However, 19 percent of Republicans said it is the most important issue, the highest share behind only those who cited inflation.
While Abbott’s actions on immigration this week elevate his profile nationally, former President Donald Trump’s looming decision on 2024 hangs over many Republicans like the Texas governor, Republican strategist Doug Heye said.
“Like so many Republicans, Gov. Abbott is increasing his name ID and pushing on issues important to the base and thereby putting himself in a position to run. But it still remains a waiting game for all of those Republicans until Donald Trump decides what he will do. They’re all jockeying for a race they ultimately may not run,” Heye said.
Related video: Abbott’s border politics (MSNBC) – Search (bing.com)

Abbott’s moves swiftly drew plaudits from other prominent Republicans who
said Abbott was bringing immigration to the fore after months of grumbling
over the rising number of border crossings.
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) said Wednesday, “Hopefully this gets liberal elites and the Biden administration to actually care about the millions of illegal aliens who are streaming across our southern border.”

“They’re going to see, with all these people invading Washington, D.C., like
they’ve invaded our border states, and it may make them realize how bad it is,”
Rep. James Comer (R-Ky.) added on Fox News Thursday.
Beyond busing the migrants, Abbott had ordered truck inspections by state troops, which first sparked long lines at key border crossings before fueling driver protests. He repealed the order on Friday afternoon but before had argued that such inspections were necessary because he claimed the vehicles offer opportunities for smuggling. 
The latest maneuvering sparked unsurprising backlash by Democrats, with White House press secretary Jen Psaki mocking the buses as a “publicity stunt.”

But Republicans say the publicity might not necessarily be bad for Abbott.
“I think it’s hard to separate politics and government. I mean, in everything that happens, whether it’s foreign policy or domestic policy, politics and government go hand in hand. Public relations is a key aspect of governing. So, I don’t see this any different than anything else,” Steinhauser said.
“There’s always a selling, a marketing side of it. There’s always a communications plan. And there clearly has been one on this. But I also think that it’s just one of the many things that the state of Texas is doing to try and deal with this problem.”
To be sure, not every Republican was pleased with Abbott’s recent decisions.
Texas Agriculture Commissioner Sid Miller called the truck inspection policy
“misguided” and “political theater” in a letter to Abbott on Wednesday.
“Instead, this policy will hurt Texas and American consumers by driving up already skyrocketing food prices, worsening ongoing supply chain disruptions, causing massive produce shortages, and saddling Texas and American companies with untold losses,” Miller said, adding that he predicts prices will rise for limes and avocados within a week.
“Buses, and trucks, and demagoguery, oh my,” added moderate GOP commentator
Charlie Sykes.

“Texas’s Greg Abbott has simultaneously: 
(1) manufactured a massive snafu at the border, 
(2) shocked even some conservative allies with the crassness of his immigrants-on-a-bus stunt.”
But still, Abbott’s unique position as a border-state governor offers him a chance to differentiate himself from other Republicans, which could be a boon if he’s considering
a 2024 presidential run.
Abbott has leaned into culture wars during his reelection bid, bolstering his hardline
bona fides on issues like abortion, gun rights, “election integrity” and more to successfully beat back primary challenges from his right earlier this year. However, the stringent new policies he implemented have caught national attention and fueled speculation that he has his eye on the White House.

In a sign of immigration’s potency as a wedge issue, other prominent Republicans, including potential 2024 candidates, have pounced on the White House’s handling of
Title 42. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) warned migrants on the bus to D.C. not to try to get to his state after some of them reportedly said they hoped to make their way to Miami.
“Life will not be easy for you, because we are obligated to uphold the immigration laws of this country, even if our federal government and other states won’t,” DeSantis’s office told Fox News on Wednesday.
Dave Carney, Abbott’s political consultant, told The Hill the governor is solely focused
on his reelection bid this year, when he’ll face off against former Rep. Beto O’Rourke
(D-Texas). But Carney also boasted that Abbott’s latest moves are hitting on what Republicans view as a winning issue.
“I think it shows that Biden and Harris and the Democrats could have done something
like this in January of last year,” he said of Abbott’s policies.  “But for politics, what they thought at the time was a winning issue, is going to kill them.”

Biden puts the lie to all of Democrats’ arguments about fossil fuels (msn.com)

US lawmakers affirm Japan alliance eyeing China, North Korea (msn.com)

America needs to be saved 🇺🇸

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Who Killed Excellence

LA street gangs targeting residents in wealthy areas, LAPD urges residents to be on guard.

Pete Hegseth on Biden’s plummeting poll numbers: ‘They got in bed with the crazy left’.
Robert B. Reich: Inflation is out of control! Urgent memo to Biden and the Democrats.
Are Rising Interest Rates Making Savings Accounts a Smart Option Again?
Pelosi responds to report questioning Feinstein’s mental fitness to serve.
Explainer: Why is inflation so high and when will it end?
Recession fears rise as Fed fights inflation.
The life of Leonardo da Vinci!

The Progressive Agenda to Dumb Down America’s Children—Alex Newman.
by Samuel L. Blumenfeld.

The history of American education can roughly be divided into three distinct periods each of which represents a particular, dominant world view.
The first period — which lasted from colonial times to about the l840s — saw the dominance of the Calvinist worldview in which God’s omnipotent sovereignty was the central reality of man’s existence. In the Calvinist scheme of things the purpose of man’s life was to glorify God, and the attainment of Biblical literacy was considered the overriding spiritual and moral function of education.
Latin, Greek and Hebrew were studied because they were the original languages of the Bible and of theological literature. Thus, this period in American education is characterized by a very high standard of literacy. The documents of the founding fathers were the products of this period, and writers like Edgar Allan Poe, who wrote for the general public, enhanced the enjoyment of their readers by using extensive, rich vocabularies and weaving long, complex sentences. Their readers relished such literary artistry.

The second period, lasting from the 1840s until about World War One, can be called the Hegelian period. It was the period in which Hegel’s statist-idealist philosophy spread throughout the Western world like a malignant spiritual disease destroying Calvinism in its wake. Hegel dethroned the Jehovah of the Old Testament and the Christ of the New Testament. In their place he offered a pantheistic view of the universe in which everything that existed was a somewhat formless God in the process of perfecting himself through a dynamic, endless struggle called the dialectic.

In this scheme man became the highest manifestation of God in the universe.
As one Hegelian educator put it, man “is Divinity awaking out of the sleep of infinitely self-expanded being.” In this pantheist scheme of things the purpose of life was to glorify man and the instrument through which his collective power could be exercised — the state. It is during this Hegelian period that the public school movement developed, promoting a secular form of education which gradually eliminated the Bible from the classrooms of America.

Yet even the Hegelian period was one of high literacy, for Hegel had stressed intellectual development since he considered man’s mind to be the highest manifestation of God in the universe. Latin and Greek were studied because they were the languages of the pagan classics. Discipline, punctuality, high academic standards and achievement were the hallmarks of the public schools during this period.

The third period, which began around World War One and has lasted to the present, can be designated the Progressive period. It came into being mainly as a result of the new behavioral psychology developed in the experimental laboratories of Wilhelm Wundt at the University of Leipzig in Germany. The major American figures who studied under Wundt and came back to the United States to revolutionize American education were James McKeen Cattell, G. Stanley Hall, Charles H. Judd and James Earl Russell.
Science and evolution replaced religion as the focus of their faith, and dialectical materialism superseded Hegel’s dialectical idealism” In this scheme, the purpose of man’s life was to deny “humanity.” The pioneer in the progressive movement who beat the first path to Wundt’s laboratory in Leipzig was G. Stanley Hall. Hall had already spent the years 1868-70 studying in Germany and had returned to the United States seething with hatred for his Puritan New England heritage.

He wrote in his autobiography:
I fairly loathed and hated so much that I saw about me that I now realize more clearly than ever how possible it would have been for me to have drifted into some, perhaps almost any, camp of radicals and to have come into such open rupture with the scheme of things as they were that I still would have been stigmatized as dangerous, at least for any academic career, where the motto was Safety First. And as this was the only way left open, the alternative being the dread one of going back to the farm, it was most fortunate that these deeply stirred instincts of revolt were never openly expressed and my rank heresies and socialistic leanings unknown.

Hall returned from his Wundtian experience in 1878 and in 1882 created America’s first psych lab at Johns Hopkins University. Two of Hall’s students were James McKeen Cattell and John Dewey. Cattell journeyed to Leipzig in 1884 where he spent two years studying under the Herr Professor. He returned to the U.S. and created the world’s first psychology department at the University of Pennsylvania in 1887.

One biographical account of Cattell’s life states:
Cattell’s student years in Baltimore, Germany and England the period of his greatest originality and productivity in psychology — were laced with inner complaint. Cattell confided only in his private journal his recurrent feelings of depression, his frequent need of hallucinogenic drugs, and his underlying philosophical stance as a “sceptic and mystic.” Is it not interesting that hallucinogenic drugs were already being used by students of psychology as far back as the 1880s?

In 1891 Cattell established Columbia University~s department of psychology.
During his years at Columbia, Cattell trained more future members of the American Psychological Association than were trained at any other institution. Cattell was one of the founders of the American Psychological Association and the Psychological Review. Under his direction, psychology at Columbia became one of the strongest departments of research and advanced teaching.
No doubt Cattell’s most celebrated pupil was Edward L. Thorndike, who had gotten his master’s degree under William James at Harvard where he had conducted experiments in animal learning. Under Cattell Thorndike continued his experiments which were to have a devastating impact on American education. Lawrence Cremin writes: Thorndike called the process by which the animals tended to repeat ever more efficiently and economically behaviors which were rewarded learning, and out of his experiment came a new theory of learning and a new “law” founded on that theory.

The theory maintained that learning involves the wedding of a specific response to a specific stimulus through a physiological bond in the neural system, so that the stimulus regularly calls forth the response. In Thorndike’s words, the bond between Sand R is “stamped in” by being continually rewarded. Whereas previous theories had emphasized practice, or repetition, Thorndike gave equal weight to outcomes to success or failure, reward or punishment, satisfaction or annoyance to the learner. Equally important, perhaps, Thorndike’s new law implied a new theory of mind. Building on the idea of the reflex area, which connected the brain and neural tissue with the total behavior of the organism, he ended the search for the mind by eliminating it as a separate e~tity.

In short, Thorndike reduced psychology to the study of observable, measurable human behavior — with the complexity and mystery of mind and soul left out. In summing up his theory of learning, Thorndike wrote: “The best way with children may often be, in the pompous words of an animal trainer, ‘to arrange everything in connection with the trick so that the animal will be compelled by the laws of its own nature to perform it. ‘” In 1904, Cattell invited his old friend John Dewey to join the faculty at Columbia. From Johns Hopkins, Dewey had not gone to Leipzig like Cattell and others.
Instead he taught philosophy at the University of Michigan for about nine years. He had left Johns Hopkins a Hegelian idealism but became a materialist at Michigan. In 1894 he became professor of philosophy and education at the University of Chicago where he created his famous Laboratory School. The purpose of the school was to see what kind of curriculum was needed to produce socialists instead of capitalists, collectivists instead of individualists. Dewey, along with the other adherents of the new psychology, was convinced that socialism was the wave of the future and that individualism had passed
.
But the individualist system would not fade away on its own as long as it was sustained by the education American children were getting in their schools. Max Eastman write, Dewey was interested in reforming education and wrote a book about it long before he became an instrumental philosopher. The book was called Applied Psychology, and that indicates what his doctrine about education is: Education is life itself, so long as the living thing continues to grow; education is growth under favorable conditions; the school is a place where those conditions should be regulated scientifically.
In other words, if we apply psychology to education, which we have done now for over
fifty years, then the ideal classroom is a psych lab and the pupils within it are laboratory animals. Dewey’s joining Cattell and Thorndike at Columbia brought together the lethal trio who were literally to wipe out traditional education and kill academic excellence in America. It would not be accomplished overnight, for an army of new teachers and superintendents had to be trained and an army of old teachers and superintendents had
to retire or die off.

By 1808 the lethal trio had produced three books of paramount importance to the progressive movement. Thorndike published Animal Intelligence in 1898; Dewey published School and Society in 1899; and in 1908 Cattell produced, through a surrogate by the name of Edmund Burke Huey, The Psychology and Pedagogy of Reading.
Concerning Thorndike and Dewey, Lawrence Cremin, in his history of Teachers College, writes: Like all the pioneers, Thorndike inspired innumerable disciples and leaders to carry on his revolutionary work in education. [ Leta S. Hollingworth, Arthur I. Gates, Arthur T. Jersild, Irving Lorge, Ruth Strang and Goodwin watson~. Indeed, it may well be stated that two thinkers, Thorndike and Dewey, supplied the two great formative influences of twentieth-century educational theory and together established the frame of reference in which their contemporaries and successors were to work.]
Actually, Dewey provided the social philosophy of the movement, Thorndike the teaching theories and techniques, and Cattell the organizing energy. There was among all of them, disciples and colleagues, a missionary zeal to rebuild American education on a foundation of science, evolution, humanism, and behaviorism. But it was Dewey who identified high literacy as the culprit in traditional education, the sustaining force behind individualism. He wrote in 1898: There is a false educational god whose idolaters are legion, and whose cult influences the entire educational system.

image.png
Why Public Schools and the Mainstream Media Dumb Us Down – YouTube

The Clown Show – YouTube
Under Biden, every state is now a border state (msn.com)
Socialism in public schools, it’s an agenda to dump down learning, family, culture,
society, nation, morality and all good values https://youtu.be/cBJM_5X_GiM

This is language-study — the study not of foreign language, but of English; not in higher, but in primary education. It is almost an unquestioned assumption of educational theory and practice both, that the first three years of a child’s school life shall be mainly taken up with learning to read and write his own language. My proposition is, that conditions — social, industrial, and intellectual — have undergone such a radical change, that the time has come for a thoroughgoing examination of the emphasis put upon linguistic work in elementary instruction.

The plea for the predominance of learning to read in early school-life because of the great importance attaching to literature seems to me a perversion. And in School and Society he wrote: The tragic weakness of the present school is that it endeavors to prepare future members of the social order in a medium in which the conditions of the social spirit are eminently wanting. The mere absorbing of facts and truths is so exclusively an individual affair that it tends very naturally to pass into selfishness. There is no obvious social motive for the acquisition of mere learning, there is no clear social gain in success thereat.
Indeed, almost the only measure for success is a competitive one, in the bad sense of the term — a comparison of results in the recitation or in the examination to see which
child has succeeded in getting ahead of others in storing up, in accumulating, the maximum of information. But in order to reform the system, the mind had to be seen in
a different way. Dewey wrote: Earlier psychology regarded mind as a purely individual affair in direct and na ked contact with an external world. At present the tendency is to conceive the individual mind as a function of social life as not capable of operating or developing by itself, but as requiring continual stimulus from social agencies, and finding its nutrition in social supplies.
~
The idea of heredity had made familiar the notion that the equipment of the individual, mental as well as physical, is an inheritance from the race: a capital inherited by the individual from the past and held in trust by him for the future. The idea of evolution has made familiar the notion that the mind cannot be regarded as an individual, monopolistic possession, but represents the outworking’s of the endeavor and thought of humanity. So according to Dewey the one part of our identity that is the most private, the mind, is really not the property of the individual but of humanity, which is merely a euphemism for the collective or the state.
That concept is at the very heart of the Orwellian nightmare, and yet that concept is the very basis of our progressive humanist-behaviorist education system. Dewey realized that such radical reform was not exactly what the American people wanted. So he wrote: Change must come gradually. To force it unduly would compromise its final success by favoring a violent reaction. The most important of the reforms to be instituted was changing the way children were to be taught to read. Since it had been ordained by Dewey and his colleagues that literacy skills were to be drastically de-emphasized in favor of the development of social skills, a new teaching method that reduced literacy skills was needed.


image.png

The traditional school used the phonics or phonetic method.
That is, children were first taught the alphabet, then the sounds the letters stand for, and in a short time they became independent readers. The new method -­ look-say or the word method — taught children to read English as if it were Chinese or Egyptian hieroglyphics. The method was not exactly new. It had been invented in the 1830s by Rev. Thomas H. Gallaudet, the famous teacher of the deaf and dumb, Since deaf-mutes have no cocception of a spoken language, they could not learn a phonetic — or sound-symbol — system of reading.
Instead, they were taught to read by a purely sight method consisting of pictures juxtaposed with whole words. Thus, the whole word was seen to represent an idea or image, not the sounds of language. The written word itself was regarded as a little picture, much like a Chinese ideograph. Gallaudet thought that the method could be adapted for use by normal children and he wrote a little primer based on that concept. In 1837 the Boston Primary School Committee decided to adopt the primer.

By 1844 the results were so devastating that a group of Boston schoolmasters published a blistering attack on the whole-word method and it was thrown out of the schools.
The return to common sense in the Boston schools, however, did not mean the end of look-say. It was kept alive in the new state normal schools where it was taught as a legitimate alternative to the alphabetic-phonics method. When the progressives decided to revive look-say, they realized that an authoritative book would be necessary to give the method the seal of approval of the new psychology.
The progressive position was based on Cattell’s reaction-time experiments in Wundt’s laboratory.
Cattell~observed that adults could read whole words just as fast as they could read individual letters. From that he concluded that a child could be taught to read simply by showing him whole words and telling him what they said. For some reason Cattell did not want to write a book himself. So, he got one of G. Stanley Hall’s students, Edmund Burke Huey, to write a book arguing that look-say was the superior way to teach reading. The book, The Psyc~y and Pedagogy of Reading, was published in 1908.

What is astounding is that by 1908 Cattell and his colleagues were very well aware that the look-say method produced inaccurate readers. In fact, Huey argued in favor of inaccuracy as a virtue! He wrote: Even if the child substitutes words of his own for some that are on the page, provided that those express the meaning. It is an encouraging sign that the reading has been real, and recognition of details will come as it is needed. The shock that such a statement will give to many a practical teacher of reading is but an accurate measure of the hold that a false ideal has taken of us, viz., that to read is to say just what is upon the page, instead of to think, each in his own way, the meaning that the page suggests.

In other words, what an author has to say is less important than what the reader thinks he has to say. And each reader is free to interpret “each in his own way” the message of a written page. Therefore precision of thought and language belongs to a “false ideal” from which teachers have got to shake themselves loose. No wonder Cattell did not want to write the book himself. He did not want to have to defend it, probably. But the book was immediately adopted by the progressives as the authoritative work on the subject despite the fact that it was written by an obscure student who had no experience whatsoever in the teaching of reading, who wrote nothing further on the subject, and about whom virtually nothing is known.

It is obvious that Dewey, Cattell, Thorndike and their associates knew that the purpose of look-say was indeed to lower the level of literacy of Americans, for G. Stanley Hall, in reviewing Huey’s book, even went so far as to extol the virtues of illiteracy. He wrote: Very many men have lived and died and been great, even leaders of the rage, without any acquaintance with Letters. The knowledge which illiterates acquire is probably on the whole more personal, direct, environmental and probably a much larger proportion of it practical.

Moreover, they escape much eyestrain and mental excitement, and, other things being equal, are probably more active and less sedentary. Illiterates escape certain temptations, such as vacuous and vicious reading. Perhaps we are prone to put too high a value both upon the ability required to this art and the discipline involved in doing so, as well as the culture value that comes to the citizen with his average of only six grades of schooling by the acquisition of this art. When a nation’s leading educational reformers start arguing in favor of illiteracy and inaccurate reading and damning early.

A study as a perversion, then we can expect some strange results to corne from our education process. In fact, by the 1950s, the progressives had done such a good job that Rudolf Flesch could write a book in 1955 entitled Why Johnny Can’t Read. Why indeed. Flesch minced no words. He wrote: The teaching of reading — all over the United States, in all the schools, in all the textbooks — is totally wrong and flies in the face of all logic and common sense. Flesch then went on to explain how beginning reading instruction in American schools had been radically changed from phonics to look-say.

What astonished so many parents was the fact that all of this was done with so little public awareness.
Flesch explained how it was done: It’s a foolproof system all right.
Every grade-school teacher in the country has to go to a teacher’s college or school of education; every teachers’ college gives at least one course on how to teach reading; every course on how to teach reading is based on a textbook; every one of those textbooks is written by one of the high priests of the word method. In the old days it was impossible to keep a good teacher from following her own common sense and practical knowledge; today the phonetic system of teaching reading is kept out of our schools as effectively as if we had a dictatorship with an all-powerful Ministry of Education.

image.png
The educators were furious with Flesch.

IN the 1950s, the job had been done so well that Rudolf Flesch wrote a book in 1955 entitled Why Johnny Can’t Read. Why indeed. Flesch minced no words. He wrote: The teaching of reading — all over the United States, in all the schools, in all the textbooks —
is totally wrong and flies in the face of all logic and common sense. He had made them appear stupid and incompetent. They knew they were not stupid.
They had pulled off the greatest conspiracy against intelligence in history. Although Dewey, Thorndike and Cattell were dead, their disciples, Arthur I. Gates at Columbia and William Sc ott Gray at the University of Chicago, were determined to carry on the work of their mentors. In 1955, the professors of reading organized the International Reading Association to maintain the dominance of look-say in primary reading instruction.

Today, look-say permeates the educational marketplace so thoroughly and in so many guises, and it is so widely by a teacher or parent and uncritically accepted, that it takes expert knowledge/to know the good from the bad, useful from the harmful ~ But Flesch had not been the first to inform the educators that what they were doing was wrong. The first to do that was Dr. Samuel T. Orton, a neuropathologist, who in 1929 published an article in the Journal of Educational Psychology entitled “The ‘Sight Reading’ Method of Teaching Reading as a Source of Reading Disability.”

In it Orton wrote: I wish to emph~size at the beginning that the strictures which I have to offer here do not apply to the use of the sight method of teaching reading as a whole but only to its effects on a restricted group of children for whom, as I think we can show, this technique is not only not adapted but often proves an actual obstacle to reading progress, and moreover I believe that this group is one of considerable size and because here faulty teaching methods may not only prevent the acquisition of academic education by children of average capacity but may also give rise to far reaching damage to their emotional life.

Had the educators been genuinely concerned with the academic and psychological welfare of their students they would have changed their plans to impose look-say, the sight method, on the schools of America. But I fear that they took Dr. Orton’s findings as confirmation that what they intended to do would work as they wanted it to: that ~ is destroy literacy skills, create learning blockages and a dumb down nation. Today their success can be measured in terms of declining SAT scores and academic achievement to the point where we are now a Nation at Risk with an education system being swamped by a rising tide of mediocrity.

Even the best students have fallen victim to this dumbing down process. In a speech given to the California Library Association in 1970, Karl Shapiro, the eminent poet-professor who had taught creative writing for over 20 years: his audience: What is really distressing is that this generation cannot and does not read. I am speaking of university students in what are supposed to be our best universities. Their illiteracy is staggering.
We are experiencing a literacy breakdown which is unlike anything I know of in the history of letters. What I have been trying to tell this audience is that this literary breakdown is no accident, it is not the result of ignorance or incompetence, it has been, in fact, deliberately created by our progressive-humanist-behaviorist educators whose social agenda is far more important to them than anything connected with academic excellence.

Perhaps their mindset was best expressed by psychologist Arthur W. Combs in an essay entitled “Humanistic Goals of Education” published in 1975. Dr. Combs writes: Modern education must produce far more than persons with cognitive skills. It must produce humane individuals The humane qualities are absolutely essential to our way of life far more important, even, than the learning of reading, for example. We can live with a bad reader; a bigot is a danger to everyone. The inference, of course, is that you can’t have both good readers and humane persons, that one must be sacrificed for the other.

Note the very subtle suggestion that high literacy may even produce bigotry.
If this is what the humanists believe, how can we expect them to promote high literacy?
Incidentally, the progressive-humanist-A behaviorist mindset also has profound political implications that threaten our freedoms. The Declaration of Independence states “that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” Well, if there is no Creator, as our humanist educators believe, then there are no unalienable rights.

OUTLAW the democratic party and label it as a Seditious Anti-American terror group.

image.png
Democrats should act like there’s no next year. And do all they can now.
This Clown Show: https://youtu.be/6CDaflxJJ0g

Dewey wrote in Liberalism and Social Action:
When (Bentham) disallowed the doctrine of inalienable individual natural rights, he removed, as far as theory is concerned, the obstacle to positive action by the state whenever it can be shown that the general well-being will be promoted by such action.
The last stand of oligarchical and anti-social seclusion is perpetuation of this purely individualistic notion of intelligence. To kill this individualistic intelligence which is the source of excellence, Dewey and his behaviorist colleagues proceeded to strip education of mind, soul, and literacy. In 1930 the percentage of illiteracy among white persons of native birth was 1.5. Among foreign born whites it was 9.9 percent, and among Negroes it was 16.3.

Among urban blacks the illiteracy rate was 9.2 percent.
Today the illiteracy rate among urban blacks is probably about 40 percent, while the illiteracy rate among whites has been estimated to be from 7 to 30 percent. No one really knows the exact figure, including the Department of Education which ~~ that there are about 23 million functional illiterates in America. In 1935 a survey was made of {Civilian Conservation Corp (CCC) enrollees. Of the 375,000 men studied, 7,369, or 1.9 percent, were found to be illiterate, that is, they could not read a newspaper or write a letter.

That’s a remarkably low rate of illiteracy considering that most of the men who joined the CCC were in the low socio-economic group. Today, our schools are creating an ever-increasing underclass of citizens without employable skills who turn to crime or welfare for sustenance. Their illiteracy makes them misfits in an industrial, high-tech society.
The irony is that they acquire their illiteracy in school from teachers who ~have\themselves been miseducated by their professors of education.

Education Week of January 30, 1985 reported that more than half the students in grades 3, 5 and 8 in the schools of Philadelphia need remedial help. Why? £-du.catio-n didn’t explain why, but the answer is that the teachers of Philadelphia are using teaching methods that Dr. Orton was warned about in 1929 and Dr. Flesch was exposed in 1955.

In fact, Dr. Flesch wrote another book in 1981 entitled.
Why Johnny Still Can’t Read. He wrote with some sadness: Twenty-five years ago I studied American methods of teaching reading and warned against educational catastrophe. Now it has happened. At the moment every state legislature in the nation is grappling with an education reform bill. I know of not one of them that has addressed this basic problem of primary reading instruction. They all seem convinced that merit pay , longer school days, smaller class size, more homework, career ladders, competency tests, higher pay for teachers, compulsory kindergarten and more preschool facilities will give us excellence.

But they won’t for one very significant reason. The academic substance of public education today is controlled lock, stock and barrel by behavioral psychologists, and they don’t believe in excellence. The American classroom has been transformed into a psych lab and the function of a psych lab is not academic excellence. If education consists of the interaction between an effective teacher and a willing learner, then you can’t have it in a psych lab which has neither.
In the lab you have the trainer and the trainee, the controller and controlled, the experimenter and the subject, the therapist and the patient.

What should go on in a classroom is teaching and learning. What goes on in the psych lab is stimulus and response, diagnosis and treatment. Many people think that behaviorism is simply the study of behavior. But, according to B.F. Skinner, behaviorism is a theory of knowledge, in which knowing and thinking are regarded merely as forms of behavior. Although psychology was supposed to be the study of the life of the psyche — the mind — behaviorists, starting with Thorndike, reduced the functions of the mind to where today the mind ceases to be a factor in education. Behavioral objectives are the goals of today’s teachers.

Who killed excellence? Behavioral psychology did. Why?
Because it is based on a lie: that man is an animal, without mind or soul, and can be taught as an animal. That concept is based on an even greater lie: “there is no God, no Creator.
So the future of American education rests on the resolution of profoundly philosophical questions, and apparently no compromise between the ruling behaviorists and the rebellious fundamentalists is possible. As long as the progressive-humanist-behaviorists control the graduate schools of education and psychology, the professional organizations and journals, and the processes whereby ~ curricula are developed and textbooks written and published, there is ~ possibility that public education can achieve academic excellence.

It is the better part of wisdom to admit that the government schools are the permanent captives of the behaviorists who also seem to control the sources of public and private funding that sustain them. They ~ impervious to the pressures for excellence. The solution lies in abandoning public education and transferring our energies and resources to the private sector thereby expanding educational freedom,,, The American people want better education. They ought to be able to get it. But to do so they will have to sweep away whatever obstacles to excellence the educators have erected.

The exodus of children from the public schools is an indication that this is already happening. But the millions of children who remain. are at risk, in danger of becoming the functional illiterates of tomorrow. Can we save them?

We have the knowledge to do so. But do we have the will?

The next few years will provide the answer.

Source: Who Killed Excellence Draft.pdf (campconstitution.net)

The pro-life industry is not serious enough to want to stop this evil of murdering
children in the womb. https://youtu.be/tderE7Mp4h4

image.png
image.png

image.png

image.png

image.png

image.png
We have communist ideology behind Wokeness & CRT in churches & seminaries.

Bill Gates spent $2.3b to push failing common core also known as Obamacore.
“America is not the greatest country in the world anymore” – The Newsroom 2012.
The economic shock hitting the housing market is starting to do some damage.

WOKE: Willfully Overlooking Known Evil.
Pope Benedict XVI is a retired prelate of the Catholic church who served as the head of the church and the sovereign of the Vatican City state from 2005 until his resignation in 2013. Benedict’s election as pope occurred in the 2005 papal conclave that followed the death of Pope John Paul II. Benedict chose to be known by the title “pope emeritus” upon his resignation. Bought Out By Bill Gates 🙁

Politicians around the globe reacted to the news. Australia’s Prime Minister Julia Gillard, Brazil’s President Dilma Rousseff, Canada’s Prime Minister Stephen Harper, Germany’s Chancellor Angela Merkel, United Kingdom’s Prime Minister David Cameron and United States’ President Barack Obama praised Benedict and his pontificate; while Italy’s Prime Minister Mario Monti and Philippines’ President Benigno Aquino III expressed shock and regret, respectively.  

Ingraham: Dems seem to be engaged in a brazen act of self-sabotage (msn.com) 
The sad truth is, the party of 2022 is not the party of Bill Clinton anymore. It’s the party of Black Lives Matter, climate crazies and trans activists. So how exactly does Joe Manchin even fit inside this twisted tent? They seem to be engaged in a brazen act of self-sabotage. The Democrats are extending mask mandates when Americans say it’s time to move on from COVID. Democrats are turning the border into an open market for the cartels. 

Taking The Serpent’s Head Off: “Watch The Water” EXPLODES Worldwide, Global Citizens Demand Answers (redvoicemedia.com)
Title 42 decision reveals Biden admin’s ‘total hypocrisy’ on COVID, says Heritage Foundation president (msn.com)
The King Cobra Venom Pandemic: Stew Peters Unveils a New COVID-19 Conspiracy Theory | Right Wing Watch
WATCH THE WATER: My Take On The Viral New Documentary [From NOAH] (welovetrump.com)
The Soul Trap: Beyond The Ice Wall // Admiral Byrd, Hollow Earth, & The Dome (odysee.com)
Watch the Water – Stew Peters Documentary Transcript – Search (bing.com)
World Premiere: Watch The Water (Full Movie) (redvoicemedia.com)
Bill Gates Bought into the Catholic Religion – Search (bing.com)
Watch the Water – Stew Peters Documentary (odysee.com)
Why Pope Benedict Resigned – Search (bing.com)
PatriotStreetfighter (rumble.com)
Dr Bing Liu – Bing video
Dr Ardis – Bing video

image.png
Texas governor sends buses of undocumented migrants to D.C.

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott has sent buses with a group of undocumented migrants
to Washington, D.C. as a show of opposition to the Biden administration ending
a Trump-era border policy. NBC’s Ali Vitali reports from Capitol Hill.
Asymptomatic people no longer need to quarantine after COVID exposure, California health officials say (msn.com)

Nurses are raging and quitting after RaDonda Vaught verdict : Shots – Health News : NPR
Poll: Most Americans see politics over substance in Supreme Court confirmation process.
White House Moves Closer to Canceling Student Debt, Schumer Says | Watch.
Here’s what Biden, Harris and their spouses paid in 2021 taxes (msn.com)
Democrats in tough races revolt over Biden administration border move.
Immigration politics bedevil Dems ahead of planned border easing.
(ALTERNATE) Future of World Flags 2021 – 3033!!!!!

Worried about rising inflation? 
With nearly risk free I bonds soon to pay 9.62%, here’s what you need to know (msn.com)
Americans grade President Biden as inflation hits a 40-year record high (msn.com)
“America is not the greatest country in the world anymore” – The Newsroom 2012.
The economic shock hitting the housing market is starting to do some damage.
Sinema dashes Biden’s hope for major tax overhaul (msn.com)
When will the sixth mass extinction occur? (msn.com)

image.png
“The Goose that Laid the Golden Eggs” is one of Aesop’s Fables: 
Numbered 87 in the Perry Index, a story that also has a number of Eastern analogues. Many other stories contain geese that lay golden eggs, though certain versions change them for hens or other birds that lay golden eggs. The tale has given rise to the idiom ‘killing the goose that lays the golden eggs’, which also refers to the short-sighted
destruction of a valuable resource, or to an unprofitable action motivated by GREED. 🙁
The fable is from read.gov.

https://youtu.be/q8rqdIlk1R4
The Bushes, data collection
https://youtu.be/ZNQ_2Hq4LHs
Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Constitutional Republic vs. Democracy

Constitutional Republic governed by the Constitution of the United States

Some believe that the United States is a democracy, but it is actually the perfect example of a constitutional republic. A pure democracy would be a form of government in which the leaders, while elected by the people, are not constrained by a constitution as to its actions. In a republic, however, elected officials cannot take away or violate certain rights of the people. The Pledge of Allegiance, which was written in 1892 and adopted by Congress in 1942 as the official pledge, even makes reference to the fact that the U.S. is a republic:

“I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic,
for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.”


The Anti-Federalists and Federalists, as the new nation was being formed, could not agree on how involved the federal government should be in citizens’ lives; a decision on a pure democracy could never be reached. Alexander Hamilton, himself a Federalist, stated that the government being created was a “republican government,” and that true freedom would not be found in a dictatorship nor a true democracy, but in a moderate government.
James Madison, another Federalist, stated that, while citizens would otherwise get together to discuss governmental operations in a democracy, a republic instead leaves the bigger decisions up to its elected representatives. Madison stated that a democracy needs to be “confined to a small spot,” while republics could be “extended over a large[r] region.”

What he meant by this, was that by not forming a democracy, citizens could allow representatives to make decisions for them on bigger issues, such as international relations, as opposed to having to find a way to all meet up and discuss these issues together.

Despite the fact that most countries claim that “democracy” is their main goal, most countries govern as republics. However, not all republics are the same; with some, for instance, operating under a president (like the U.S.), and others operating under a parliament (the U.K.), in which the people elect a legislative branch that then decides the executive branch. Even some monarchies operate as republics, despite having royalty as their heads of state.

The following table outlines some of the differences
between a constitutional republic and a democracy:


DEMOCRACY
– Ruled by a majority that enjoys unlimited power. Minority groups have no protection.
– Individuals can make their own decisions except in those situations that the majority
has limited.
– While all citizens supposedly have a say in government and are to be treated as equals, the majority often ends up tyrannically ruling the minority.
– The United States is commonly confused for a democracy. However, the will of the people should not, and does not, change the rules that limit the government’s power.
– Freedom of religion is permitted to the extent that the majority does not limit religious freedom for the minority.
– Private property is permitted, though the majority may place limits on the property rights of the minority.

REPUBLIC
– Follows a written Constitution that protects the rights of the minority from being infringed upon by the majority.
– Generally, individuals can make their own decisions, especially in situations
where the Constitution protects their “unalienable rights.”
– Generally, all citizens are supposed to have an equal say and be treated equally, especially as protected under the Constitution
Article 4, Section 4 defines the United States as a Republic.
– Generally, religious freedom is permitted, especially as protected under the Constitution.
– Generally, private property is permitted, especially as protected under the Constitution.

Limits on Governmental Power.
A constitutional republic is put in place to prevent the government from becoming
a tyrannical ruler. The United States Constitution contains protections against what
is referred to as “the tyranny of the majority” on the rights of American citizens.
Examples of constitutional republic protections include:
Congress cannot prohibit the expression of free speech, nor the free exercise of one’s religion, and it cannot infringe on a citizen’s right to possess a gun.

(First and Second Amendments)
The Senate must be elected by the States, not citizens. (Seventeenth Amendment)
The President must be elected by the Electoral College, not citizens.
American citizens have argued in the past for the abolishment of the Electoral College. This argument comes up when a presidential candidate wins the popular vote but loses
the election, due to not receiving enough electoral votes to win the presidency.
The 2016 election was the perfect example of this situation.
Donald Trump was elected to the presidency by the Electoral College, despite having lost the popular vote to Hillary Clinton. Those who believed that Donald Trump would become a tyrannical ruler if he were to ascend to the Oval Office fought for the Electoral College to be abolished once and for all. Several citizens created petitions, calling upon the government for this abolishment, and many others voiced their frustrations via protests.

Constitutional Republic Example in Obamacare
There are several examples of constitutional republic being under attack through lawsuits. These types of situations typically arise when the majority passes a law through their representatives, yet other citizens claim the law is unconstitutional.
Perhaps one of the most prominent examples of this in recent history is the challenging
of the Affordable Care Act (commonly referred to as “Obamacare”) at the Supreme Court level. 
Congress passed the Affordable Care Act (ACA), which went into effect in March 2010.
The purpose of the ACA was to provide health insurance to millions of Americans who were not covered. It also sought to limit the extent to which citizens could seek health
care services for which they could not – or did not – pay.

Shortly after the ACA was passed, several states and organizations – led by the state
of Florida – brought lawsuits before the United States District Court in Florida, claiming that the ACA was unconstitutional. Individuals Kaj Ahburg and Mary Brown also jumped on board as plaintiffs in the case.
The group’s claims were based on a number of grounds, among them was the claim that the requirement for employers to purchase health insurance for their employees interfered with state sovereignty, or the right of the state to remain independent and have control over its own decisions.

Another of these grounds – and Brown’s individual reason for bringing suit – echoed the complaints of several Americans who felt they were being punished financially by the ACA. Brown did not have health insurance, and was being forced to make necessary financial arrangements to ensure that she could comply with the Act’s requirements.
Those who could not afford, or simply refused, to comply were to be issued a tax penalty when they submitted their taxes. This individual mandate penalty essentially acted as a sort of punishment for not having health insurance.
Among the additional rulings that the District Court made on this case, it ultimately found the entire ACA to be invalid. This was due, in part, to the fact that the individual mandate that taxed citizens for not having insurance was not an appropriate usage of Congress’ powers of commerce or taxation.
The Court of Appeals agreed with the District Court in some aspects but reversed the District Court on the individual mandate issue. The appeals court held that yes, the mandate could actually be considered separately without invalidating the other parts
of the ACA.

When the case reached the U.S. Supreme Court, the Court was split on the issue of the individual mandate penalty. Chief Justice Roberts, along with Justices Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan, held that the mandate was a legitimate exercise of Congressional power. They concluded that the penalty is not a normal tax to be collected by the IRS, and that it is not so severe as to be considered forcible. Further, they ruled that the mandate was not limited to willful violations, such as fines that are imposed upon citizens for breaking the law.
However, Justices Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas, and Alito disagreed. Their argument was that, because Congress referred to the payment as a “penalty,” then if it were to be considered another kind of tax, that would require a re-write of the Constitution’s
Taxing and Spending Clause.

The Constitution of the United States is the supreme law of the United States of America.[3] 
It superseded the Articles of Confederation, the nation’s first constitution.
Originally comprising seven articles, it delineates the national frame of government. Its first three articles embody the doctrine of the separation of powers, whereby the federal government is divided into three branches: the legislative, consisting of the bicameral  Congress  (Article I); the executive, consisting of the president and subordinate officers (Article II); and the judicial, consisting of the Supreme Court and other federal courts (Article III). Article IVArticle V and Article VI embody concepts of federalism, describing the rights and responsibilities of state governments, the states in relationship to the federal government, and the shared process of constitutional amendment. Article VII establishes the procedure subsequently used by the 13 States to ratify it.

It is regarded as the oldest written and codified national constitution in force.[4]
Since the Constitution came into force in 1789, it has been amended 27 times, including one amendment that repealed a previous one,[5] in order to meet the needs of a nation that has profoundly changed since the 18th century.[6] In general, the first ten amendments, known collectively as the Bill of Rights, offer specific protections of individual liberty and justice and place restrictions on the powers of government.[7][8] 
The majority of the 17 later amendments expand individual civil rights protections.
Others address issues related to federal authority or modify government processes and procedures. Amendments to the United States Constitution, unlike ones made to many constitutions worldwide, are appended to the document. All four pages[9] of the original U.S. Constitution are written on parchment.[10]

According to the United States Senate:
“The Constitution’s first three words—We the People—affirm that the government
of the United States exists to serve its citizens. For over two centuries the Constitution has remained in force because its framers wisely separated and balanced governmental powers to safeguard the interests of majority rule and minority rights, of liberty and equality, and of the federal and state governments.”[6] The first permanent constitution,[a] it is interpreted, supplemented, and implemented by a large body of federal constitutional law, and has influenced the constitutions of other nations. 
Source: Constitution of the United States – Wikipedia
Constitutional Republic governed by the Constitution of the United States.

Related Legal Terms and Issues
Tyranny – Brutal and oppressive governmental rule.
Kid Rock – We The People (Lyrics) – Bing video

If your path demands you to walk through hell, walk like you own the place.
Feeling squeezed: March inflation report shows eye-popping 8.5% increase over last year
Inflation surged to its fastest rate since 1981 in March as food and energy prices soared.
Joe Biden allows ethanol blend with gas to lower ‘Putin’s price hike’ and high inflation.
Inflation Forecast 2022: Take a Deep Breath, This May Be the Worst of It.
We might be nearing the peak here in inflation, says Angel Oak’s Pate.
Average Gas Price In US Sees Biggest Weekly Drop In Over Two Years
White House braces for ‘extraordinarily elevated’ inflation numbers
Biden official just admitted inflation is going to get so much worse
Inflation Surges to New Four-Decade High of 8.5 Percent in March
Crude Oil Prices Are Plummeting, but Gas Pump Prices Stay High
Labor department: Inflation jumps to highest level since 1981
U.S. producer prices increase more than expected in March
March inflation report may show another rapid price spike
Gasoline prices drop eight cents in one week: AAA says
Here’s how the Russia-Ukraine war is driving up prices
Rising Gas Prices: The True Cost of Going Electric
Inflation is High Again, But Here’s The Upside,.,
Inflation is crushing Joe Biden and Democrats
Biden pitches new action to lessen gas prices.
Inflation Fear May Be Worse Than Inflation
Inflation hits 8.5%, economists explain why
America’s inflation at highest in 41 years
U.S. inflation reaches 40-year high
One way Biden could cut inflation
Inflation hits a new 40-year high.

Bottom Line: The Electoral College Worked Until Obama —

Figured Out A way to Cheat the System.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment