To begin with, this is your president. This ought to be one of the most shameful things ever said by a sitting president.
"Do you have any words to the victims of the hurricane?"
BIDEN: "We've given everything that we have."
"Are there any more resources the federal government could be giving them?"
BIDEN: "No." pic.twitter.com/jDMNGhpjOz
— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) September 30, 2024
We must have spent too much money on Ukraine to help Americans in distress. I don't…… [read more]
I asked a few days ago whether Coronavirus originated in a Chinese lab, and said “That’s what I have believed from the beginning, it is what I believe today, and it’s what I will always believe unless someone presents clear and convincing evidence that persuades me to relinquish my belief.”
This informed video doesn’t dissuade me from my views. It cements them.
His analysis is sweeping and he seems conversant on a whole host of topics, including the effect on the economy of having so much of our material and parts produced in China. The effect on the logistics chain is enormous for a just-in-time chain when a blip happens.
He says we must bring it all home. I agree. If that doesn’t sound “capitalistic,” then so be it. I’ve said before that I’m not a Ron Paul libertarian “The world is a Utopian trade platform and unicorns fart purple pixie dust rainbows over trade-friends to knit them together in love for each other” follower. I don’t want to debate this point – it’s a value judgment, and it’s mine. You can have your own, whatever that is.
And R.J. Rushdooy as well. Libertarianism without a moral foundation is a recipe for disaster. If “free trade” and “capitalism” means a borderless world where evil corporations outsource manufacturing to enemies in order to maximize quarterly earnings because idiot analysts want to play a better gambling game on Wall Street, then I’m not that.
Under the Lordship of Christ, nothing and no one is free to do anything they wish. We are free to obey God’s commandments, which brings the ultimate liberty, and He has a lot to say about this sort of thing, including duties of company owners to their workers. I cannot ensure that corporations are practicing righteousness, and don’t advocate holding CEOs at the barrel of a gun to force good behavior on them.
But as for the safety, security, health, protection and welfare of a country with borders, corporations who do business with enemies hell bent on destruction of our country should be seen and treated as allies of those enemies. So should the politicians who enable that alliance.
Finally, as I mentioned before, I see the FDA as culpable in the deaths of Americans due to this virus, and I have previously mentioned that the CDC had one job, i.e., to prepare for epidemics and infectious disease.
They … had … one … job. They failed. They failed to model, they failed to stay abreast of the facts, they failed to ensure enough PPEs were available in the national stockpile. Additionally, I stumbled upon this comment at another site.
Hospitals were given the green light by the government to get rid of private practice physicians. This occurred during the days leading up to the passage of Obamacare, when hospitals were initially promised they would have monopolies on patients vis a vis Accountable Care Organizations. Hospitals went on a buying spree, paying top dollar for physicians and their practices. Coupled with the expense and headaches of the Electronic Medical Record, and insurance companies and hospitals both developing so called networks, in which physicians were frozen out of contracts as independent practitioners.
Why? Because the government figured out that it is easier to control the 5200 or so hospital CEO’s, who would now be the boss of the formerly independent 750k or more physicians.
This corporate practice of medicine has led to pressure on doctors to adapt protocols and submit to busybody hospital administrators to toe the line, or else find another job. In the worst cases, hospitals start sham peer review proceedings, a weaponized version of quality review and oversight, which can tarnish a doctor for life based on scurrilous and false evidence.
Doctors should not work for hospitals. It is an inherent conflict of interest, unethical, and it is the corporate practice of medicine. The doctor no longer works for the patient, but the hospital CEO, who has a fiduciary duty. This story is a good example. Unfortunately, the AMA is all in on it, and has not represented practicing physicians and patients for years.
You can see that however you wish. But I’ll remind you of the quote attributed to Mussolini: “Fascism should more properly be called corporatism, since it is the merger of state and corporate power.” A market void of righteousness is as much slavery as the state authority without righteousness. You’re merely exchanging one wicked ruler for another.
The Food and Drug Administration helped turn the coronavirus from a deadly peril into a national catastrophe. Long after foreign nations had been ravaged and many cases had been detected in America, the FDA continued blocking private testing. The FDA continued forcing the nation’s most innovative firms to submit to its command-and-control approach notwithstanding the pandemic. South Korean is in a far better situation dealing with coronavirus, because its government did not preemptively cripple private testing.
One of the clearest lessons from the current pandemic is that nothing has changed at one of the nation’s most powerful regulatory agencies. The FDA is repeating the same mistakes and showing the same arrogance that I chronicled decades ago in articles for the Wall Street Journal, the American Spectator, and other publications.
Dr. David Kessler, who became FDA commissioner in 1990, quickly sought to intimidate the companies that his agency regulates. A laudatory Washington Post article concluded, “What he cannot accomplish with ordinary regulation, Kessler hopes to accomplish with fear.” Kenneth Feather of the FDA’s drug advertising surveillance branch boasted: “We want to say to these companies that you don’t know when or how we’ll strike. We want to eliminate predictability.”
Dr. Kessler’s heavy-handed tactics battered the American medical device industry—one of the nation’s export superstars. An American Electronics Association survey found that “40% [of medical device companies] reduced the number of U.S. employees because of FDA delays, 29% increased their investment in foreign operations, and 22% moved U.S. jobs overseas.” The survey also found that “57% of the firms said the FDA had applied guidance instructions retroactively to some of their submissions,” as Biomedical Market Newsletter reported.
The FDA’s stonewalling of new medical devices was sometimes politically motivated. A 1994 report by the Medical Device Manufacturers Association noted, “It is not unusual for [FDA] reviewers to express the position that excessive requests [for additional information] are made because of a concern or fear about how a particular member or members of Congress will react” to the approval of a new device. Sacrificing lives was a small price to pay for bureaucrats to avoid bothersome interrogatories from Capitol Hill.
[ … ]
Dr. Kessler did not spare the First Amendment in his grab for power, and cancer patients and other seriously ill people suffered as a result. Doctors, hospitals, and researchers often discover after FDA approval that a drug to treat one disease is also effective at treating other diseases. Drug companies have routinely publicized this news, alerting physicians to other possible ways to save lives. American Medical Association vice president Roy Schwarz estimated that “off-label” uses of drugs account for up to 60 percent of all drugs prescribed.
But in 1991 Dr. Kessler prohibited pharmaceutical companies from informing doctors of new uses for approved drugs. He announced that the FDA would enforce the ban with seizures, injunctions, and prosecutions. Though the agency never finalized its proposed regulations, it warned companies that they would face its wrath if they violated the draft proposals. Dr. Kessler, in a speech before the Drug Information Association, said: “I would urge all members of the pharmaceutical industry to take a long and hard look at their promotional practices. I do not expect companies to wait until this guidance becomes final to put their advertising and promotional houses in order.” The question of off-label treatments is becoming a key issue again as doctors search for effective treatments for the COVID-19 coronavirus.
And thus because of a bureaucrat-laden impediment to medical science, the response to Covid-19 has been slow, cumbersome, lumbering, and deadly.
An example of this might be found in a recent article on another treatment for the virus. Before we get to that, I recalled a few days ago before seeing this next article that a doctor friend of mine who volunteered in Haiti, found that he had nothing to treat the children who had scabies. He had to let them suffer because he was sent without medications for that. If he had been sent with it, he could have used Ivermectin to treat Scabies in humans.
I also recalled that I had treated my dog, Heidi, with Ivermectin once for a parasite, and was warned by the Vet that it was “off-label.” In this case, off-label meant that it was for livestock, not dogs, but that it has worked for dogs for such a long time that Vets had no problem prescribing it.
As I live and breath, I actually had a fleeting thought and wondered a few days ago whether Ivermectin might be effective at treating Coronavirus. I figured, “You’re not a medical doctor, never even bring this up because people will think you’ve fallen off your rocker.”
An anti-parasitic drug available throughout the world has been found to kill COVID-19 in the lab within 48 hours.
A Monash University-led study has shown a single dose of the drug Ivermectin could stop the SARS-CoV-2 virus growing in cell culture.
“We found that even a single dose could essentially remove all viral RNA (effectively removed all genetic material of the virus) by 48 hours and that even at 24 hours there was a really significant reduction in it,” Monash Biomedicine Discovery Institute’s Dr Kylie Wagstaff said on Friday.
While it’s not known how Ivermectin works on the virus, the drug likely stops the virus dampening the host cells’ ability to clear it.
The next step is for scientists to determine the correct human dosage, to make sure the level used in vitro is safe for humans.
“In times when we’re having a global pandemic and there isn’t an approved treatment, if we had a compound that was already available around the world then that might help people sooner,” Dr Wagstaff said.
“Realistically it’s going to be a while before a vaccine is broadly available.”
Before Ivermectin can be used to combat coronavirus, funding is needed to get it to pre-clinical testing and clinical trials.
Ivermectin is an FDA-approved anti-parasitic drug also shown to be effective in vitro against viruses including HIV, dengue and influenza.
But if we’re waiting for FDA approval, we could be waiting for a very long time. The bureaucrats get their say.
For 13 years Timothy Treadwell spent his summers camping out in Alaska with wild bears.
A former heroin addict, the 46-year-old found solace with the grizzlies – who he spoke to, played with and even touched. He gave each one a name and classed them as his friends.
But his luck ran out one stormy October evening when, just hours from when he was due to be picked up by seaplane to return home for winter, he was mauled to death in front of girlfriend Amie Huguenard, 37, before the bear turned on her.
Air taxi pilot Willy Fulton immediately knew what had happened when he landed at Katmai National Park to collect the duo just 24 hours after last speaking to Timothy.
Instead of finding the pair waiting on the shore, there was an eerie silence and the ‘meanest looking bear sitting atop of a pile of human remains, feeding from a human ribcage.
Tim and Aime’s tents were found collapsed and torn with their evening snack lying opened and untouched. Their shoes were lay neatly by the door.
Outside one tent lay a 3ft-high mound of grass, mud, twigs and remains, with ranger Joe Ellis spotting fingers and an arm protruding from the grotesque pile.
Nearby they found what was left of Tim’s mauled head connected to a small piece of spine. His right arm was also found, his wrist watch still attached.
But it was the video camera in Tim’s tent that would provide the full terrifying picture of what really happened.
Tim recorded all his bear interactions and the ferocious attack was no exception. But in their panic, either he or Amie didn’t have time to remove the lens, resulting in six long minutes of blood-curdling audio.
It starts with a frightened Amie asking if the bear is still out there before Tim screams: “Get out here! I’m getting killed out here!”
The tent zipper is heard going as Amie rushes out into the storm and shouts for her boyfriend to ‘play dead’. Her screams and shouts appear to work and the bear lets Tim out of its grip, but as soon as she heads to help it returns, apparently clamping its jaws around his head once more and pulling him towards the undergrowth.
Frantic, Tim screams for Amy to ‘hit the bear’ and she is heard telling him to ‘fight back’ before attacking it with a frying pan.
Throughout the bear is sinisterly silent, with Tim’s shouts giving way to moans before Amy panics and lets out a series of spine-chilling screams.
There the tape runs out.
When the bear was shot, investigators recovered four bin bags full of human remains from the stomach of the 1,000 pound 28-year-old male, who is said to have struggled to feed that season due to his age and broken teeth.
The October 2003 attack was the subject of award-winning documentary The Grizzly Man by Werner Herzog, which revealed how Amie was terrified of the bears and thought her boyfriend was ‘hellbent on destruction’.
She’d told Tim the trip would be her last and had a new job waiting for her back in California.
As for the tape, he warned that people should ‘never listen to this’ and it is believed to have been placed under lock and key with one of his friends.
That’s okay. I don’t want to see it.
I actually don’t have a problem with his being so arrogant about things. I also don’t have a problem with his having put himself in danger – lots of people do that for various and sundry reasons. I also don’t have a problem with his love for the beasts.
What I have a problem with is his having put himself in a position of danger without means of self defense, and especially that he put someone else’s life in danger without that same thing.
Don’t do that with any beast, whether two-legged or four-legged, whether inner city or the bush.
What on earth is wrong with the folks in West Virginia? They can make appearances of being a 2A sanctuary all they want. When they allow tyrants to run amok, they show themselves to be liars.
Oh, and by the way, when this wayward judge declared that she would come in the man’s home without a warrant or else she would have him arrested, notice that the cop said nothing.
Nothing. He would have followed the unconstitutional orders.
Why anyone would want to penetrate cinder blocks with small bore ammunition I don’t know, but for no other reason than interest, here it is.
I’ve always thought that 22LR was a little underpowered for a varmint round. I’m not sure I’d keep the 5.7X28 by my bed either. I prefer PD ammunition because of things like walls, people, and neighbors.
He seems to think it’s okay, whereas for me, being unable to shoot anything I want to put in it is a deal-breaker for me.
He also seems to like Colt, whereas I prefer my Dan Wesson and Smith & Wesson 1911s. I’ve never had a single malfunction with either of them, and neither has had a hiccup of any sort regardless of what ammunition I feed it (including and up to 450 SMC).
I don’t do FTF/FTE drills with my 1911s because I’ve never had a failure in many thousands of rounds. But as always, I learn something from Paul (watch his demonstration of the safety feature on the Colt that isn’t there with the RIA, another deal-breaker for me).
“I was just standing up for the Constitution, and I did it in a professional manner that did not delay the bill,” Massie told Fox News. “This is the biggest transfer of wealth in human history.”
“The Constitution requires that a quorum of members be present to conduct business in the House,” he elaborated on Twitter. “Right now, millions of essential, working-class Americans are still required to go to work during this pandemic such as manufacturing line workers, healthcare professionals, pilots, grocery clerks, cooks/chefs, delivery drivers, auto mechanics, and janitors (to name just a few). Is it too much to ask that the House do its job, just like the Senate did?”
“Massie has now become the most hated person on Capitol Hill,” New York Rep. Peter King …
Oh, I think I could name a lot of people who are much more hated than Massie. Like maybe Peter King, gun controller.
Look, a quick Google search will find that I have been a defender of Thomas Massie, and I will continue to be so regardless of what orange man says.
My wife heard that the congress voted without a quorum, and looked at me and rolled her eyes. She’s not one to overreact, but this one galled her. They can’t even follow the rules, things you learn to do as children when you’re playing dodge ball (or for me in my gym class, “murder ball”).
Men who can’t follow the rules can’t be trusted with anything.
