Master of Truth. A writer who has captured the imagination of many.
Views: 32
Since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic two years ago, hundreds of studies have examined the efficacy of dozens of drugs and other compounds in treating the disease. While the research is still ongoing, a sizable number of treatments have shown promise. A growing number of them have been authorized by the U.S. government, though virtually all of those approved sport hefty price tags.
176
Views: 6
First Biden removed the tariffs from the Europe Union, now he’s removing them from Japan. I normally don’t support tariffs, but our allies were dumping their products like Steel and Aluminum below cost. Who was crying the most? California steel companies wanted to buy that cheap steel Would rather import from Japan and other companies instead of buying from American companies.
We have this from NTD News.
The United States reached an agreement with Japan on Monday to lift the 25 percent tariff imposed on Japanese steel products by Trump during his presidency, according to U.S. Trade Representative and Department of Commerce officials.
The agreement will allow up to 1.25 million tons of Japanese steel imports per year into the U.S. market without being subject to Section 232 tariffs, starting April 1. U.S. steel industry executives had voiced concern that the Biden administration would negotiate too much access for foreign steelmakers, which might result in a flood of imports as they invest billions of dollars in new capacity.
And the giant sucking sound of jobs leaving will continue.
159
Views: 17
Well we have another loon from the left who puts out a statement of hate speech or Antisemitism, and guess what? They apologize, Did I say that? Did my comments offend you? For those who disagree with my hate, I apologize.
While discussing a Tennessee school district’s recent ban of the Pulitzer Prize-winning graphic novel “Maus,” about a Holocaust survivor, Goldberg argued that the genocide was broader than a race-based injustice.
“The Holocaust isn’t about race. No, it’s not about race,” Goldberg, 66, said repeatedly. “It’s about man’s inhumanity to man.”
232
Views: 30
Greetings all. As you know, I’m no longer writing regularly on any of my three disqus channels. Phoenix is now running www.newswithanalysis.com . Still working on finding an owner for this channel and Koda. But what I did want you to know was that I’ve been writing on a substack website. What is substack?
Substack users range from journalists, to experts, to large media sites. Among the high-profile writers to have used the platform are Pulitzer-Prize-winning journalist and author Glenn Greenwald, culture critic Anne Helen Petersen, music essayist Robert Christgau, and food writer Alison Roman.[14] The New York Times columnist Mike Isaac argued in 2019 that some of these companies see newsletters as a more stable means to maintain readers through a more direct connection with writers.
In 2020, The New Republic said there was an absence of local news newsletters, especially in contrast to the large number of national-level political newsletters. As of late 2020, large numbers of journalists and reporters were coming to the platform, driven in part by the long-term decline in traditional media (there were half as many newsroom jobs in 2019 as in 2004). Around that time, The New Yorker said that while “Substack has advertised itself as a friendly home for journalism, […] few of its newsletters publish original reporting; the majority offer personal writing, opinion pieces, research, and analysis.”
It described Substack’s content moderation policy as “lightweight,” with rules against “harassment, threats, spam, pornography, and calls for violence; moderation decisions are made by the founders.”
In 2019, Substack added support for podcasts and discussion threads among newsletter subscribers.[17][18]Major writers on Substack include historian Heather Cox Richardson, journalists Matt Taibbi and Bari Weiss,[19] authors Daniel M. Lavery, George Saunders, and Chuck Palahniuk,[20] novelist Salman Rushdie,[21] tech journalist Casey Newton,[22]and economist Emily Oster.
At this time I’m just writing political articles. You can comment, but you need to give your e-mail to them. Just like disqus.
https://joshmahony.substack.com
270
Views: 32
This is a reprint from Newsweek.
By
Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene used MLK Day to claim there is a “new segregation” for people who are unvaccinated against the coronavirus. Politicians across the United States honored the work of Martin Luther King Jr. on Monday. But Greene, a Georgia Republican, appeared to equate the segregation faced by Black Americans to vaccine requirements in a Gettr post.
“Thanks to the hard work of Rev MLK Jr. and others, growing up in Georgia, I’ve seen the beautiful fruit that blossomed from the Civil Rights Era, where segregation ended & equality began,” she wrote. “Today, I believe we are seeing a new segregation and discrimination beginning, wrongfully forced upon unvaccinated Americans by the tyrants of the Democrat Party.” She added: “Our freedoms come from our Almighty God, and we must not let any man take them away.”
Some cities across the United States have implemented vaccine requirements to enter some public places, including restaurants and gyms, in an attempt to convince people to take the vaccine, which has proven to prevent serious illness from the virus. The Biden administration also implemented a vaccine mandate for healthcare workers. But the Supreme Court last week blocked a further-reaching federal requirement for large companies to mandate vaccines.
248
Views: 30
In contrast to previous oversight hearings on the administration’s Covid-19 response, Dems raised sharp questions and complaints on the state of the resurging pandemic.
Senators on Tuesday demanded clear answers from the Biden administration health officials on the state of the resurging pandemic and the government’s short- and long-term plans for combating it. They mostly got jargon.
In contrast to previous oversight hearings on the Biden administration’s Covid-19 response, Democrats on the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee raised sharp questions and complaints about widespread “confusion and frustration” around who should isolate and for how long after a Covid exposure or diagnosis, or where and when to get tested.
“We want the Biden team to take advantage of the opportunity to speak directly to those frustrations and anxieties,” a senior Democratic aide told POLITICO heading into the hearing.
The answers may not assuage their fears. Here’s what was said, and the takeaways:
The question: What is current CDC guidance on quarantine and isolation?
What they said: Centers for Disease Control Director Rochelle Walensky spent several minutes walking lawmakers through her agency’s recently-amended guidelines for Covid infections, which critics have called confusing and contradictory,
“If they are exposed and completely boosted, they do not need to stay home, but they should get a test at day five,” Walensky said. “So by five days after your symptoms — if you’re feeling better, if your fever is better, if your cough and sore throat are better, then on day six you can go out, but you have to wear a mask and you have to wear a mask reliably.”
When HELP Committee Chair Patty Murray (D-Wash.) interrupted to ask for more clarity on what to do between days five and 10, Walensky replied: “You shouldn’t go visit grandma. You shouldn’t get on an airplane.”
Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) later told the officials that many Americans — himself included — don’t even understand what it means to be “exposed.” Biden Chief Medical Adviser Anthony Fauci explained it means 15 or more minutes in close contact with someone known to be infected.
The takeaway: Confusion still reigns. People five days into a Covid infection shouldn’t “go visit grandma,” but if they’re a health care worker, they are cleared to treat grandmas in a hospital. The lack of a testing component to reenter society also reflects the administration’s current scramble to address a severe shortage of reliable tests, leaving the CDC asking individuals to make decisions based on a subjective evaluation of their own symptoms.
The question: How did CDC arrive at those guidelines? Was it a public health or an economic decision?
What they said: Walensky acknowledged that the CDC changed its quarantine and isolation guidance based both on new research about when Covid-positive people are most infectious as well as “the real-world circumstances we currently face” with a decimated workforce.
In particular, she said she has heard from hospitals around the country that “they had plenty of beds, but they didn’t have staff to staff them” and that preventing closures of schools and pharmacies were other top priorities.
The takeaway: Walensky is arguing that even the economic imperative to get more people back to work faster has a health component. If hospitals don’t have enough workers, for example, they could be forced to turn patients away or delay elective procedures.
Yet the acknowledgment that the guidance change wasn’t based purely on science leaves a perception that the government is willing to put workers’ health behind economic interests.
The question: Why are there still test shortages? When will they be resolved?
What they said: Assistant Health Secretary Dawn O’Connell testified that when the Omicron varient began sweeping across South Africa and Europe in the fall and early winter, the Biden administration “immediately reached out to our manufacturers to understand any supply constraints they had and to evaluate their surge capacity.”
Beyond daily follow-up meetings, she said the administration has used the Defense Production Act a dozen times to help free up testing supplies, expand manufacturing capacity and make sure the U.S. gets first priority. And she said it’s working to fulfill Biden’s recent promise to provide free rapid at-home tests to those that want them, but added the $3 billion invested in the work so far is “not enough.” Just 10 percent of the 500 million promised tests have been purchased so far.
The takeaway: They’re on the case.
The administration is dealing with supply chain hiccups and a testing workforce that is itself sidelined by Covid and other challenges. But lawmakers faulted the administration Tuesday for failing to prepare for the current surge months ago, when demand for testing was lower.
And while the health officials stressed Tuesday that keeping schools open is a priority this winter, the testing shortage has left schools scrambling to obtain enough to track infections and decide who goes to the classroom and who stays home.
The question: Why is CDC data on vaccination rates still spotty and inaccurate? When will the agency get it right?
What they said: Sen. Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.) pressed Walensky on why the CDC can’t distinguish between booster shots and first vaccine doses, which has led to incorrect data on vaccination rates in her state and elsewhere.
Walensky responded that “CDC is the compiler of the data and we rely on state immunization services to provide CDC the data at the state level.” She added that when people don’t bring their vaccine card to their booster shot appointment, the shot is marked down as their first dose instead of their third.
Walensky couldn’t say when the issue will be resolved, but she noted the agency is working with every state to “reconcile” data gaps.
The takeaway: CDC says the blame really rests with states and Americans who don’t accurately keep records.
Yet vaccination rates are far from the only area where the federal government has struggled to pull together and make available accurate data on the state of the pandemic. As Walensky noted, data trickles up from underfunded state and local health departments — many of which still operate on manual data entry, fax machines and other outdated technologies.
The problem extends beyond vaccination rates to challenges tracking new variants, collecting information on racial disparities in Covid-19 infections and more — forcing the government to turn to international data to make domestic policy decisions as the pandemic drags on.
The question: Why does the CDC find it “really encouraging” that people with underlying health conditions are dying of Covid?
What they said: Sen. Bob Casey (D-Pa.) expressed concern about remarks Walensky made on Good Morning America on Friday that the CDC found it “really encouraging” that the majority of deaths from people infected with Omicron are happening to people with other medical conditions.
Walensky said the comment was “taken out of context” and that she was referencing a recent study that demonstrated the currently available vaccines are doing a great job protecting most people from Omicron.
“The study was a cohort of 1.2 million people who were vaccinated, and 36 people passed — demonstrating the remarkable effectiveness of our vaccines. But no less tragic are those 36 people who passed because of Covid-19, and many of them had comorbidities.”
She added that the agency is taking additional steps to help people with disabilities.
The takeaway: Walensky still has a messaging problem. While vaccines are holding strong against the new variants and preventing millions of hospitalizations and deaths, people with disabilities, parents of children too young to be vaccinated and other vulnerable groups still feel that the government is not doing enough, or taking their needs into account when crafting policy and guidance.
288
Views: 27
The fauch and I have one thing in common. We both haven’t practiced medicine for decades ( Actually I never have ). I admit it. He does not. He’s been a administrator since 1984. Famous for the finger in the air to see which way the political wind’s blowing.
What’s being ignored by the fauch and his loyalists is that Omicron so far isn’t the deadly one. Testing healthy people makes no sense. Why not test folks to every disease and virus known to man?
Now as we look into the future, ( 2022 ) what other nonsense will he hit us with? Spoke with my family doctor on anti bodies and T cells. Both for me are way up there I have what’s called CD8+ T cells. They directly kill infected cells. His medical opinion is that the Johnson booster will put me through the roof. He feels that since I started with Johnson, stay with it since my counts are so high. Will test again in March. And yes it’s still free. Thanks Medicare Advantage.
275
Views: 111
This channel is also looking for someone to take over. A pure political channel that’s never done Religion, but if someone wants to do add Religious topics, be my guest. We have always welcomed the left and the right here. If someone wishes to continue that, fine. If not, again that’s up to you. Being that this channel uses disqus, You will need to stay within their guidelines.
Here’s the homepage.
Also if you wish to contact me by e-mail.
ledbed12345@gmail.com
298
Views: 27
The Public Interest Legal Foundation went to Pennsylvania with a list of tens of thousands of people who were likely dead, but still on the state’s voter rolls in the weeks before the 2020 election.
The state was totally uninterested, according to Christian Adams, the organization’s founder. But once the election was over, Mr. Adams says, the state changed its tune.
It went into mediation with PILF, agreed to look into the list and even agreed to a settlement paying some of the group’s lawyers’ fees. The kicker, though, was that Pennsylvania prosecutors even brought charges against a man who, according to PILF’s data, had registered his dead wife to vote, then requested her ballot in the 2020 election. “All of the sudden they’re happy to settle and to clean up their rolls,” Mr. Adams told The Washington Times.
He said it’s not a fluke. The aftermath of the 2020 elections has opened new opportunities for election-integrity advocates, who say they’re seeing signs of better cooperation from at least some jurisdictions.
Last year’s contest exposed what those involved in voter administration have known for years — national elections are not an exact science, but rather an approximation of the will of voters in the weeks surrounding early November. How close an approximation is still heatedly debated.
But it’s become clear to many that dirty voter rolls, lost or miscounted votes and mishandled ballots are more common than one might have imagined.The difference in 2020 is that one of the candidates, then-President Trump, argued those usual flaws, combined with more preposterous speculation about machines switching votes and dumping ballots, “stole” the White House.
While the outlandish claims still have traction among some Trump supporters, the more complicated work of cleaning up the very real problems with dead people, noncitizens and other bogus voters remains.
Mr. Adams said his experience with Pennsylvania shows that in some states, the new attention from 2020 has helped.
“A virtual army has arisen of the grassroots, who are not worried about magic voting machines, and recognize the real work of election administration. These people are pressuring states to follow the law and remove dead voters,” Mr. Adams said. But not every state is more receptive in the wake of 2020.
PILF last month sued Michigan over nearly 26,000 deceased voters whom the group says Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson won’t remove. And earlier this month PILF sued Colorado just to get a look at the state’s records on removing ineligible voters. Those on the other side of the voter wars also are fighting back.
The League of Women Voters sued Wisconsin last week to try to force the state to “reactivate” nearly 32,000 voters who were purged from the rolls “without warning.”
The pool of registered voters has become a battleground as states move to make it easier to vote by mail. Voting-rights activists say striking names means legitimate but infrequent voters will have a tougher time casting ballots.
Election integrity experts say the more bad names on a list, the more chances there are for fraud. A ballot mailed out to a deceased voter is one that can be filled out and mailed back by someone else. It’s illegal, but unless someone is out there actively looking for it, it’s tough to spot.
Mr. Adams said he’s noticed an even more worrying trend — dead voters actually registering, then voting. That was the case for Judy C. Presto, who died in 2013. Mr. Adams has a photo of her grave. Yet she still managed to file a registration request in August 2020, and cast a ballot in October. Prosecutors say her husband voted in her name by mail.
PILF says it found 114 people in Pennsylvania who appear to have registered to vote after their deaths were recorded.
Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, another group that polices voter rolls, said the key moment for election integrity came a few years back, when the Supreme Court reaffirmed the requirement in federal law that states do have to take steps to clean up their lists. That gives activists a hefty stick, but plenty of states are still resistant. “Our perception is that states that are not cleaning up the rolls won’t clean up the rolls until they’re called on it,” he said. There are some dangers to conservatives in the new focus on election integrity.
Analysts plausibly argue that Mr. Trump’s questioning of Georgia’s handling of elections helped convince thousands of GOP voters to stay home in that state’s Senate runoff elections earlier this year, costing Republicans two seats — and control of the Senate.
Still to be seen is whether Mr. Trump’s relitigation of the 2020 election will keep GOP voters at home in 2022. But the former president has also helped a broader set of conservatives realize what’s at stake in the administration of elections.
“Conservative activists have realized they have to have a seat at the table,” Mr. Fitton said. “Typically the administration of elections has been ceded to the left, and partisans. And so conservatives are trying to get involved.”
267
Views: 31
Article taken from The Western Journal.
“Based on watching the full clip and reading the entire transcript, it’s more than clear that Jesse Watters was using a metaphor for asking hard-hitting questions to Dr. Fauci about gain-of-function research and his words have been twisted completely out of context,” a Fox representative said, according to CNN.
The controversy arose from a speech Watters gave at Turning Point USA’s “AmericaFest” conference, where Watters criticized Fauci for his handling of the pandemic.
He said Fauci should be questioned for his decisions and then went on to describe how an ordinary citizen could create a viral moment by confronting Fauci in public and getting it on video. In his description, Watters used the metaphor of “ambushing” Fauci in the style of an aggressive journalist.
“Now you go in for the kill shot. The kill shot with an ambush — deadly, because he doesn’t see it coming … Boom, he is dead! He is dead!” Watters said.
Many responded to Watter’s language claiming it was inflammatory and encouraged harassment of Fauci.
CNN host John Berman asked Fauci how he felt about the comments on Tuesday.
“Jesse Waters, who is a Fox News entertainer, was giving a speech to a conservative group where he talked about you, and suggested to the crowd that they ambush you with what he said was some kind of rhetorical kill shot. That was his exact word,” Berman said, as Mediaite reported.
“I’m wondering, you know, how much that concerns you when you hear language like that about you and your well-being?”
Fauci didn’t hold back.
“That’s awful that he said that. And he’s going to go very likely unaccountable. I mean, whatever network he’s on is not going to do anything for him. I mean, that’s crazy. The guy should be fired on the spot!” Fauci said.
This is not the first time that Fauci has spoken out against Fox News. In light of criticism he has received for his role in the pandemic, he has commented that Fox should discipline their hosts.
He wanted Watters fired, and he wanted Lara Logan disciplined several weeks ago after she compared Fauci to the Nazi doctor Josef Mengele, who performed barbarous medical experiments at the Auschwitz concentration camp.
“What I find striking, Chris, is how she gets no discipline whatsoever from the Fox network,” Fauci told MSNBC host Chris Hayes, according to CNN. “How they can let her say that with no comment and no disciplinary action. I’m astounded by that.”
Fauci has become more and more the subject of harsh criticism from conservatives over his performance during the pandemic. This criticism also follows on the heels of a general growing mistrust of Fauci and the CDC that was beginning before Trump even left office.
StatNews reported in September 2020 that a poll at the time found “the public’s trust in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the U.S.’s top doctors, like Anthony Fauci, is rapidly dropping, particularly among Republicans.”
This year, as amid continued government overreaching and doubts about the Biden administration’s competence in handling of the coronavirus, public trust in Fauci is questionable, despite his celebrity status in the mainstream media.
An I&I/TIPP poll released Monday found trust in Fauci is apparently lacking among a majority of Americans.
The poll of 1,301 Americans conducted Dec. 1-4 found fewer than half of Americans surveyed had had “a lot” or “quite a bit” of trust in Fauci, according to Issues&Insights. Forty-one percent had “little trust” or “no trust at all. Thirteen percent had no opinion.
The results broke down along party lines, with 45 percent of Democrats saying they had “a lot” of trust in Fauci, and 27 percent saying they had “quite a bit.”
Among Republicans, 28 percent said they had little faith in Fauci, according to the poll, and 40 percent saying they had none at all.
This from the Western Journal. We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.
193
