Nice to see at least some in govt. finally admit the obvious truth. Many have said this since the start, because that’s what the evidence always pointed to. Yet they were mocked and called conspiracy theorists by the medical “experts” because those “experts” were complicit and funding it. It wasn’t a weapon, but they tinkered, and their monster got lose.
“GOP report argues lab leak theory is most likely explanation of COVID-19”
“Minority staff for the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee have released an interim report on the origins of the COVID-19 virus. The 35-page report argues that a lab leak is the most likely explanation for the origin of the virus.
Although the report favors the “lab leak” origin, it does not rule out a market origin. The report also does not indulge the more provocative arguments for how SARS-CoV-2 entered the human population. There is no claim that the virus was engineered as a bioweapon, for example.
Nor does it mention Anthony S. Fauci, the head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, who has been a frequent target of Paul and other lab-leak proponents because his institute helped fund virus research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
The full report is here. It does offer a review of both possibilities but heavily favors the lab leak view. Here’s a section on why the authors believe the lab leak is more likely.
The full report is here. It does offer a review of both possibilities but heavily favors the lab leak view. Here’s a section on why the authors believe the lab leak is more likely.
Nearly three years after the COVID-19 pandemic began, substantial evidence demonstrating that the COVID-19 pandemic was the result of a research-related incident has emerged. A research-related incident is consistent with the early epidemiology showing rapid spread of the virus in Wuhan, with the earliest calls for assistance being located in the near the WIV’s original campus in central Wuhan. It also explains the low genetic diversity of the earliest known SARS-CoV-2 human infections in Wuhan, because the likely index case, would be an infected researcher, is the likely primary source of the virus in Wuhan. A research-related incident also explains the failure to find an intermediate host as well as the failure to find any animal infections pre-dating human COVID-19 cases…
d. Anomalies in Epidemiology of SARS-COV-2 Outbreak
SARS-CoV-2 spilled over into humans only in Wuhan.222 This is a break with the precedent of SARS, MERS, and multiple outbreaks of avian influenza, all of which were much less transmissible than SARS-CoV-2 and infected fewer animals.
The low genetic diversity of the earliest SARS-CoV-2 samples, coupled with one of the two early lineages being more closely related to bat coronaviruses, suggests that COVID-19 pandemic is most likely the result of one, or at most two, spillovers of SARS-CoV-2.223 SARS-CoV-2’s low initial genetic diversity is also a break with the precedent of recent zoonotic spillovers of respiratory viruses.
Critical corroborating evidence of a natural zoonotic spillover is missing. While the absence of evidence is not itself evidence, the lack of corroborating evidence of a zoonotic spillover or spillovers, three years into the pandemic, is highly problematic. If the COVID-19 pandemic is the result of the zoonotic spillover of SARS-CoV-2 in Wuhan from an intermediate host species, there should be evidence of SARS-CoV-2 circulating in animals before it spilled over into humans. Instead, there is no evidence that any animal was infected with SARS-CoV-2 prior to the first human cases.”
The conclusion states:
Based on the analysis of the publicly available information, it appears reasonable to conclude that the COVID-19 pandemic was, more likely than not, the result of a research-related incident. New information, made publicly available and independently verifiable, could change this assessment. However, the hypothesis of a natural zoonotic origin no longer deserves the benefit of the doubt, or the presumption of accuracy. The following are critical outstanding questions that would need to be addressed to be able to more definitively conclude the origins of SARS-CoV-2:
What is the intermediate host species for SARS-CoV-2? Where did it first infect humans?
Where is SARS-CoV-2’s viral reservoir?
How did SARS-CoV-2 acquire its unique genetic features, such as its furin cleavage site?
Advocates of a zoonotic origin theory must provide clear and convincing evidence that a natural zoonotic spillover is the source of the pandemic, as was demonstrated for the 2002-2004 SARS outbreak. In other words, there needs to be verifiable evidence that a natural zoonotic spillover actually occurred, not simply that such a spillover could have occurred.
Scientists who published studies which favored the natural spillover theory earlier this year have already denounced the report as wrong.”
—–
Of course they denounced it, because they don’t want to admit their role in it, or their attacking of those who were right all along.
Breaking News: Elon Musk is said to have started cleaning house at Twitter, firing at least four top executives as he completes his takeover of the company. https://t.co/e9R0oWrTFW
“Twelve days before the election, Democrats have yet to lose the House or Senate, or confront the dire, your-lab-results-are-back-and-the-doctor-needs-to-see-you implications for a progressive agenda.
Plenty of prominent party voices, however, believe it’s best to prepare in advance. It is one of the more notable features of the 2022 midterms — the readiness to perform an autopsy on a living patient. Many Democrats believe there is already sufficient evidence to make the question unavoidable: What the hell is our problem?
Too woke, argued former president Barack Obama in a Pod Save America interview with his former aides. Some Democrats are a “buzzkill,” he suggested, by making people “feel as if they are walking on eggshells” that they might say things “the wrong way.”
Too timid on the jobs and economy message, warned Sen. Bernie Sanders. “Young people and working people” won’t turn out, he told CNN, without “a strong, pro-worker Democratic position.”
Too much reliance on abortion-rights positioning, not enough on anti-crime, said James Carville, who believes his 1990s-era political instincts are not as obsolete as a younger generation of liberals believes.
A weak message (and by implication so-so substance) on inflation, pronounced former Sen. Al Franken on his podcast, acknowledging he is “stressed out” by what may happen next month. “Things have not been trending in the right direction of late.”
These are just some entries in a long roster of here’s-why-we-suck analysis from Democrats, in the closing days before the Nov. 8 election. This kind of told-you-so fretting is common after a disappointing election, or even in not-my-fault, not-for-attribution chatter among operatives beforehand.
There are two, closely related reasons why the soul-searching this year started early, even as there remains a decent (though some polls suggest dwindling) chance it won’t be needed.
One, candidates and progressive commentators are describing 2022 as the most important midterm election in generations. Someday, perhaps, we will have an election in which people say, “You know, this one is actually not that big a deal — there’s little at stake either way.” Still, this year — with Donald Trump’s past, present and future still looming over all American politics — does genuinely qualify as consequential. Which means the after-election ruminations will similarly be among the most consequential.
Two, Democrats are genuinely confronting a political moment that for most defies comprehension. As Nancy Pelosi put it in an interview with the New York Times, explaining her against-the-current optimism: “Part of it is, I can’t believe anybody would vote for these people.””
—–
That’s funny Nancy, we were thinking the same about you clowns.
“It is difficult to describe just how disastrous Tuesday evening’s Pennsylvania Senate debate performance was for Democratic candidate (and current Keystone State Lt. Gov.) John Fetterman. In the course of one incredibly revealing and frankly painful hourlong debate, Fetterman — the victim of a stroke from May 13, just four days before his primary win over Rep. Conor Lamb (D-Pa.) — was exposed as still struggling mightily to regain his full cognitive abilities, and thus wholly unfit to serve Pennsylvanians in what was once considered “the world’s greatest deliberative body.”
It should go without saying that, like every decent American, I wish Fetterman the swiftest convalescence possible under his difficult circumstances. But it is also true that Fetterman’s stroke befell him before the primary — just a few days before, but before the primary date nonetheless. Fetterman’s inner circle, including his ambitious social activist wife, thus had a few days to consult trusted — that is, not Democratic Party donor — doctors to soberly gauge his continued viability as a candidate. While we should all feel bad for Fetterman, then, it must be said that a more altruistic and less cynical political candidate would have likely dropped out after a debilitating stroke such as that which Fetterman suffered. Democrats had a reasonable alternative ready to go, in Lamb.
But now, the Pennsylvania Senate race, which was already a nail-biter, is Dr. Mehmet Oz’s race to lose. And in addition to Fetterman’s glaring cognitive deficiencies, two other things were also exposed for the whole nation to see in the course of that cringeworthy hour of television Tuesday night: the Democrats’ hypocrisy on how mental and cognitive fitness concerns ought to impact the viability of a U.S. Senate candidacy, and how shameful and loathsome the mainstream media’s monthslong cover-up of Fetterman’s health woes is. In fact, the two aspects of this scandalous story fit together quite neatly.
The Democrats’ stances on the Pennsylvania and Georgia Senate races are impossible to reconcile with each other. In Georgia, Republican Senate candidate Herschel Walker, a former football star who has a checkered personal past, has been very open about his past struggles with mental illness. In fact, Walker literally a wrote book about it over a decade ago, titled Breaking Free: My Life with Dissociative Identity Disorder. Walker’s past struggles, about which he has been fully transparent, have often come up during the course of his close race against incumbent Sen. Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.). The Democrats’ basic stance on Walker — which, notably, runs entirely contrary to their general pro-“forgiveness” stance on “criminal justice reform” — is not to forgive, not to show grace, and to tarnish him as an irredeemable candidate.
Suffice it to say that is not how Democrats and their myriad apologists in the press have approached the Pennsylvania Senate contest, which, like the Georgia race, may well determine which party controls the Senate come January. In the Keystone State, the Fetterman campaign, Democrats more broadly, and the mainstream media’s blue-checked Twitterati have been the opposite of transparent about Fetterman’s health issues; they have been outright deceitful. The campaign, Democrats, and the media have taken pains to assure Americans of Fetterman’s health and cognition, often even going so far as to dismiss entirely reasonable health-related questions and concerns as reflecting “ableist” privilege. More generally, journalists — at least prior to Tuesday’s debate — have gone above and beyond to spew bile at anyone daring to question the Regime-approved narrative that Fetterman is entirely competent to be a U.S. senator.
The only notable journalist who reported the truth about Fetterman in the lead-up to Tuesday’s debate was NBC News’ Dasha Burns, who tweeted, “In small talk before the [NBC] interview without [closed] captioning, it wasn’t clear he was understanding our conversation.” As aptly chronicled by Peter Savodnik at Bari Weiss’ Substack earlier this week, Burns was promptly excoriated by the blue-checked mafia. Burns is now owed a big apology. Indeed, if anything, Burns’ mild tweet dramatically understated the severe extent of Fetterman’s cognitive problems.
The Fetterman debate debacle is yet another “mask-off” moment for America’s hyperpartisan Fourth Estate, which time and again demonstrates its eagerness to provide cover for its overlords in the Democratic Party rather than do what it is supposed to do: report accurately, and opine intelligently, on the news of the day and why it matters to the American people. The extent of the media cover-up for Fetterman, in particular, represents the media scandal of the year. And there is a large sample size from which to choose that honor.”
UPDATE: After forging state documents, Rebekah Jones accused two different reporters of "forging" the copies they got from state officials, adding that doing so is a crime.
When others began pointing out how she was clearly the one who forged documents she shut off commenting. https://t.co/urXv5PZg85
Whatever voters ultimately decide at the polls, Fetterman’s performance marks something of a milestone for the disability community, which remains underrepresented at every level of elected office. https://t.co/P6VHWtpBju
An analysis of politicians between 2013 to 2017 found that while the number of elected officials with disabilities went up, they are still underrepresented — making up 12% of politicians at the local level and about 6% at the state and federal level. https://t.co/P9yDl20br5
Also, you know, there's kind of a difference between a genetic condition & having a stroke because you spent years on end not taking your meds & not seeing a doctor https://t.co/O5qvJSw9zp
“It seems like every day Democrats and their cronies in the corrupt corporate media concoct a new, bogus “threat to democracy” that they use to intimidate Americans out of voting for their political opponents.
These “threats” aren’t just overused, they are overexaggerated in an effort to cover up Democrats’ hypocrisy, mask their incompetence, and justify the targeting of their ideological enemies. Meanwhile, it’s the blue party that’s working overtime to erode and replace the actual democratic processes responsible for keeping our nation running.
Here is a list of everything Democrats claim is “a threat to democracy.”
Donald Trump
Americans think corporate media are a bigger “threat to democracy” than former President Donald Trump yet not one day goes by without a Democrat, talking head, or corporate media outlet asserting the Republican is responsible for the downfall of the nation.
The “threat to democracy” accusations began before Trump won the 2016 election, have continued throughout his presidency, and repeatedly make headlines more than a year after the end of his first term.
Republicans
What could possibly be a bigger “threat to democracy” than Democrats’ top Trumpian foe? According to President Joe Biden, it is “MAGA Republicans.”
“Donald Trump and the MAGA Republicans represent an extremism that threatens the very foundations of our republic,” Biden said during a doom-and-gloom speech in Philadelphia earlier this year.
Whether it’s Republican voters, Republican governors, Republican members of Congress, Republican-controlled legislatures, or even Republican grandmas, Democrats and the media say anyone associated with the GOP could destroy our nation and deserves punishment.
Ted Cruz
Brookings, a left-leaning think tank, described Republican Sen. Ted Cruz as one of many “copycat candidates who parrot Trump’s moves and endorse his anti-democratic tactics” in a piece titled, “Trump is not the only threat to democracy.”
Josh Hawley
Republican Sen. Josh Hawley earned the same judgment from Brookings as Cruz. Additionally, when he objected to certifying the 2020 presidential election results, he (along with Cruz and other GOP senators) was smeared by The Washington Post as one of “the Constitution’s most dangerous domestic enemies.”
Ron DeSantis
According to Democrats, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis is a raging, extreme “threat to democracy” for simply governing as a Republican.
“Ron DeSantis Would Kill Democracy Slowly and Methodically,” one article in New York Magazine warned.
Dr. Oz
“An impaired Fetterman who does not pose a threat to our democracy is better than a polished Oz who does. Remember what’s at stake here,” a senior adviser at The Lincoln Project tweeted shortly after the political opponents’ debate.”
——-
On and on it goes, there’s plenty more.
According to D’s, everything we disagree with is the worst thing ever, and all R’s are worse than Hitler.
“Earlier this month, spies and sleuths walked through the doors of the Central Intelligence Agency’s top-secret headquarters here in the D.C. suburbs for a day of work fighting foreign threats to the United States. Around the corner, on Georgetown Pike, teens shuffled through the doors of classroom No. 1208 at Langley High School for 90 minutes of Spanish II.
“Hola!” the teacher said to them, as they started class.
What the teens got instead of a normal tutorial in Spanish was a surprise lesson on “Identidad,” or “Identity,” with students handed a two-page worksheet created by the University of Michigan’s Program on Intergroup Relations. It included a list of “Social Identity Groups,” not teaching the students about Spanish-language communities, but probing personal, intrusive, and even shaming questions right off a Buzzword Bingo card in identity politics, and asking them to pen their self-identities into a “Social Identity Wheel.””
“For these teens as young as 14, they faced the task — in the early morning class of Spanish II on Thursday, Oct. 13 — of identifying their “Social Identity Groups,” including their “Sexual Orientation,” with this wide array of confusing choices: “Lesbian,” “Gay,” “Bisexual,” “Heterosexual,” “Pan-Attractional,” “Attractionality” and, in case those didn’t cover it, “Questioning.”
For their “sex,” these young students had “intersex” among their choices, along with female and male.
For gender, they had “Woman, Man, Transgender, Post-Gender.”
—
“Despite body image being such an issue, especially among teen girls, the students were offered a “social identity group” of “Body Size/ Type,” with “Fat,” “Person of Size,” and “Thin” as examples. One irked Langley mother said, “Really? With all of the body-shaming that girls already feel?”
In the Langley High School community, many parents settled in the nation’s capital to affect U.S. and global policy in high-level posts from the White House, Congress, Defense Department, and even the CIA. These parents work at law firms, media companies, and government contractors, but, like youth everywhere, their children experience the same, complicated lives of teens, with depression, anxiety, and growing pains.
In the oversimplification of societal dynamics that activists have increasingly imposed on children, the Spanish II students also had the task of identifying their “Social Class,” with choices including “Poor,” “Working Class,” “Lower-Middle Class,” “Upper-Middle Class,” “Owning Class,” and “Ruling Class,” another judgment on the young people.
To cap off this exercise, their teacher, Teresa Quigley, instructed them to ponder if they were in a “marginalized group” that is “disenfranchised and exploited” or a “privileged group” with “unearned privileged” status in society. Students looked at each other, confused about what they were doing.
“What does any of this have to do with learning Spanish?” a local mother asked.
To parents and alumni, this kind of subversion of a simple Spanish lesson is emblematic of the national assault on education that led this week to the results the U.S. Education Department released in “The Nation’s Report Card,” with historically low performances by students in math and reading, including in Virginia. As much as teachers union leaders and too many Democratic politicians insist the teachings of critical race theory are not taught in K-12 classrooms, this type of lesson is exactly how students are introduced to concepts key to critical race theory.
The lesson is a stark reminder that, while Virginia is an inspiration to many after Republican Glenn Youngkin won the governor’s race in 2021, parents must remain vigilant. It’s stealth lessons like this one that distract students when they are learning, introduce them to ideas that aren’t age-appropriate, and divide students, rather than connect them.”
“CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky tested positive for COVID last week in spite of being “up to date” with her vaccines. Although the press release didn’t say what “up to date” meant, it’s reasonable to assume that Walensky has had multiple booster shots on top of the original vaccination. Just a few days earlier, the CDC recommended adding COVID vaccines to regular immunization requirements for children attending public school.
Don’t worry, the Washington Post reassured us in the vain hope of keeping fear of mandates out of midterm voters’ minds, the CDC doesn’t have the power to mandate anything.
Of course, we live in a world where the word “recommendation” no longer means something is “voluntary.” It’s irrelevant that the CDC does not have the legal authority to mandate vaccines as a condition for school attendance. We all know that when the CDC recommends something, health officials and school boards enforce the “recommendation” as if it were a command from the high priestess herself.
Many skeptics with memories noted how, in 2021, Walensky assured the public, “we know that at the individual level, vaccinated people are safe.” But what are they safe from? Falling anvils and alien attacks? Because, as the doctor must now admit, vaccinations do not keep you safe from COVID. Everyone knows somebody who took the vaccination and has since contracted COVID. Just 12 months ago, you could be censored on Facebook for suggesting what is now obviously true. We still don’t know how many of the vaccinated died from COVID.
So if the vaccines don’t stop people from getting COVID, how did the CDC reach the conclusion that schools should require COVID vaccinations to enter school? What is the CDC telling us to justify this “recommendation” that, as we all know, is really a mandate? It now turns out that the CDC made booster recommendations without the benefit of any data to show additional shots would be safe or effective. That’s not science, and we shouldn’t have to comply with mandates based on guesses and wishful thinking.
Anyone attempting to research the risks and benefits of vaccinating children against COVID will quickly arrive at the CDC’s cartoonish fact sheet. The CDC declares: “The known risks of COVID-19 and possible severe complications outweigh the potential risks of having a rare, adverse reaction to the vaccination.” But is that true? What about informing people of the data and allowing individuals to make their own choices? It’s one thing to mandate a vaccine to prevent the spread. But if the only benefit is lessening the symptoms, the government should have no role in the decision.
When one clicks through to the CDC’s supporting information for this claim, one finds this fact sheet warning of the health risks of a child contracting COVID. These include something called “multisymptom inflammatory syndrome,” in severe cases which include many of the flu-like symptoms we’ve come to associate with COVID over the past two years (fever, vomiting, diarrhea, etc.). Notably missing from the list of severe outcomes? Long-term damage to a child’s heart.
The CDC does not explain how it weighed the risks of COVID against the risks of vaccinating children. It did not provide any data in this fact sheet that might allow the reader to reconstruct the CDC’s judgment. We just have to take it on faith. “Trust the science.”
Coincidentally, Science.org this month published an eye-opening piece analyzing vaccination risks to children. The authors noted,
COVID-19 vaccines do have a rare but worrisome cardiac side effect. Myocarditis, an inflammation of the heart muscle that can cause chest pain and shortness of breath, has disproportionately struck older boys and young men who received the shots. Only one out of several thousand in those age groups is affected, and most quickly feel better. A tiny number of deaths have been tentatively linked to vaccine myocarditis around the world. But several new studies suggest the heart muscle can take months to heal, and some scientists worry about what this means for patients long term.
The piece goes on to report that the FDA, on which the CDC so frequently relies for its “vaccines are safe” statements, “has ordered vaccine makers Pfizer and Moderna to conduct a raft of studies to assess these risks.” The authors further wrote,
“Earlier this month, a team from Kaiser Permanente Northern California and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reported the risk of myocarditis or pericarditis—inflammation of the tissue surrounding the heart—was about one in 6700 in 12- to 15-year-old boys following the second vaccine dose, and about one in 16,000 following the first booster. In 16- and 17-year-olds, it was about one in 8000 after the second dose and one in 6000 after the first booster. Men ages 18 to 30 have a somewhat elevated risk as well.
While the symptoms related to vaccine-induced heart damage usually abate, one cardiologist quoted by the piece noted a nagging observation that troubled him:
Although their heart rhythm is normal and they usually feel fine, MRI scans of their heart often show something called late gadolinium enhancement (LGE), which signifies injury to the muscle. In June, Portman and his colleagues reported in The Journal of Pediatrics that 11 of 16 patients had LGE about 4 months after their bout of myocarditis, although the area affected in the heart had shrunk since they were hospitalized.
Now some researchers are quick to point out that buried deep in the data is evidence that COVID itself also causes myocarditis in young people. But critically missing from this argument is any data demonstrating that taking the shot will reduce the chances of this dangerous complication. Isn’t it also possible that the component in the vaccine that triggers myocarditis actually adds to the risk if the person later gets COVID? If the vaccine prevented a COVID infection—which it does not—it might be worth taking the chance. But as it stands, we don’t know whether taking the vaccine just makes things worse.
The CDC has a terrible track record of hiding adverse effect data regarding the vaccines. As the New York Times noted in February, “When the CDC published the first significant data on the effectiveness of boosters in adults younger than 65 two weeks ago, it left out the numbers for a huge portion of that population: 18- to 49-year-olds, the group least likely to benefit from extra shots, because the first two doses already left them well-protected.”
Why hide this data in particular? The CDC didn’t say. But the obvious suspicion is that this is the group for which COVID poses relatively mild risks which do not outweigh the risks of an adverse effect from the vaccine.
The New York Times reported in December that over 200 million Americans were fully vaccinated. As Joe Biden recently noted, this number has fallen to just 20 million Americans as the definition of “fully vaccinated” has expanded to require booster after booster. Is that true? Yes, it is. CDC statistics put the number at 19.4 million. That means 90 percent of the people who faithfully took the vaccine have come to doubt what they’re being told about the boosters. The Biden Administration spent vast sums of public money talking up vaccinations; public confidence imploded anyway.”
“The new, heavily promoted mRNA booster shots from Pfizer and Moderna are not all they’re cracked up to be, according to two new preprint studies.
The boosters perform no better against Omicron than the fourth jab with the original formulation,” a new study from scientists at Columbia University in New York City found. The updated Covid-19 booster shots have been advertised as “bivalent,” meaning they target the original coronavirus strain as well as the Omicron BA.4/BA.5 subvariants.
However, the Columbia paper found that the newer Omicron variants easily evade both types of boosters, Alex Berenson reported on Substack.
The report strongly suggests anyone who received mRNA shots should hope the next Sars-Cov-2 variants remain mild as the current Omicron variants, because those folks will have very little protection from future Sars-Cov-2 variants going forward.
In other words: immune imprinting and original mRNA vaccine antigenic sin are real, and they’re spectacular (spectacularly bad).
About the only good news in the study actually comes from vaccine failure. People who had three shots and then were infected with Omicron had markedly higher antibody levels than people who received either booster.
The boosters were reportedly authorized for human use based on data from eight baby mice.
The Columbia scientists acknowledged that their findings “may be indicative of immunological imprinting”—also known as original antigenic sin—a phenomenon in which an initial exposure to a virus by infection or vaccination limits a person’s future immune response against new variants.
Dr. David Ho, one of the world’s top virologists, released the paper on Monday.
Another study released by scientists at Harvard University on Monday came to essentially the same conclusion.
“Waning immunity following mRNA vaccination and the emergence of SARS-CoV-2 variants has led to reduced mRNA vaccine efficacy against both symptomatic infection and
severe disease,” the Harvard scientists concluded.
Dissident doctors and scientists like Drs. Robert Malone, Peter McCullough, Ryan Cole, and Michael Yeadon have been warning of this for over a year, and now other medical scientists who aren’t totally captured by Big Pharma appear to be catching up.
These findings come amid the Biden regime’s aggressive nationwide campaign to get the updated COVID boosters in American arms.
“We have to be careful when we get in front of the American public and try and sell this vaccine as something that’s significantly better when all the evidence we have so far doesn’t support that,” said Dr. Paul Offit, a member of the FDA’s independent vaccine advisory committee.
Joe Biden received his fifth COVID-19 shot on Tuesday, and warned Americans that the virus was still a threat, even though he declared that the pandemic was “over” just last month.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky, who received the Covid-19 booster in September, meanwhile, is the latest Biden official to test positive for Covid-19.”
“If there is one thing you can count on from publishers, academics, writers, MSM figures, and Leftists it is defending the right to shove pornography right into the faces of children. Anything less than pornographic books in the classroom is book banning.
But when it comes to publishing books by conservatives, not so much. Publishing books by conservatives is an attack on human rights and should be stopped. It is a literal violation of human rights to allow conservatives to have their say in the public square.
That is the position that over 325 (and counting–people are signing up continually) editors, publishers, booksellers, and other figures in the literary world. They are calling on Penguin Random House to not publish Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s forthcoming memoir. As reported by Publisher’s Weekly:
An open letter has begun circulating in publishing circles, in protest of the acquisition of Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s forthcoming memoir by Penguin Random House. The statement, posted today, has been circulating online, including on the Instagram account @publishersbrunch, whose anonymous administrator told PW that the statement was drafted and circulated by “a group of concerned publishing professionals.”
In April 2021, AP reported that Coney Barrett had inked a book deal with Sentinel, an imprint of Penguin Random House. At the time the deal was announced, Sentinel founder, president, and publisher Adrian Zackheim declined to provide additional details. However, Politico, citing three anonymous “publishing industry sources,” reported that the Coney Barrett had garnered a $2 million advance for the book—a sum repeated in the statement.
The open letter, much of which I quote below, was inspired by the danger of violent fascists like you and me destroying America by voting.
“With the midterms coming up, and the 2024 election looming, the group decided it was time to make a statement,” @publishersbrunch told PW on behalf of the group. “We cannot, and will not, amplify the voices of extremists (like Amy Coney Barrett) who would gladly take away the rights of millions of Americans if given the chance. I’m extremely proud to see the responses thus far and hope that this action encourages others in the industry to speak out!”
The publishing world’s definition of free speech has been “evolving” for some time now. As you may recall the American Bookseller’s Association actually publicly apologized for distributing Abigail Shrier’s book on the transgender movement:
As soon as Casey Morrissey opened the box of books, they were furious. [DS–“they” pronoun, of course]
The title at the top of the stack was Abigail Shrier’s “Irreversible Damage: The Transgender Craze Seducing Our Daughters,”a contentious tome that has sparked cries of transphobia since its release last summer.
“Do you know how that feels, as a trans bookseller and book buyer?” Morrissey, who works at Greenlight Bookstores in Brooklyn tweeted Wednesday. “It isn’t even a new title, so it really caught me in the gut. Do better.”
The American Booksellers Association quickly apologized for including the nonfiction book, which it characterized as “anti-trans,” in its July mailing to its 750 member bookstores. The trade organization’s monthly “white box” includes marketing materials, advance copies of books and finished titles the ABA wants booksellers to consider stocking.
“This is a serious, violent incident that goes against ABA’s … policies, values, and everything we believe and support,” the ABA wrote on Twitter. “It is inexcusable.”
The organization also vowed to take concrete steps to remedy the harm it said it had caused.
Sending out a book is “violent,” if it is the wrong book. Yet books that instruct children in oral sex, sadomasochistic practices, and other obscenities must be in elementary school classrooms because doing otherwise is censorship.
The open letter is a hoot, twisting around itself to insist that demanding the book not be published is not censorship, but upholding basic human rights.”
The devil is working hard these days to seduce, confuse and kill.
Sadly, women pregnant with babies who will possibly have DS are pressured to abort. They are given the very worst-case scenarios. Fear is a powerful motivator. It is truly sad that at a time when the medical system is most able to help those with DS there are so many in the field ready, willing and able to kill them.
Pelosi’s husband was “violently” attacked during a “home invasion” this morning. As I was reading the AP “report” I found this interesting little tid bit they added….
While the circumstances of the attack are unclear, the attack raises questions about the safety of members of Congress and their families as threats to lawmakers are at an all-time high almost two years after the deadly Capitol insurrection. The attack also comes just 11 days ahead of midterm elections in which crime and public safety have emerged as top concerns among Americans.
So now there is “concern” for the protection of Congress members…there was none for our Supreme Court conservative Justices nor their family members. And what the heck does the “deadly” Capitol “insurrection” have to do with this? And the only person who died on Jan 6 was Ashli Babbitt.
Journalist much there AP???? I’m waiting with bated breath to see which MAGA follower attacked Pelosi! Maybe it was Trump himself!!
The motive is unknown, but the suspect is in custody, so we may know more within the day. (And I see there’s a news conference scheduled shortly.)
But AP isn’t wrong to raise that question — it’s the obvious question we all ask, after all.
From Reuter’s:
~ The Capitol Police said a motive for the attack was still under investigation. The Associated Press reported that the attack was not random and the assailant specifically targeted the home. The speaker’s office said Paul Pelosi was
“violently assaulted.”
The circumstances of the attack were unclear, including how the intruder got into the home. The assault comes less than two weeks before the Nov. 8 midterm elections, in which control of the House and the Senate is at stake.
The San Francisco Police said it responded to a home break-in at 02:27 a.m. Pacific time (0927 GMT) and said it took a suspect into custody. Further details were expected at a news conference scheduled for 09:30 a.m Pacific Time (1630 GMT).
Paul Pelosi was being treated for bruising, severe swelling and other injuries after being severely beaten in the head and body by an assailant wielding a hammer, the Associated Press reported, citing two sources with knowledge of the investigation. ~
~ The husband of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Paul, has been assaulted with a hammer this morning in a San Francisco home invasion by an attacker who was shouting “Where is Nancy, where is Nancy?,” a law enforcement source tells Fox News.
“Early this morning, an assailant broke into the Pelosi residence in San Francisco and violently assaulted Mr. Pelosi,” Pelosi spokesman Drew Hammill said. “The assailant is in custody and the motivation for the attack is under investigation.” Hammill added, “Mr. Pelosi was taken to the hospital, where he is receiving excellent medical care and is expected to make a full recovery.” ~
Funny but my mind didn’t immediately go to Jan 6 “insurrection “. I thought of many of her constituents in SF who are disgusted with her and her inaction on their behalf. Her home was vandalized over a year ago so it’s not like she is queen for a day in her district even though she views herself as such.
So the police were called for a well-being check. The fight over the hammer broke out after they got there. And the assailant was arrested in his underwear.
I’m sorry, it’s up to the authorities to be fully transparent here. You can’t blame people for looking at that sideways.
So a guy in his underwear, who was once involved in a nudist wedding, broke into Pelosi's house with a hammer, police arrived after being called on a "well-being check" at 2 am, walked in to find them struggling over the hammer, watched him assault Paul Pelosi, and arrested him.
@5:11 Interesting. I was waiting for more information on the guy. I was suspecting that the LACK of immediate universal outcry by the usual media suspects that he is definitely a Trumpian Republican white nationalist meant that he is either illegal or a Democrat or both. Not much detail at this point.
He seems to have his fingerprints on both political extremes. And I’m guessing there could be a mental illness factor going on as well, probably not surprisingly.
“Mr. Pelosi was admitted to Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital where he underwent successful surgery to repair a skull fracture and serious injuries to his right arm and hands,” Drew Hammill, spokesman for Speaker Pelosi, said in a statement. “His doctors expect a full recovery.”
Also, according to this report, Mr. Pelosi had been able to call 911 without Depape knowing. When police arrived, Depape was trying to tie him up. My guess is that Depape attacked Pelosi when he realized the police had been called. (That is just a guess based on what we know so far.)
Scratch that last part. I forgot that they were apparently struggling over the hammer when police arrived. At least that is the info we have right now.
Yep no surprise there at all. He is after all the great divider and has spewed hatred towards anyone ie Republicans who will not follow lock step behind his regime.
The story of this attack gets weirder by the second. A call on the police radio from P Pelosi stating the man in the home was a “friend”? Officer stating Pelosi sounded confused. Some saying they both had a hammer and Pelosi wasn’t hit until the police were there but Pelosi was tied up in a chair?
Oh what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive…
Wandering Views 
Nice to see at least some in govt. finally admit the obvious truth. Many have said this since the start, because that’s what the evidence always pointed to. Yet they were mocked and called conspiracy theorists by the medical “experts” because those “experts” were complicit and funding it. It wasn’t a weapon, but they tinkered, and their monster got lose.
“GOP report argues lab leak theory is most likely explanation of COVID-19”
https://hotair.com/john-s-2/2022/10/27/gop-report-argues-lab-leak-theory-is-most-likely-explanation-of-covid-19-n506272
“Minority staff for the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee have released an interim report on the origins of the COVID-19 virus. The 35-page report argues that a lab leak is the most likely explanation for the origin of the virus.
Although the report favors the “lab leak” origin, it does not rule out a market origin. The report also does not indulge the more provocative arguments for how SARS-CoV-2 entered the human population. There is no claim that the virus was engineered as a bioweapon, for example.
Nor does it mention Anthony S. Fauci, the head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, who has been a frequent target of Paul and other lab-leak proponents because his institute helped fund virus research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
The full report is here. It does offer a review of both possibilities but heavily favors the lab leak view. Here’s a section on why the authors believe the lab leak is more likely.
The full report is here. It does offer a review of both possibilities but heavily favors the lab leak view. Here’s a section on why the authors believe the lab leak is more likely.
Nearly three years after the COVID-19 pandemic began, substantial evidence demonstrating that the COVID-19 pandemic was the result of a research-related incident has emerged. A research-related incident is consistent with the early epidemiology showing rapid spread of the virus in Wuhan, with the earliest calls for assistance being located in the near the WIV’s original campus in central Wuhan. It also explains the low genetic diversity of the earliest known SARS-CoV-2 human infections in Wuhan, because the likely index case, would be an infected researcher, is the likely primary source of the virus in Wuhan. A research-related incident also explains the failure to find an intermediate host as well as the failure to find any animal infections pre-dating human COVID-19 cases…
d. Anomalies in Epidemiology of SARS-COV-2 Outbreak
SARS-CoV-2 spilled over into humans only in Wuhan.222 This is a break with the precedent of SARS, MERS, and multiple outbreaks of avian influenza, all of which were much less transmissible than SARS-CoV-2 and infected fewer animals.
The low genetic diversity of the earliest SARS-CoV-2 samples, coupled with one of the two early lineages being more closely related to bat coronaviruses, suggests that COVID-19 pandemic is most likely the result of one, or at most two, spillovers of SARS-CoV-2.223 SARS-CoV-2’s low initial genetic diversity is also a break with the precedent of recent zoonotic spillovers of respiratory viruses.
Critical corroborating evidence of a natural zoonotic spillover is missing. While the absence of evidence is not itself evidence, the lack of corroborating evidence of a zoonotic spillover or spillovers, three years into the pandemic, is highly problematic. If the COVID-19 pandemic is the result of the zoonotic spillover of SARS-CoV-2 in Wuhan from an intermediate host species, there should be evidence of SARS-CoV-2 circulating in animals before it spilled over into humans. Instead, there is no evidence that any animal was infected with SARS-CoV-2 prior to the first human cases.”
The conclusion states:
Based on the analysis of the publicly available information, it appears reasonable to conclude that the COVID-19 pandemic was, more likely than not, the result of a research-related incident. New information, made publicly available and independently verifiable, could change this assessment. However, the hypothesis of a natural zoonotic origin no longer deserves the benefit of the doubt, or the presumption of accuracy. The following are critical outstanding questions that would need to be addressed to be able to more definitively conclude the origins of SARS-CoV-2:
What is the intermediate host species for SARS-CoV-2? Where did it first infect humans?
Where is SARS-CoV-2’s viral reservoir?
How did SARS-CoV-2 acquire its unique genetic features, such as its furin cleavage site?
Advocates of a zoonotic origin theory must provide clear and convincing evidence that a natural zoonotic spillover is the source of the pandemic, as was demonstrated for the 2002-2004 SARS outbreak. In other words, there needs to be verifiable evidence that a natural zoonotic spillover actually occurred, not simply that such a spillover could have occurred.
Scientists who published studies which favored the natural spillover theory earlier this year have already denounced the report as wrong.”
—–
Of course they denounced it, because they don’t want to admit their role in it, or their attacking of those who were right all along.
Here’s the full report.
Click to access report_an_analysis_of_the_origins_of_covid-19_102722.pdf
LikeLiked by 3 people
The ads practically write themselves… 🙂
LikeLiked by 2 people
Good.
LikeLiked by 1 person
You don’t have enough time for the answers…. 🙂
“Democrats Debate Themselves: Why Do We Suck?”
https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2022/10/27/democrats-debate-why-do-we-suck-00063718
“Twelve days before the election, Democrats have yet to lose the House or Senate, or confront the dire, your-lab-results-are-back-and-the-doctor-needs-to-see-you implications for a progressive agenda.
Plenty of prominent party voices, however, believe it’s best to prepare in advance. It is one of the more notable features of the 2022 midterms — the readiness to perform an autopsy on a living patient. Many Democrats believe there is already sufficient evidence to make the question unavoidable: What the hell is our problem?
Too woke, argued former president Barack Obama in a Pod Save America interview with his former aides. Some Democrats are a “buzzkill,” he suggested, by making people “feel as if they are walking on eggshells” that they might say things “the wrong way.”
Too timid on the jobs and economy message, warned Sen. Bernie Sanders. “Young people and working people” won’t turn out, he told CNN, without “a strong, pro-worker Democratic position.”
Too much reliance on abortion-rights positioning, not enough on anti-crime, said James Carville, who believes his 1990s-era political instincts are not as obsolete as a younger generation of liberals believes.
A weak message (and by implication so-so substance) on inflation, pronounced former Sen. Al Franken on his podcast, acknowledging he is “stressed out” by what may happen next month. “Things have not been trending in the right direction of late.”
These are just some entries in a long roster of here’s-why-we-suck analysis from Democrats, in the closing days before the Nov. 8 election. This kind of told-you-so fretting is common after a disappointing election, or even in not-my-fault, not-for-attribution chatter among operatives beforehand.
There are two, closely related reasons why the soul-searching this year started early, even as there remains a decent (though some polls suggest dwindling) chance it won’t be needed.
One, candidates and progressive commentators are describing 2022 as the most important midterm election in generations. Someday, perhaps, we will have an election in which people say, “You know, this one is actually not that big a deal — there’s little at stake either way.” Still, this year — with Donald Trump’s past, present and future still looming over all American politics — does genuinely qualify as consequential. Which means the after-election ruminations will similarly be among the most consequential.
Two, Democrats are genuinely confronting a political moment that for most defies comprehension. As Nancy Pelosi put it in an interview with the New York Times, explaining her against-the-current optimism: “Part of it is, I can’t believe anybody would vote for these people.””
—–
That’s funny Nancy, we were thinking the same about you clowns.
LikeLiked by 2 people
The media continues to destroy their reputation, pathetic as it.
“Fetterman Debate Disaster Reveals Both Democrat Hypocrisy and Media’s Shame
Yet another “mask-off” moment for the Pennsylvania Senate candidate and the Fourth Estate.”
https://spectator.org/fetterman-debate-disaster-reveals-democrat-hypocrisy-and-media-shame/
“It is difficult to describe just how disastrous Tuesday evening’s Pennsylvania Senate debate performance was for Democratic candidate (and current Keystone State Lt. Gov.) John Fetterman. In the course of one incredibly revealing and frankly painful hourlong debate, Fetterman — the victim of a stroke from May 13, just four days before his primary win over Rep. Conor Lamb (D-Pa.) — was exposed as still struggling mightily to regain his full cognitive abilities, and thus wholly unfit to serve Pennsylvanians in what was once considered “the world’s greatest deliberative body.”
It should go without saying that, like every decent American, I wish Fetterman the swiftest convalescence possible under his difficult circumstances. But it is also true that Fetterman’s stroke befell him before the primary — just a few days before, but before the primary date nonetheless. Fetterman’s inner circle, including his ambitious social activist wife, thus had a few days to consult trusted — that is, not Democratic Party donor — doctors to soberly gauge his continued viability as a candidate. While we should all feel bad for Fetterman, then, it must be said that a more altruistic and less cynical political candidate would have likely dropped out after a debilitating stroke such as that which Fetterman suffered. Democrats had a reasonable alternative ready to go, in Lamb.
But now, the Pennsylvania Senate race, which was already a nail-biter, is Dr. Mehmet Oz’s race to lose. And in addition to Fetterman’s glaring cognitive deficiencies, two other things were also exposed for the whole nation to see in the course of that cringeworthy hour of television Tuesday night: the Democrats’ hypocrisy on how mental and cognitive fitness concerns ought to impact the viability of a U.S. Senate candidacy, and how shameful and loathsome the mainstream media’s monthslong cover-up of Fetterman’s health woes is. In fact, the two aspects of this scandalous story fit together quite neatly.
The Democrats’ stances on the Pennsylvania and Georgia Senate races are impossible to reconcile with each other. In Georgia, Republican Senate candidate Herschel Walker, a former football star who has a checkered personal past, has been very open about his past struggles with mental illness. In fact, Walker literally a wrote book about it over a decade ago, titled Breaking Free: My Life with Dissociative Identity Disorder. Walker’s past struggles, about which he has been fully transparent, have often come up during the course of his close race against incumbent Sen. Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.). The Democrats’ basic stance on Walker — which, notably, runs entirely contrary to their general pro-“forgiveness” stance on “criminal justice reform” — is not to forgive, not to show grace, and to tarnish him as an irredeemable candidate.
Suffice it to say that is not how Democrats and their myriad apologists in the press have approached the Pennsylvania Senate contest, which, like the Georgia race, may well determine which party controls the Senate come January. In the Keystone State, the Fetterman campaign, Democrats more broadly, and the mainstream media’s blue-checked Twitterati have been the opposite of transparent about Fetterman’s health issues; they have been outright deceitful. The campaign, Democrats, and the media have taken pains to assure Americans of Fetterman’s health and cognition, often even going so far as to dismiss entirely reasonable health-related questions and concerns as reflecting “ableist” privilege. More generally, journalists — at least prior to Tuesday’s debate — have gone above and beyond to spew bile at anyone daring to question the Regime-approved narrative that Fetterman is entirely competent to be a U.S. senator.
The only notable journalist who reported the truth about Fetterman in the lead-up to Tuesday’s debate was NBC News’ Dasha Burns, who tweeted, “In small talk before the [NBC] interview without [closed] captioning, it wasn’t clear he was understanding our conversation.” As aptly chronicled by Peter Savodnik at Bari Weiss’ Substack earlier this week, Burns was promptly excoriated by the blue-checked mafia. Burns is now owed a big apology. Indeed, if anything, Burns’ mild tweet dramatically understated the severe extent of Fetterman’s cognitive problems.
The Fetterman debate debacle is yet another “mask-off” moment for America’s hyperpartisan Fourth Estate, which time and again demonstrates its eagerness to provide cover for its overlords in the Democratic Party rather than do what it is supposed to do: report accurately, and opine intelligently, on the news of the day and why it matters to the American people. The extent of the media cover-up for Fetterman, in particular, represents the media scandal of the year. And there is a large sample size from which to choose that honor.”
LikeLiked by 1 person
Breathe deeply and enjoy the Democrats newest perfume….
The scent of desperation……
LikeLiked by 1 person
🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡 run WaPo.
And yet…..
LikeLiked by 2 people
But muh democracy…….
“Here Is Everything Democrats Claim Is ‘A Threat To Democracy’”
https://thefederalist.com/2022/10/27/here-is-everything-democrats-claim-is-a-threat-to-democracy/
“It seems like every day Democrats and their cronies in the corrupt corporate media concoct a new, bogus “threat to democracy” that they use to intimidate Americans out of voting for their political opponents.
These “threats” aren’t just overused, they are overexaggerated in an effort to cover up Democrats’ hypocrisy, mask their incompetence, and justify the targeting of their ideological enemies. Meanwhile, it’s the blue party that’s working overtime to erode and replace the actual democratic processes responsible for keeping our nation running.
Here is a list of everything Democrats claim is “a threat to democracy.”
Donald Trump
Americans think corporate media are a bigger “threat to democracy” than former President Donald Trump yet not one day goes by without a Democrat, talking head, or corporate media outlet asserting the Republican is responsible for the downfall of the nation.
The “threat to democracy” accusations began before Trump won the 2016 election, have continued throughout his presidency, and repeatedly make headlines more than a year after the end of his first term.
Republicans
What could possibly be a bigger “threat to democracy” than Democrats’ top Trumpian foe? According to President Joe Biden, it is “MAGA Republicans.”
“Donald Trump and the MAGA Republicans represent an extremism that threatens the very foundations of our republic,” Biden said during a doom-and-gloom speech in Philadelphia earlier this year.
Whether it’s Republican voters, Republican governors, Republican members of Congress, Republican-controlled legislatures, or even Republican grandmas, Democrats and the media say anyone associated with the GOP could destroy our nation and deserves punishment.
Ted Cruz
Brookings, a left-leaning think tank, described Republican Sen. Ted Cruz as one of many “copycat candidates who parrot Trump’s moves and endorse his anti-democratic tactics” in a piece titled, “Trump is not the only threat to democracy.”
Josh Hawley
Republican Sen. Josh Hawley earned the same judgment from Brookings as Cruz. Additionally, when he objected to certifying the 2020 presidential election results, he (along with Cruz and other GOP senators) was smeared by The Washington Post as one of “the Constitution’s most dangerous domestic enemies.”
Ron DeSantis
According to Democrats, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis is a raging, extreme “threat to democracy” for simply governing as a Republican.
“Ron DeSantis Would Kill Democracy Slowly and Methodically,” one article in New York Magazine warned.
Dr. Oz
“An impaired Fetterman who does not pose a threat to our democracy is better than a polished Oz who does. Remember what’s at stake here,” a senior adviser at The Lincoln Project tweeted shortly after the political opponents’ debate.”
——-
On and on it goes, there’s plenty more.
According to D’s, everything we disagree with is the worst thing ever, and all R’s are worse than Hitler.
That’s their campaign strategy in a nut shell.
LikeLiked by 2 people
“Why Are Virginia Students Studying Sexuality, Body Size, And Privilege In Spanish Class?”
I can answer this.
Because they’re being indoctrinated, not educated.
—
https://thefederalist.com/2022/10/28/virginia-students-no-comprendo-why-spanish-class-is-spent-identifying-sexuality-body-size-and-privilege/
“Earlier this month, spies and sleuths walked through the doors of the Central Intelligence Agency’s top-secret headquarters here in the D.C. suburbs for a day of work fighting foreign threats to the United States. Around the corner, on Georgetown Pike, teens shuffled through the doors of classroom No. 1208 at Langley High School for 90 minutes of Spanish II.
“Hola!” the teacher said to them, as they started class.
What the teens got instead of a normal tutorial in Spanish was a surprise lesson on “Identidad,” or “Identity,” with students handed a two-page worksheet created by the University of Michigan’s Program on Intergroup Relations. It included a list of “Social Identity Groups,” not teaching the students about Spanish-language communities, but probing personal, intrusive, and even shaming questions right off a Buzzword Bingo card in identity politics, and asking them to pen their self-identities into a “Social Identity Wheel.””
“For these teens as young as 14, they faced the task — in the early morning class of Spanish II on Thursday, Oct. 13 — of identifying their “Social Identity Groups,” including their “Sexual Orientation,” with this wide array of confusing choices: “Lesbian,” “Gay,” “Bisexual,” “Heterosexual,” “Pan-Attractional,” “Attractionality” and, in case those didn’t cover it, “Questioning.”
For their “sex,” these young students had “intersex” among their choices, along with female and male.
For gender, they had “Woman, Man, Transgender, Post-Gender.”
—
“Despite body image being such an issue, especially among teen girls, the students were offered a “social identity group” of “Body Size/ Type,” with “Fat,” “Person of Size,” and “Thin” as examples. One irked Langley mother said, “Really? With all of the body-shaming that girls already feel?”
In the Langley High School community, many parents settled in the nation’s capital to affect U.S. and global policy in high-level posts from the White House, Congress, Defense Department, and even the CIA. These parents work at law firms, media companies, and government contractors, but, like youth everywhere, their children experience the same, complicated lives of teens, with depression, anxiety, and growing pains.
In the oversimplification of societal dynamics that activists have increasingly imposed on children, the Spanish II students also had the task of identifying their “Social Class,” with choices including “Poor,” “Working Class,” “Lower-Middle Class,” “Upper-Middle Class,” “Owning Class,” and “Ruling Class,” another judgment on the young people.
To cap off this exercise, their teacher, Teresa Quigley, instructed them to ponder if they were in a “marginalized group” that is “disenfranchised and exploited” or a “privileged group” with “unearned privileged” status in society. Students looked at each other, confused about what they were doing.
“What does any of this have to do with learning Spanish?” a local mother asked.
To parents and alumni, this kind of subversion of a simple Spanish lesson is emblematic of the national assault on education that led this week to the results the U.S. Education Department released in “The Nation’s Report Card,” with historically low performances by students in math and reading, including in Virginia. As much as teachers union leaders and too many Democratic politicians insist the teachings of critical race theory are not taught in K-12 classrooms, this type of lesson is exactly how students are introduced to concepts key to critical race theory.
The lesson is a stark reminder that, while Virginia is an inspiration to many after Republican Glenn Youngkin won the governor’s race in 2021, parents must remain vigilant. It’s stealth lessons like this one that distract students when they are learning, introduce them to ideas that aren’t age-appropriate, and divide students, rather than connect them.”
LikeLiked by 3 people
You shouldn’t.
“How Can We Trust the CDC with Our Children’s Health?
The CDC has blown its credibility and Americans should not be forced to comply with mandates that rely on
recommendations from them.”
https://amgreatness.com/2022/10/27/how-can-we-trust-the-cdc-with-our-childrens-health/
“CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky tested positive for COVID last week in spite of being “up to date” with her vaccines. Although the press release didn’t say what “up to date” meant, it’s reasonable to assume that Walensky has had multiple booster shots on top of the original vaccination. Just a few days earlier, the CDC recommended adding COVID vaccines to regular immunization requirements for children attending public school.
Don’t worry, the Washington Post reassured us in the vain hope of keeping fear of mandates out of midterm voters’ minds, the CDC doesn’t have the power to mandate anything.
Of course, we live in a world where the word “recommendation” no longer means something is “voluntary.” It’s irrelevant that the CDC does not have the legal authority to mandate vaccines as a condition for school attendance. We all know that when the CDC recommends something, health officials and school boards enforce the “recommendation” as if it were a command from the high priestess herself.
Many skeptics with memories noted how, in 2021, Walensky assured the public, “we know that at the individual level, vaccinated people are safe.” But what are they safe from? Falling anvils and alien attacks? Because, as the doctor must now admit, vaccinations do not keep you safe from COVID. Everyone knows somebody who took the vaccination and has since contracted COVID. Just 12 months ago, you could be censored on Facebook for suggesting what is now obviously true. We still don’t know how many of the vaccinated died from COVID.
So if the vaccines don’t stop people from getting COVID, how did the CDC reach the conclusion that schools should require COVID vaccinations to enter school? What is the CDC telling us to justify this “recommendation” that, as we all know, is really a mandate? It now turns out that the CDC made booster recommendations without the benefit of any data to show additional shots would be safe or effective. That’s not science, and we shouldn’t have to comply with mandates based on guesses and wishful thinking.
Anyone attempting to research the risks and benefits of vaccinating children against COVID will quickly arrive at the CDC’s cartoonish fact sheet. The CDC declares: “The known risks of COVID-19 and possible severe complications outweigh the potential risks of having a rare, adverse reaction to the vaccination.” But is that true? What about informing people of the data and allowing individuals to make their own choices? It’s one thing to mandate a vaccine to prevent the spread. But if the only benefit is lessening the symptoms, the government should have no role in the decision.
When one clicks through to the CDC’s supporting information for this claim, one finds this fact sheet warning of the health risks of a child contracting COVID. These include something called “multisymptom inflammatory syndrome,” in severe cases which include many of the flu-like symptoms we’ve come to associate with COVID over the past two years (fever, vomiting, diarrhea, etc.). Notably missing from the list of severe outcomes? Long-term damage to a child’s heart.
The CDC does not explain how it weighed the risks of COVID against the risks of vaccinating children. It did not provide any data in this fact sheet that might allow the reader to reconstruct the CDC’s judgment. We just have to take it on faith. “Trust the science.”
Coincidentally, Science.org this month published an eye-opening piece analyzing vaccination risks to children. The authors noted,
COVID-19 vaccines do have a rare but worrisome cardiac side effect. Myocarditis, an inflammation of the heart muscle that can cause chest pain and shortness of breath, has disproportionately struck older boys and young men who received the shots. Only one out of several thousand in those age groups is affected, and most quickly feel better. A tiny number of deaths have been tentatively linked to vaccine myocarditis around the world. But several new studies suggest the heart muscle can take months to heal, and some scientists worry about what this means for patients long term.
The piece goes on to report that the FDA, on which the CDC so frequently relies for its “vaccines are safe” statements, “has ordered vaccine makers Pfizer and Moderna to conduct a raft of studies to assess these risks.” The authors further wrote,
“Earlier this month, a team from Kaiser Permanente Northern California and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reported the risk of myocarditis or pericarditis—inflammation of the tissue surrounding the heart—was about one in 6700 in 12- to 15-year-old boys following the second vaccine dose, and about one in 16,000 following the first booster. In 16- and 17-year-olds, it was about one in 8000 after the second dose and one in 6000 after the first booster. Men ages 18 to 30 have a somewhat elevated risk as well.
While the symptoms related to vaccine-induced heart damage usually abate, one cardiologist quoted by the piece noted a nagging observation that troubled him:
Although their heart rhythm is normal and they usually feel fine, MRI scans of their heart often show something called late gadolinium enhancement (LGE), which signifies injury to the muscle. In June, Portman and his colleagues reported in The Journal of Pediatrics that 11 of 16 patients had LGE about 4 months after their bout of myocarditis, although the area affected in the heart had shrunk since they were hospitalized.
Now some researchers are quick to point out that buried deep in the data is evidence that COVID itself also causes myocarditis in young people. But critically missing from this argument is any data demonstrating that taking the shot will reduce the chances of this dangerous complication. Isn’t it also possible that the component in the vaccine that triggers myocarditis actually adds to the risk if the person later gets COVID? If the vaccine prevented a COVID infection—which it does not—it might be worth taking the chance. But as it stands, we don’t know whether taking the vaccine just makes things worse.
The CDC has a terrible track record of hiding adverse effect data regarding the vaccines. As the New York Times noted in February, “When the CDC published the first significant data on the effectiveness of boosters in adults younger than 65 two weeks ago, it left out the numbers for a huge portion of that population: 18- to 49-year-olds, the group least likely to benefit from extra shots, because the first two doses already left them well-protected.”
Why hide this data in particular? The CDC didn’t say. But the obvious suspicion is that this is the group for which COVID poses relatively mild risks which do not outweigh the risks of an adverse effect from the vaccine.
The New York Times reported in December that over 200 million Americans were fully vaccinated. As Joe Biden recently noted, this number has fallen to just 20 million Americans as the definition of “fully vaccinated” has expanded to require booster after booster. Is that true? Yes, it is. CDC statistics put the number at 19.4 million. That means 90 percent of the people who faithfully took the vaccine have come to doubt what they’re being told about the boosters. The Biden Administration spent vast sums of public money talking up vaccinations; public confidence imploded anyway.”
LikeLiked by 2 people
Houston we have a problem….
“The Updated mRNA COVID Boosters Are a Bust, Two New Studies Show”
https://amgreatness.com/2022/10/27/the-updated-mrna-covid-boosters-are-a-bust-two-new-studies-show/
“The new, heavily promoted mRNA booster shots from Pfizer and Moderna are not all they’re cracked up to be, according to two new preprint studies.
The boosters perform no better against Omicron than the fourth jab with the original formulation,” a new study from scientists at Columbia University in New York City found. The updated Covid-19 booster shots have been advertised as “bivalent,” meaning they target the original coronavirus strain as well as the Omicron BA.4/BA.5 subvariants.
However, the Columbia paper found that the newer Omicron variants easily evade both types of boosters, Alex Berenson reported on Substack.
The report strongly suggests anyone who received mRNA shots should hope the next Sars-Cov-2 variants remain mild as the current Omicron variants, because those folks will have very little protection from future Sars-Cov-2 variants going forward.
In other words: immune imprinting and original mRNA vaccine antigenic sin are real, and they’re spectacular (spectacularly bad).
About the only good news in the study actually comes from vaccine failure. People who had three shots and then were infected with Omicron had markedly higher antibody levels than people who received either booster.
The boosters were reportedly authorized for human use based on data from eight baby mice.
The Columbia scientists acknowledged that their findings “may be indicative of immunological imprinting”—also known as original antigenic sin—a phenomenon in which an initial exposure to a virus by infection or vaccination limits a person’s future immune response against new variants.
Dr. David Ho, one of the world’s top virologists, released the paper on Monday.
Another study released by scientists at Harvard University on Monday came to essentially the same conclusion.
“Waning immunity following mRNA vaccination and the emergence of SARS-CoV-2 variants has led to reduced mRNA vaccine efficacy against both symptomatic infection and
severe disease,” the Harvard scientists concluded.
Dissident doctors and scientists like Drs. Robert Malone, Peter McCullough, Ryan Cole, and Michael Yeadon have been warning of this for over a year, and now other medical scientists who aren’t totally captured by Big Pharma appear to be catching up.
These findings come amid the Biden regime’s aggressive nationwide campaign to get the updated COVID boosters in American arms.
“We have to be careful when we get in front of the American public and try and sell this vaccine as something that’s significantly better when all the evidence we have so far doesn’t support that,” said Dr. Paul Offit, a member of the FDA’s independent vaccine advisory committee.
Joe Biden received his fifth COVID-19 shot on Tuesday, and warned Americans that the virus was still a threat, even though he declared that the pandemic was “over” just last month.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky, who received the Covid-19 booster in September, meanwhile, is the latest Biden official to test positive for Covid-19.”
LikeLiked by 2 people
Of course they did….
“The literary world comes out for censorship”
https://hotair.com/david-strom/2022/10/27/the-literary-world-comes-out-for-censorship-n506184
“If there is one thing you can count on from publishers, academics, writers, MSM figures, and Leftists it is defending the right to shove pornography right into the faces of children. Anything less than pornographic books in the classroom is book banning.
But when it comes to publishing books by conservatives, not so much. Publishing books by conservatives is an attack on human rights and should be stopped. It is a literal violation of human rights to allow conservatives to have their say in the public square.
That is the position that over 325 (and counting–people are signing up continually) editors, publishers, booksellers, and other figures in the literary world. They are calling on Penguin Random House to not publish Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s forthcoming memoir. As reported by Publisher’s Weekly:
An open letter has begun circulating in publishing circles, in protest of the acquisition of Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s forthcoming memoir by Penguin Random House. The statement, posted today, has been circulating online, including on the Instagram account @publishersbrunch, whose anonymous administrator told PW that the statement was drafted and circulated by “a group of concerned publishing professionals.”
In April 2021, AP reported that Coney Barrett had inked a book deal with Sentinel, an imprint of Penguin Random House. At the time the deal was announced, Sentinel founder, president, and publisher Adrian Zackheim declined to provide additional details. However, Politico, citing three anonymous “publishing industry sources,” reported that the Coney Barrett had garnered a $2 million advance for the book—a sum repeated in the statement.
The open letter, much of which I quote below, was inspired by the danger of violent fascists like you and me destroying America by voting.
“With the midterms coming up, and the 2024 election looming, the group decided it was time to make a statement,” @publishersbrunch told PW on behalf of the group. “We cannot, and will not, amplify the voices of extremists (like Amy Coney Barrett) who would gladly take away the rights of millions of Americans if given the chance. I’m extremely proud to see the responses thus far and hope that this action encourages others in the industry to speak out!”
The publishing world’s definition of free speech has been “evolving” for some time now. As you may recall the American Bookseller’s Association actually publicly apologized for distributing Abigail Shrier’s book on the transgender movement:
As soon as Casey Morrissey opened the box of books, they were furious. [DS–“they” pronoun, of course]
The title at the top of the stack was Abigail Shrier’s “Irreversible Damage: The Transgender Craze Seducing Our Daughters,”a contentious tome that has sparked cries of transphobia since its release last summer.
“Do you know how that feels, as a trans bookseller and book buyer?” Morrissey, who works at Greenlight Bookstores in Brooklyn tweeted Wednesday. “It isn’t even a new title, so it really caught me in the gut. Do better.”
The American Booksellers Association quickly apologized for including the nonfiction book, which it characterized as “anti-trans,” in its July mailing to its 750 member bookstores. The trade organization’s monthly “white box” includes marketing materials, advance copies of books and finished titles the ABA wants booksellers to consider stocking.
“This is a serious, violent incident that goes against ABA’s … policies, values, and everything we believe and support,” the ABA wrote on Twitter. “It is inexcusable.”
The organization also vowed to take concrete steps to remedy the harm it said it had caused.
Sending out a book is “violent,” if it is the wrong book. Yet books that instruct children in oral sex, sadomasochistic practices, and other obscenities must be in elementary school classrooms because doing otherwise is censorship.
The open letter is a hoot, twisting around itself to insist that demanding the book not be published is not censorship, but upholding basic human rights.”
LikeLiked by 3 people
The devil is working hard these days to seduce, confuse and kill.
Sadly, women pregnant with babies who will possibly have DS are pressured to abort. They are given the very worst-case scenarios. Fear is a powerful motivator. It is truly sad that at a time when the medical system is most able to help those with DS there are so many in the field ready, willing and able to kill them.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Pelosi’s husband was “violently” attacked during a “home invasion” this morning. As I was reading the AP “report” I found this interesting little tid bit they added….
While the circumstances of the attack are unclear, the attack raises questions about the safety of members of Congress and their families as threats to lawmakers are at an all-time high almost two years after the deadly Capitol insurrection. The attack also comes just 11 days ahead of midterm elections in which crime and public safety have emerged as top concerns among Americans.
So now there is “concern” for the protection of Congress members…there was none for our Supreme Court conservative Justices nor their family members. And what the heck does the “deadly” Capitol “insurrection” have to do with this? And the only person who died on Jan 6 was Ashli Babbitt.
Journalist much there AP???? I’m waiting with bated breath to see which MAGA follower attacked Pelosi! Maybe it was Trump himself!!
LikeLiked by 2 people
The motive is unknown, but the suspect is in custody, so we may know more within the day. (And I see there’s a news conference scheduled shortly.)
But AP isn’t wrong to raise that question — it’s the obvious question we all ask, after all.
From Reuter’s:
~ The Capitol Police said a motive for the attack was still under investigation. The Associated Press reported that the attack was not random and the assailant specifically targeted the home. The speaker’s office said Paul Pelosi was
“violently assaulted.”
The circumstances of the attack were unclear, including how the intruder got into the home. The assault comes less than two weeks before the Nov. 8 midterm elections, in which control of the House and the Senate is at stake.
The San Francisco Police said it responded to a home break-in at 02:27 a.m. Pacific time (0927 GMT) and said it took a suspect into custody. Further details were expected at a news conference scheduled for 09:30 a.m Pacific Time (1630 GMT).
Paul Pelosi was being treated for bruising, severe swelling and other injuries after being severely beaten in the head and body by an assailant wielding a hammer, the Associated Press reported, citing two sources with knowledge of the investigation. ~
LikeLike
Fox News now reporting:
~ The husband of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Paul, has been assaulted with a hammer this morning in a San Francisco home invasion by an attacker who was shouting “Where is Nancy, where is Nancy?,” a law enforcement source tells Fox News.
“Early this morning, an assailant broke into the Pelosi residence in San Francisco and violently assaulted Mr. Pelosi,” Pelosi spokesman Drew Hammill said. “The assailant is in custody and the motivation for the attack is under investigation.” Hammill added, “Mr. Pelosi was taken to the hospital, where he is receiving excellent medical care and is expected to make a full recovery.” ~
LikeLike
Jussie Smollet false flag alert…
LikeLiked by 1 person
Funny but my mind didn’t immediately go to Jan 6 “insurrection “. I thought of many of her constituents in SF who are disgusted with her and her inaction on their behalf. Her home was vandalized over a year ago so it’s not like she is queen for a day in her district even though she views herself as such.
LikeLike
Keep this in mind as the media will now tell everyone this guy is a republican.
Hemp jewelery maker?
Clearly a Republican… 🙄
LikeLiked by 1 person
Uh…..
LikeLiked by 1 person
Bizzare.
LikeLiked by 2 people
LikeLiked by 1 person
It just gets more and more bizzare.
Apparently he is a homeless illegal from Canada, known to authorities, and with an extensive criminal record, and numerous bizzare online rantings.
He should have been deported long ago, but SF is a sanctuary city.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@5:11 Interesting. I was waiting for more information on the guy. I was suspecting that the LACK of immediate universal outcry by the usual media suspects that he is definitely a Trumpian Republican white nationalist meant that he is either illegal or a Democrat or both. Not much detail at this point.
LikeLiked by 1 person
He seems to have his fingerprints on both political extremes. And I’m guessing there could be a mental illness factor going on as well, probably not surprisingly.
LikeLike
A quote from the hospital spokesman:
“Mr. Pelosi was admitted to Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital where he underwent successful surgery to repair a skull fracture and serious injuries to his right arm and hands,” Drew Hammill, spokesman for Speaker Pelosi, said in a statement. “His doctors expect a full recovery.”
Also, according to this report, Mr. Pelosi had been able to call 911 without Depape knowing. When police arrived, Depape was trying to tie him up. My guess is that Depape attacked Pelosi when he realized the police had been called. (That is just a guess based on what we know so far.)
https://www.nbcconnecticut.com/news/national-international/nancy-pelosis-husband-violently-assaulted-in-home-invasion-in-san-francisco/2903150/?_osource=newltr_v2_station_Hdlines_WVIT
LikeLike
Scratch that last part. I forgot that they were apparently struggling over the hammer when police arrived. At least that is the info we have right now.
LikeLike
And here it is. Trump Republicans are responsible. Naturally.
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2022/10/28/joe-biden-blames-gop-for-attack-on-paul-pelosi-he-used-same-chant-as-january-6th-protesters/
LikeLiked by 2 people
Yep no surprise there at all. He is after all the great divider and has spewed hatred towards anyone ie Republicans who will not follow lock step behind his regime.
The story of this attack gets weirder by the second. A call on the police radio from P Pelosi stating the man in the home was a “friend”? Officer stating Pelosi sounded confused. Some saying they both had a hammer and Pelosi wasn’t hit until the police were there but Pelosi was tied up in a chair?
Oh what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive…
LikeLiked by 1 person
Sure as the sun rises….
Is there no end to Trump’s evil powers?
🙄
LikeLiked by 1 person