Category: Deceit O’ The Day

Global Warming? Northern Hemisphere Snow Cover At 56-Year High

The COP27 climate change conference wrapped up last month. World leaders flew in private jets to Egypt to discuss how fossil fuels were quickly heating the planet to the point of no return, as humanity was doomed if crucial climate change policies weren’t implemented. But while the climate alarmist leaders met in the desert, November’s snowfall across the Northern Hemisphere was running at rates exceeding a half-a-century average. NOAA and Rutgers University released new data that showed snow cover across the Northern Hemisphere reached the highest level since measurements began in 1967 and are currently above the 56-year mean.

Here’s the Rutgers Global Snow Lab snow coverage map across the Northern Hemisphere.

And another from NOAA with more resolution.

“Extensive snow extent early in the season is an indicator of persistent cold as we head into winter proper,” weather blog Severe Weather Europe said.

Most mainstream media outlets overlooked this data because it is an inconvenient truth for the climate change narrative they’re pushing.

A severe winter for the Northern Hemisphere might complicate power grids for western countries that are hellbent on disrupting energy flows by sanctioning Russia, forcing the world into the worst energy crisis in a generation. Since the US and Europe’s natural gas storage facilities have flipped into withdrawal season, the clock starts as storage levels could quickly wind down if temperatures stay below average, which would continue to boost energy prices.

Twitter and the FBI on a Collision Course After Sworn Document Shows Conflicting Narratives

The pipeline of revelations surrounding Twitter’s censorship of the Hunter Biden story keeps pumping out new material.

As RedState has reported extensively (click here and here for a taste of what’s transpired), Elon Musk delivered on a promise to release a trove of documents related to the decision to censor the Hunter Biden laptop story just prior to the 2020 election. Revelations include the fact that the Biden campaign had a direct through-line to get content removed, as well as the fact that Twitter lied about the “hacked material” excuse that was used to justify their actions.

But as I’ve written on before, Twitter is just one piece of the puzzle, and in some ways, the company was more a willing lackey than a mastermind of the plot. That distinction goes to the FBI, which was having weekly meetings with Twitter’s leadership to discuss what content to remove from the site. Further, it was the FBI that first planted the idea that the Hunter Biden laptop was a Russian hacking operation meant to spread “disinformation.”

How do we know that? Because of this unearthed FEC disclosure signed by none other than Yoel Roth, who recently left as Twitter’s head of “Trust and Safety.”

According to the old Twitter regime, they were simply responding to what the FBI told them, which was that the laptop had been hacked and leaked as a way to spread disinformation about Joe Biden. Meanwhile, the FBI has claimed in the past that they never gave such detailed descriptions to any social media company, but rather relied on general threat warnings of possible foreign interference. Yet, Roth says they specifically mentioned Hunter Biden, which would leave the laptop story unambiguously the subject at hand.

So who’s lying here? The safest bet is to assume both entities are lying. Clearly, given the document dump that happened on Friday evening, Twitter was far more involved in censoring the story than just listening to the advice of the FBI. Democrat elected officials were colluding with the company to decide what should be taken down.

On the other hand, the FBI obviously lied when it told Twitter (and other social media companies) that the Hunter Biden laptop story was a “hack and leak operation.” There was never any evidence that the laptop was hacked, and the FBI had been in possession of it for over a year at that point. Further, they gained possession of it from the computer repair store where the laptop was left. That means the FBI knew its provenance the moment The New York Post broke the story, but agents (no doubt backed by leadership) chose to falsely claim it was a foreign hacking operation anyway.

In the end, Twitter and the FBI did what they thought they needed to do to ensure Donald Trump wouldn’t be re-elected. There are no good guys or innocent bystanders here. The FBI lied, but Twitter wanted to believe what it was being told, and it pushed well past the boundaries of its stated TOS to ban the Post and block the Hunter Biden laptop story.

CDC Withheld Data on Fatal Reaction to COVID Vaccine From Post-Vax Surveys for Nearly Two Years

Anyone shocked by the report that the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) withheld data about a potentially fatal complication from COVID-19 vaccinations until it was forced under court order to release the data hasn’t been paying attention to the CDC’s multitude of misstatements and lies over the last two years.

As reported by Just the News, data released under court order shows 1 in 3 among the earliest populations to get vaccinated reported needing medical care, missed school or work, or was unable to “perform normal daily activities,” while the CDC continued to fight to keep the data from the public.

Here’s more, via Just the News: 

Among the 10 million-plus users of the agency’s v-safe active monitoring smartphone app through July — 8.5 million of whom signed up between December 2020 and April 2021, before all adults were eligible for COVID vaccines — nearly 8% said they required medical care after receiving the vaccines.

For patients ages 3 and older needing such care, nearly 3 in 4 couldn’t rely on telehealth visits. They required urgent care (48%), emergency room (15%), or hospitalization (10%).

For infants who were authorized to receive the jabs this summer and are enrolled in v-safe through parents or guardians, hospitalizations were much lower (2%) but urgent care [was] much higher (66%).

The v-safe active monitoring smartphone app allows users to quickly share post-vax experiences with the CDC. V-safe uses text messaging and web surveys to provide personalized health check-ins after users receive a COVID “vaccine.” (COVID-19 “vaccine” is no more a vaccine than is a flu shot.)

The v-safe app proved to be an early hit, with more than 10 million symptom reports filed each month from January through April 2021, dropping to 5 million in May and hovering around 1 million for the next few months. The reports jumped above 2 million again in October following Biden’s (unconstitutional) vaccine mandates for roughly 100 million workers, and dropped dramatically to the low- to mid-hundred thousands from January through July 2022.

Why? Because an overwhelming majority of Americans are over the COVID scare, perpetuated by Biden and the Democrat Party, and the left-wing media sock puppets. Simply, tens of millions of Americans grew weary of Joe “Winter of severe illness and death” Biden’s COVID fearmongering, and have kicked the virus to the curb.

Here’s more, courtesy of JTN: 

The v-safe data obtained thus far are posted by the Informed Consent Action Network as both interactive graphs and several gigabytes of files. It got them through ongoing Freedom of Information Act litigation against the CDC.

Those are just the data the CDC affirmatively sought through checkboxes on v-safe surveys, which are sent to users daily for the first week after each dose, then weekly for 6 weeks and 3, 6, and 12 months after the final dose.

As JTN noted, it took a year and a half to get “five excel files which likely took the CDC minutes to download and produce,” as ICAN said in its portion of the Nov. 4 joint status report filed with the court.

And here’s the tragedy: Chest pain and other cardiac symptoms that could indicate myocarditis and pericarditis — now known to be more common post-vaccination in people under 40, according to JTN — are completely missing from the survey checkboxes, without which, input data are harder to standardize.

So what’s the problem?

V-safe users would have to take the time to write in cardiac symptoms on the survey form’s “other” field, limited to 250 characters, for them to be counted. Moreover, ICAN is still trying to compel the CDC to turn over its relative “free-text field data,” its lawyer Aaron Siri told Just the News.

The fact the app didn’t prompt users to consider life-threatening complications it had already identified in an early v-safe protocol is “one of the best and most compelling pieces of evidence supporting premeditated [wrongful] conduct,” Siri wrote in the second of what he told Just the News would be at least a 12-part series of posts on the disclosures.

How did the CDC respond?

The CDC said in a court filing it would be “premature and inefficient” for the court “to address the legality of CDC’s withholdings in piecemeal fashion,” as ICAN wants, maintaining that “the records at issue here are not reasonably “segregable,” an argument ICAN called “frivolous.”

The Bottom Line

Maybe it’s just me, but the CDC’s strong resistance to turning over critical, potentially life-saving data is not dissimilar to the Democrat Party’s continuing meltdown over Elon Musk’s restoration of free speech on Twitter. Think about it.

As I’ve previously written, multiple times, the greatest fear of — and threat to — the left is free speech, and in this example, the release of any data or information that runs counter to the Democrats’ continuing efforts to censor “misinformation” that directly contradicts their narrative — including the left’s politicization of the so-called “pandemic.”

‘Roadmap’ Latest ‘Commonsense’ Ploy to Advance Citizen Disarmament

U.S.A. – -(Ammoland.com)-  The 97percent “gun safety” organization purports to have a plan to reduce “gun violence” that can bring people on both sides of the issue together. In Part One, AmmoLand looked at a so-called “Policy Roadmap” put out by the group and examined its three “core principles.” In Part Two we examined the four policies we’re told promise to dramatically reduce gun-related homicides and suicides.

Of course, it will do none of that, but instead is just a “new” tactic to recycle to make old citizen disarmament ideas palatable to a critical mass of low-information Americans amenable to being manipulated by well-funded “gun safety” snake oil salesmen.

What makes 97percent’s “roadmap” all the more insidious is that the organization is (at times) successfully employing a “divide and conquer” strategy by claiming to represent both “responsible” gun owners (as if opponents are irresponsible) as well as “bipartisan” (that is, RINO) interests. We’re essentially talking Fudds and Democrat gun owners, who place faith in centralized government disarmament diktats and hostility to “deplorables” above uninfringed freedom for their countrymen. Out of such, we get groups like Giffords’ calculatedly-named Gun Owners for Safety, and “Republicans” like Joe Walsh, who capitalized on his supposed “pro-gun” bona fides to advance his political career and then “proved” them by “commending” David Hogg and endorsing Joe Biden.

Continue reading “”

No. Next question

Will the Left Ever Learn to Wait Before Blaming the Right for a Mass Shooting?

It’s our thirst to understand “why” someone would carry out such a horrific act that drives our curiosity and animates our search for a political villain in these mass shootings.

Answers are always few and very unsatisfying. Trying to ascribe rational, logical thought processes to someone who is mentally ill is an exercise in futility. It doesn’t matter if he leaves a right-wing manifesto railing against blacks and Jews or swears allegiance to Antifa and claims to want to stamp out “fascism.” “Politics” — a shooter’s limited understanding of it — isn’t a catalyst as much as it is a touchstone to a reality of which he or she is only vaguely aware.

The most recent incident led to a familiar pattern. A man walked into a gay club where a drag queen show was underway. Before he was stopped, five people were killed and 18 were wounded. Given the gunman’s “target,” it was “naturally” assumed that the perpetrator was a right-wing fanatic who was driven to this mass slaughter by conservative politicians and online hate sites (like PJ Media).

A National Review editorial sums up the arguments on the left.

According to the burgeoning conventional wisdom, therefore, the true culprits for the Club Q shooting include Libs of Tik Tok, Tucker Carlson, Elon Musk’s Twitter content-moderation policies, the “right wing moral panic” about drag queen story hours, and — of course — the entire Republican Party.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez attributed the shooting to the Right’s “anti-LGBT+ campaign,” writing: “Connect the dots, @GOP.” Equality Florida press secretary Brandon Wolf told MSNBC that “right wing grifters, including politicians like Ron DeSantis and Greg Abbott, they’ve been spewing this vile, hateful rhetoric about LGBTQ people . . . and we warned them that inevitably this would result in violence.”

In the New York Times, columnist Michelle Goldberg argued that the shooting “seems hard to separate” from the Right’s “nationwide campaign of anti-L.G.B.T.Q. incitement.” “Each time these things happen, the right-wing go-to is to blame ‘mental illness,’” Brian Broome wrote in the Washington Post. But “it’s right-wing rhetoric that sparks these nightmares.”

The Southern Poverty Law Center — always looking to fundraise off of a tragedy — weighed in.

The mass shooting at Club Q in Colorado Springs, which saw a 22-year-old man charged with hate crimes and murder on Monday, came after years of intensifying anti-LGBTQ rhetoric, acts of violence and intimidation, and discriminatory legislation from far-right individuals and groups, including powerful Republican politicians.

Anderson Lee Aldrich was not influenced by right-wing “hate speech.” He was not “anti-LGBTQ” because he was, in fact, a “non-binary” person who preferred being addressed with the pronouns “they/them.” He had been hospitalized several times for mental disorders. But, apparently, Aldrich was influenced and motivated to kill fellow LGBTQ people by right-wing loudmouths?

“Words matter,” Whoopi Goldberg said on The View. “Words matter and people like Lauren Boebert who, you know, has been in the forefront of dissing LGBTQ+ people, is now saying her prayers and thoughts go with the families. Well, they don’t really need your prayers and thoughts. They needed your votes. That’s what they needed.”

What did people need when a Bernie Sanders campaign volunteer opened fire on a number of House Republicans at a practice for the Congressional baseball game, putting House Majority Whip Steve Scalise in the hospital for six weeks? This came just days after Sanders warned on the Senate floor that if the GOP’s healthcare bill passed, “thousands of Americans would die” — a phrase echoed by most of the Democratic congressional leadership.

In 2017, a Tennessee woman attempted to run a Republican congressman off the road for his support for the GOP’s Obamacare replacement bill. Does violent rhetoric from the left ever matter? Or is it only violent rhetoric from the right?

There have been more than 100 pro-life churches attacked since the Dobbs decision last summer. A man was arrested outside of the private home of Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh admitting he was planning to kill him. Using the left’s rationale to explain the attacks, we have to assume that left-wing rhetoric is to blame.

But that will never happen. And what’s really, truly frightening is that the left pretends not to see the hypocrisy of its position.

Observation O’ The Day

Hi 97 Percent Team,

Thank you for putting on yesterday’s conference. I am a gun owner and member of the firearm community based in Chicago. I share your desire to decrease gun deaths and find common ground. As a sign of my good faith intentions, I recently put on a Safe Storage presentation with a Moms Demand Action representative for our school community despite vehemently disagreeing with their public policy platform.

I feel that the strongest part of yesterday’s presentation was the Hot Button Topics discussion between Amy Swearer and Fred Guttenberg. I am still shocked that Fred wold be willing to sit down with Amy. More conversations like that need to happen where each side sits down with one another to try and have good faith conversations.

I am writing after watching the entirety of yesterday’s presentation. I watched because I was interested in what the panel, which included elected officials and other policy makers, would put forward as give and take compromises to get the gun community onboard. Unfortunately I feel as if it was a hugely blown opportunity on the whole as zero policy compromises were put forward by any of the speakers except Dr. Seigel.

Many members of the gun community showed up to watch in the hopes that we may have found a partner where we could work together. Instead we were shown a parade of speakers who have all publically asked for or voted recently for assault weapons bans. Governor Roy Cooper, Rep Moulton, Rep Dean, are all elected officials who have publicly pushed for bans and made clear yesterday that not only are they unwilling to remove these bans (despite the organization’s stated policy as presented by Michael Seigel) but rather they said explicitly that they are just waiting for the opportunity to have the votes to pass it in Congress. Congressman Moulton even threw in the usual talking point about shooting deer with AR-15s and needing better aim. Is insulting comments REALLY how you intend to find common ground with the majority of responsible gun owners who train to use their firearms not for hunting, but to defend themselves and family? Our supposed “voice at the table” Former Rep Walsh put forward no push back but rather spent most of the panel virtue signaling his hatred of the NRA (who we all hate too btw). There was not one word, not one proposal that was put forward as a give-and-take compromise with the gun community. That first panel lost many of us but I continued watching.

Former Schumer aid Emily Amick’s social media is full of video clips demonizing gun owners who own AR-15s, calling for an end to the filibuster to push gun ban proposals, and glowing videos of Congressman Cellini saying “spare me the constiutional right bull sh*t.” How was including her, who again has shown no sign of willing to compromise on any policy, intended on getting buy in from the gun community?

What was the point of allowing WH Assistant Stefanie Feldman to read a 5 minute speech about Biden’s domestic policy, including once again her emphasizing that he wants to ban assault weapons and if you don’t agree with the ban then you don’t actually care about crime? Again not one word about compromises that the administration is willing to make with the gun community.

The gun community has a huge amount of respect for Stephen Guttowski and I am glad you included him in the discussion. Stephen’s method and podcasts, calmly discussing the DETAILS of firearm policy and law should be how 97 Percent moves forward in discussions with the gun community.

Unfortunately I’m not sure your organization will get the chance after yesterday’s conference as much credibility was lost. You simply cannot parade out a bunch of speakers, many of whom are board members, who have publically been strong advocates of gun bans and then ask us to trust your organization because…… your official platform says you don’t want an assault weapons ban? We all remember Conor Lamb campaigning with video of him shooting an AR-15 and then voting to ban them this year.

Richard Aborn (instrumental proponent of 94 AWB), Rep Steve Israel (proponent of AWB and on recent 97% podcast spoke favorable of NY’s Bruen-response bill and explained his idea of compromise as “getting 60% rather than 100%” of gun control policies he wants), and Rep Moulton (who’s service I respect yet again just voted for an AWB), are all prominent members of your board. Why should the gun community trust you???

So when will the gun community trust you? When you come forward with REAL policy compromises as well as fight to overturn abusive laws. We want to stand shoulder to shoulder with you in calling out California’s Handgun Roster or New York’s post-Bruen concealed carry restrictions. We are willing to discuss federal Universal background checks in exchange for national concealed carry reciprocity. A federal license (with training perhaps!) in exchange for not needing FFL NICS checks for transfers. These were the types of discussions we were expecting when we showed up to watch yesterday. The ONLY person who in good faith touched on any of this was Dr. Siegel.

I will end with a humorous fictional story written about someone attending the conference in-person that is circulating among the gun community.

https://hwfo.substack.com/p/ninety-seven-percent

I hope your organization will take this criticism to heart and revamp how you plan on engaging in good faith with the firearm community. Many of us are still willing to talk, but not just about how much we are willing to give up in exchange for nothing.

Best,
David Rice
Chicago

COVID vax makers finally study long-term heart damage as FDA admits bivalent data lacking
HHS corrects stats on tripling of COVID-related pediatric hospitalizations, used to justify booster campaign for kids, after analyst calls out bad data. CNN still hasn’t corrected false report.

More than a year after the FDA added heart inflammation warnings to COVID-19 mRNA vaccines — amid the second academic year of campus vaccine mandates on a demographic at higher risk of severe adverse events — vaccine makers are finally studying the long-term consequences of vaccine-induced myocarditis and pericarditis.

Moderna already has two trials running, while Pfizer said its first trial will start “in the next couple months” and include up to 500 teenagers and young adults under 21, NBC News reported last week. Neither has disclosed the studies on their websites.

The CDC isn’t much further ahead in studying long-term post-vaccination harm. In late September, the agency started contacting people who meet the case definition of myocarditis and have been reported to the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System.

While an “independent entity” should be reviewing long-term consequences, it’s “puzzling” why Pfizer and Moderna waited so long to follow through on the FDA’s approval conditions, said MIT professor Retsef Levi, lead author of a study on post-vaccination “emergency” heart problems in 16-39 year-olds in highly vaccinated Israel.

Continue reading “”

Four Developments That Waited Until After the Midterms.

Did you notice that there have been many stories breaking recently that are inconvenient to the left-wing narrative? I did. And I noticed that they came out after the midterm elections were over — when they’d have no impact on the vote. Wasn’t that nice and convenient? Here are four of those stories.

Newsom’s budget deficit

After back-to-back years of running surpluses, this week we learned that California is back in the red. Back in May, the Golden State had a nearly $98 billion surplus, but new projections show that California will have a $25 billion deficit in the 2023-2024 fiscal year. Luckily for Gov. Gavin Newsom, voters reelected him last week before the news broke. The story may not have doomed Newsom’s reelection bid, but it could have helped some GOP candidates running for Congress.

Rudy Giuliani cleared

The Biden administration and the Democrats have gone after anyone remotely tied to Donald Trump. One man they targeted for destruction was Rudy Giuliani. A two-year investigation into possible violations of foreign lobbying ended this week without charges — effectively clearing him of wrongdoing. Boy, what stellar timing.

New York City crime

The crime issue was so influential this year that it threatened to oust Gov. Kathy Hochul (D-N.Y.) from office. So the liberal media did everything possible to pretend that crime wasn’t an issue. But now that the midterms are over and the red wave didn’t materialize, the New York Times decided it was finally safe to report on crime again.

Biden’s student loan forgiveness killed

In a blatantly transparent move to bribe young voters to get to the polls, Joe Biden announced a student loan relief plan over the summer. So it should come as no surprise that young voters came out in droves in the midterm elections, effectively saving the Democrats from a red wave. And conveniently, a few days after the election, a federal judge struck down Biden’s student debt forgiveness plan. Whew, that was close!

DeWine allies push for passage of STRONG Ohio gun bill in lame duck session

Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine cruised to re-election last week, defeating Democrat Nan Whaley by an eye-popping 25 points. Now the governor, who signed Constitutional Carry into law back in March, is hoping to spend some of his newly-acquired political capital to put several new gun control measures on the books, and his allies in the state legislature are doing everything they can to help.

The bill in question is SB 357, and though it’s been bottled up in committee for most of the year, there’s now a push to move the bill forward during the legislature’s lame-duck session that started this week.

An attempt to revive some of the “Strong Ohio” proposals against gun violence, stalled in the General Assembly since 2019, faces a timeline that’s hard to meet.

State Sen. Matt Dolan, R-Chagrin Falls, is trying to resurrect some of the “Strong Ohio” proposals against gun violence that stalled in the legislature in 2019. His Senate Bill 357 will get a first hearing, but also faces a tight timeline. The bill includes a “red flag” provision, better background checks, some limitation on private sales, and using $175 million in federal funds to improve mental healthcare.

Gov. Mike DeWine has signaled approval of the bill, which includes some of the ideas he unsuccessfully floated following the August 2019 mass shooting in Dayton’s Oregon District.

On Tuesday, the Senate Finance Committee held its first hearing on SB 357, but didn’t hold a vote on the measure. Dolan, meanwhile, has made a few tweaks to the legislation, which would create a new category of prohibited persons, require adults under the age of 21 to have a co-signer for all gun purchases, and establish a “seller’s protection certificate” that is designed to encourage (but not require) background checks on private transfers of firearms.

“Everything in this sub bill is about before you buy a gun,” said Dolan, who chairs the finance committee.

During months of campaigning for the Nov. 8 election, legislators heard people statewide asking what they’d do to prevent gun violence, he said.

From speaking with healthcare personnel, law enforcement and others, it became clear the state’s current involuntary commitment program is not sufficient to identify all the at-risk people who shouldn’t be able to buy guns, Dolan said.

His substitute bill adds a sixth “disability” to state laws preventing people from buying guns. Existing ones prohibit fugitives from justice, felons, those who committed juvenile crimes that would be adult felonies, drug addicts and alcoholics, and those with established dangerous mental problems from buying guns, he said.

Dolan’s bill adds people who go before a behavioral risk assessment team and have been determined to be a “suicidal or homicidal risk.”

Ohio law already prohibits people under age 21 from buying handguns, he said. His bill would add that under-21 buyers of other guns would need a cosigner age 25 or older. There are exceptions for anyone under 21 in law enforcement or the military, Dolan said.

For some reason Dolan’s really focused on the fact that these provisions are all directed at individuals before they purchase a firearm, though that doesn’t mean that any or all of his proposals would be constitutional or effective.

Take his new category of prohibited persons, for example. The supposed reason to add those who’ve been determined by a behavioral risk assessment team to be a “suicidal or homicidal risk” is that the state’s current involuntary commitment law isn’t working as well as it should. Seems to me the proper legislative response would be to determine why that’s the case and work to fix the existing law, rather than avoiding improving the state’s mental health system by making it easier to deny some individuals the ability to purchase a firearm. If someone truly is a risk to themselves or others, simply denying them the ability to purchase a firearm at a gun store isn’t going to make them any less dangerous, but Dolan’s bill treats guns as the issue and not the supposedly dangerous individual.

There are also major issues with Dolan’s desire to force young adults to find someone who’ll sign off on their gun ownership. The co-signer assumes some legal liability if the under-21 gun buyer were to misuse the firearm; an extraordinary provision that is unlike any existing (or historical) gun regulation that I’m aware of. Not only would this have a chilling effect on the Second Amendment rights of young adults, it’s hard to see how this restriction even remotely fits with the text, history, and tradition of the right to keep and bear arms.

SB 357 has been floating around the Ohio legislature in one form or another since 2019, and so far it’s received a very cool reception from the Republican majority. Clearly DeWine is hoping to capitalize on his overwhelming victory last week, but whether or not his Republican colleagues in the statehouse have had a change of heart about his gun proposals is still very much up in the air. The first test will be a vote in the Senate Finance Committee, and Ohio gun owners should be reaching out to those committee members to share their concerns before the bill has a chance to reach the Senate floor.

Virginia: Fairfax Co. Schools Push Anti-Gun Propaganda on 5th Graders

USA – -(AmmoLand.com)-  A concerned parent, Darcey Geissler, has brought attention to an assignment that her son received in a Fairfax County school.

In a “lesson” on persuasive writing, students were given an anti-gun essay to evaluate, rather than something with more neutral content, so that the students could focus on the persuasive writing aspect. There was no sample essay with an opposing viewpoint presented.

Though this sample essay is ostensibly meant to be just a learning tool, it does parrot many worn-out talking points that disarmament radicals have used over the years. It claims that the Second Amendment is about hunting, that the existence of modern police forces makes the Second Amendment obsolete, and that citizens defending themselves from imminent danger while police are, at best, minutes away is somehow “tak[ing] the law into their own hands.”

It even mentions the Brady Campaign and simply describes it as “an organization to prevent violence,” without any mention of their radical policy proposals, such as gun bans and restricting the right to self-defense, or their junk lawsuits that attempt to bankrupt the firearms industry. Most recently, Brady partnered with the Mexican government against the rights of law-abiding Americans.

All this is not surprising, coming from a school system in a county that is hostile to the Second Amendment rights of its own citizens.

In 2020, the county banned firearms in many county-owned and operated locations, including its extensive public parks. While disarming law-abiding citizens, the ordinance they passed was not about safety or security. There were no measures ordered to prevent armed criminals from ignoring the arbitrary boundaries (as criminals do), such as metal detectors or increased police presence. This carry ban is currently the subject of an NRA-backed lawsuit.

This situation underscores the value of parents and guardians being involved in passing on American values, such as respect for the Second Amendment, to the next generation. Government schools in Fairfax County, despite being funded with taxpayer dollars, certainly will not.

Comment O’ The Day:
The ultimate bow to China

Biden and Trudeau Beclown Themselves by Parading Around Asia in Commie Mao Jackets

What better way to show the world you suckle at the teat of the globalists’ New World Order than to dress like the most “successful” mass-murdering communist in history?

Joe Biden and Canada’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, North America’s one-two punch of Marxism, were filmed happily flouncing around the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) summit in matching Mao starter kit jackets.

FAMINE-O-RAMA! Some leftists believe dressing like a geisha on Halloween is “super not cool.” Yet Biden and Trudeau were happy to bend their weak knees and dress like Chairman Mao, the commie dictator responsible for more deaths than Hitler and Stalin. Democrats have said nothing.

Most of the people on Mao’s victim list died of starvation. Now is a good time to remind you that the Dutch want to close 30% of their livestock farms in the name of “climate change” and they want this done by 2030.

Holy cow farts, Batman: 2030 is the same year the commie swine (heh-heh) at the World Economic Forum (WEF) predict plan to cut most meat out of our lives.

The embarrassing, planned sartorial bum-licking comes just before North America’s Uriah Heeps are expected to meet with China’s leader Xi Jinping. Some Canadians expect Trudeau to confront Jinping on civil rights involving the Uyghurs and China’s possible involvement in Canada’s 2019 election.

FACT-O-RAMA!  A man suffering from cognitive disabilities was recently fired for dressing as Hitler in a mocking way. But when a president suffering from his own issues dresses as Mao, leftists say nothing.

Biden will meet Jinping for the first time on Monday to discuss, among other things, the tension between China and Taiwan. What better way for Trudeau and Biden to stand up to the pinkos than by dressing like their exalted, draconian leader? It reminds me of Jen Psaki wearing a Soviet hat in Russia.

BLUF
The study follows on the heels of Moderna’s third-quarter earnings report released Nov. 3. The 2022 sales forecast for its COVID-19 vaccine was lowered to between $18 billion and $19 billion in revenue, down from $21 billion.

Study: Myocarditis risk 2 to 3 times higher from Moderna than Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine.

Nov. 7 (UPI) — The incidence of myocarditis — inflammation of the heart muscle — is two- to threefold higher after a second dose of the Moderna Spikevax COVID-19 vaccine than the Pfizer BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine, a study released Monday says.

But Moderna tells UPI the benefits of its vaccine “significantly outweigh” the risks.

Males under age 40 who received the Moderna vaccine were shown to have the highest rates of myocarditis, and the researchers said the study’s findings support the idea of recommending specific vaccines for certain populations to maximize benefits and minimize adverse events.

But the scientists underscored that cases of heart inflammation as a serious side effect from either mRNA vaccine are rare overall — also stressed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which said it is actively monitoring the situation, and by the manufacturer itself.

The most common symptoms of myocarditis are chest pain, fever, fatigue, shortness of breath, and a rapid or irregular pulse, says the National Institutes of Health. Heart inflammation can lead to serious complications, including heart failure, shock or death.

Moderna, in an emailed statement provided by spokesman Luke Mircea-Willats, said its “mRNA-1273 has been administered to hundreds of millions of people worldwide and has been shown to be effective against both the original strain of the virus and its major variants.

“Regulatory agencies around the world have stated that the benefits of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines significantly outweigh the risk across all age groups. Vaccination against COVID-19 continues to be a critical tool in overcoming the impacts of the global pandemic.”

According to Moderna, myocarditis is a known, though “very rare” risk associated with COVID-19 mRNA vaccines and, “when it does occur, cases are generally mild and resolve after a few days with treatment and rest.”

And, “at a population level,” current evidence indicates the risk of myocarditis after COVID-19 infection is much higher than after COVID-19 vaccination, Moderna said.

Moderna stressed that patients’ health and ensuring the safety of its vaccines is its top priority, noting it “shares all adverse events data with regulators and has a robust pharmacovigilance function, ensuring any adverse events are recorded and shared with the regulator in line with local regulations.”

Results from the new study, which appeared in the Journal of the American College of Cardiology, “generally align” with findings from previous studies into indirect comparison of COVID19 mRNA vaccine product safety, the researchers said in their paper.

Continue reading “”

Reviewer Exposes EV Truck’s ‘Kryptonite’ After Trip Takes 3 Hours Longer Than It Should’ve

Auto reporter Henry Payne is only the latest person to discover that electric vehicles are simply not ready to replace gas-powered cars, especially for long-distance driving, when his Ford F-150 Lightning got only just over half the mileage that the manufacturer claimed on a 280-mile trip.

Payne, an auto critic for the Detroit News, set out to travel from Detroit to Charlevoix, Michigan. His trip was to be around 280 miles, and he was driving a new 2022 F-250 Lightning EV.

Payne wrote that he charged the truck to a full 100 percent charge ahead of the trip, and that the manufacturer claimed that a full charge should have allowed him to travel the whole distance without another charge.

But it wasn’t even close.

Payne wrote that as he sat at his third charging station of the day, another driver asked what sort of mileage he was getting on his roughly $93,000 EV truck.

“I’m getting about 170 miles of range on this trip up I-75,” he told the other driver. “How about you?”

The man replied, “I’ve got the turbo-6 cylinder. I’m getting 600 miles and 22 mpg. I don’t think I’ll ever get one of those electrics.”

At the bottom of his tale of woe, Payne reeled off the F-150 Lightning’s statistics, which included that it was supposed to have a 320-mile travel range on a full charge. But Payne only got about 170 miles down the road before he had to find a charger.

Certainly, electric cars themselves are not entirely useless, especially for local driving. Instead, the problem comes with the Biden administration’s attempts to force Americans to switch to electric vehicles rather than allowing them to determine for themselves what kind of vehicle best fits their needs.

The auto writer noted that inside the city limits of his hometown of Detroit, the Ford Lightning was a great vehicle. But out on the open road, no so much, adding that out on the long haul, “the Lightning’s wattage starts to dim.”

Payne started out the night before with a full charge on his battery, but by the time he got to Saginaw, a little less than halfway to his destination, “the Lightning was getting just 60 percent of estimated range and it was becoming clear to the trip computer that we would not make it to Gaylord,” Payne wrote. He added that the “281-mile range (he was supposed to get) looked more like 168 miles.”

Saginaw had several charging stations, but even that experience left him with a less-than-satisfying outcome.

The first charging station that he found stated that other drivers were currently charging their vehicles. So, he tried a second location that supposedly had four charging stations. But when he got there, two were occupied and the other two were being serviced by technicians and were out of service.

Then it got worse. One of the drivers at one of the two portals pulled out and told Payne that the second charger was not working, meaning that only one of the four chargers at the station was any good.

A frustrated Payne then drove to the first station he found and waited, wasting a lot of time.

Perhaps it could have been worse. If Payne’s truck had needed a battery pack replacement on that trip, it could have cost him more than $35,000!

Payne also added that he had to calculate earlier chargings in areas he knew he could find a station instead of risking having to hunt for a charging station when he was dangerously low on power. It was a calculation about which he said manufacturers don’t warn buyers.

“Though I had traveled just 70 miles since Bay City, chargers are scarce in Charlevoix and so I wanted to top up. That’s something that in-car navi systems don’t tell you. Arrive at your destination with low battery and there may be no infrastructure to get you around town,” he wrote as a warning to his readers.

This fact brings to light the serious mental aspect about driving an EV. The phenomenon is called “range anxiety,” as drivers find themselves in anguish over whether or not they will make it to the next charging station before their EV conks out because manufacturer claims don’t ever seem to pan out.

Payne’s final report was a bit disheartening, especially for those who claim it is much cheaper to drive an EV.

“I arrived in Charlevoix after 6 hours, 40 minutes for what’s normally a stop-free, 4-hour trip by gas-fired pickup. I had been delayed by 45 minutes of construction and nearly two hours of charging detours across three stations. Cost? About the same as filling with $3.50 gas,” he wrote.

The disaster led Payne to conclude that road trips are the electric truck’s “kryptonite.”

Payne ruefully concluded his review of the F-150 Lightning with a statement made by the driver of a Rivian, an electric car made by a Tesla competitor.

“I recalled my conversation with the Rivian driver in Gaylord,” Payne wrote. “He said he hadn’t anticipated so many delays on his family trip to Mackinac Island. ‘Next time,’ he said, ‘I’m bringing a different vehicle.’”

That statement seems to be the common denominator in these stories. Everyone who tries using an EV for a long haul wishes they had driven a gas-powered car, instead.

For instance, a Colorado man found his 180-mile road trip through Wyoming took 15 hellish hours where it would take less than four hours in a gas-powered car.

In another case of an EV disaster, a Youtube user discovered that his electric truck was not suited for towing despite what the manufacturers said.

Towing is a particular problem which seriously limits the range of an EV. According to Autotrader, towing large loads reduces the range of electric cars significantly, sometimes by as much as one-third, or even by half.

American consumers are perfectly free to buy a far more expensive electric vehicle, of course, especially if they intend to use it only to drive locally. But the government’s idea that we all should be in an EV is simply not a logical goal considering the logistical and technological limits from which these vehicles suffer.

BLUF
COVID has been the tool that the Elites™ have used to bully Americans into complying with the most absurd rules, beating us into submission. It would be ironic indeed if we could turn the tables and use the likelihood that the United States helped fund the development of the virus that has literally plagued us as a tool to dismantle the bipartisan transnational clique who have been driving the West into the ground.

The COVID coverup begins to unravel.

UPDATE: Vanity Fair has a detailed story on the investigation into the COVID virus’ origin:

COVID likely started circulating in China is late 2019–now 3 years ago–and its effects have dominated our lives for 2 1/2 years.

Yet for much of that time the Establishment™ has been gaslighting us about its likely origins. You know that. The Establishment™ knows that you know. And now the Senate Republicans on the health committee are laying the facts out on the table. COVID almost certainly was released accidentally from a Chinese research lab.

It was remarkable how quickly the Narrative™ settled on the zoonotic origin of the virus, since warning signs that the virus didn’t originate naturally were everywhere. Even scientists who confidently declared in private their belief that the virus was engineered publicly stated the opposite–after having been directed to by Anthony Fauci, the keeper of the keys to the kingdom’s treasury when it comes to research dollars. Fauci in recent months has been backtracking on whether or not the virus could have been engineered, but he sure expended enormous effort maintaining the fiction that an animal origin was certain.

There is a simple reason for Fauci’s reluctance to consider a lab leak hypothesis–if it came from the Wuhan Institute for Virology, the US government likely funded the research. Obviously nobody wants that on their record, and Fauci has quite the pension to protect, as well as an unearned reputation as The Science™.

From the Wall Street Journal:

WASHINGTON—The Covid-19 pandemic that has killed millions worldwide “was most likely the result of a research-related incident” in China, and not natural transmission of a virus from animal to human, a new report by Republicans on the Senate health committee concludes.

The study cites details about the early spread of the SARS-COV-2 virus, which causes Covid; the fact that no animal host has been identified nearly three years into the pandemic; and troubled biosafety procedures at labs in the Chinese city of Wuhan to buttress its conclusion.

The 35-page report by Republican committee staff acknowledges that definitive conclusions about the pandemic’s origins are impossible without more evidence. But, it says: “The hypothesis of a natural zoonotic origin no longer deserves the benefit of the doubt, or the presumption of accuracy.”

The report is largely based on information already publicly available but is likely to bolster calls in Washington for further investigations into the origins of the virus. Republicans have vowed to launch more aggressive Covid-19 probes if they regain control of one or both chambers of Congress in the midterm elections.

Previous zoonotic disease outbreaks—in which a pathogen jumps from animals to man—have occurred in multiple locations as a virus circulates in animal populations, while the Covid virus is known to have emerged only in Wuhan, home to laboratories conducting research on coronaviruses, the report notes. In addition, it says, no animal has been identified as infected with the virus before the December 2019 pandemic outbreak.

I have always suspected, based upon the balance of the evidence I have access to, that the virus was accidentally leaked from a lab. But I freely admit that biological research is not in my wheelhouse.

Continue reading “”

BLUF
Democrats,  Demoncraps, who have spent years delegitimizing the Supreme Court and rule of law, undermining legislative norms, cheering on unprecedented and blatant executive abuses, and using the DOJ to target their political enemies, among other “democracy”-destroying behaviors, do not occupy any high moral ground. And while “democracy” was once just a transparently silly euphemism for “stuff we want,” it has since evolved into a rhetorical device that denotes a decisively illiberal mindset.

DEMOCRATS Demoncraps: The Only Way To Save Democracy Is One-Party Rule.
‘Save Our Democracy’ is the new ‘Russia Collusion.’

At this point, it would save everyone time if Democrats could simply point to a policy agenda item that isn’t going to save democracy — if such a thing exists.

If Republicans vote, they are killing democracy. If they don’t vote, they are killing democracy. The only way to “save democracy,” writes The Washington Post’s Max Boot, is to empower one-party rule — a position that probably sounds counterintuitive to anyone with a middle-school education. “Now you need to vote to literally save democracy again,” contends President Joe Biden, or we will lose our “fundamental rights and freedoms like the right to choose, the right to privacy, the right to vote — our very democracy.”

Chilling stuff. But it doesn’t end there. You will remember that by failing to “reform” the filibuster, which would entail authorizing the thinnest of fleeting majorities to shove through massive generational “reforms” without any national consensus or debate, we are also killing democracy. This has been the position not only of left-wing pundits and the New York Times editorial board, but also senators tasked with defending their institution. I wonder if they will support this democracy-saving fix next session, as well?

Then again, if we don’t nationalize the economy to avert a climate crisis, we are also killing democracy. “We’ve got to save democracy in order to save our species,” Jamie Raskin explains. And if we don’t empty the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to temporarily keep gas prices low to help Democrats win in 2022, we are killing democracy. “We find ourselves in a situation, where keeping gas prices low is key to preserving and strengthening the future of our democracy,” MSNBC’s Chris Hayes says.

We must allow the president to unilaterally create trillion-dollar spending bills and break existing private sector contracts by fiat. For democracy. We must pack the court to “save democracy.” We must create a Ministry of Truth to help with “strengthening democratic institutions.” We must vote for a Pennsylvania candidate who can’t cobble two consecutive coherent sentences together because the “fate of our democracy” is at stake, says our former president.

Continue reading “”