16 thoughts on “News/Politics 11-14-22

  1. Our whole area voted primarily Republican. Such a thing would have been unthinkable not that many years ago. So many people were essentially pushed out of the Democratic party. The metro areas are what make the state blue and that seems not unusual around the country.

    Liked by 3 people

  2. Remember kids, some election deniers are more equal than others. 🙂

    Like

  3. Come to America, Dems will help you kill your children.

    Joe Biden’s human trafficking ring continues.

    “Border Crisis: Biden Admin Transporting Pregnant Unaccompanied Girls to States Without Abortion Restrictions

    “This may involve transporting a minor to a state in which abortion is lawful and available, if the minor is currently in a state in which abortion is not lawful or available.””

    https://legalinsurrection.com/2022/11/border-crisis-biden-admin-transporting-pregnant-unaccompanied-girls-to-states-without-abortion-restrictions/

    “The Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR), an agency within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), works to house unaccompanied children (UC) at the border who are not legal American citizens.

    ORR revised Field Guidance #21 to include directions to send pregnant UC to states without abortion restrictions since SCOTUS overturned Roe v. Wade.

    In 2017, the ACLU sued the Trump administration (J.D. V. AZAR, FORMERLY GARZA V. AZAR AND GARZA V. HARGAN) after ORR prevented a teenager from getting an abortion.

    In September 2020, under Biden’s administration, the ORR “adopted a new policy under which it would not interfere with immigrant minors’ access to abortion and related services and would adopt strict limits on disclosure of minors’ pregnancy and abortion information.”

    Yes. Children. In other words, minors. Humans under 18 years old (emphasis mine):

    This Field Guidance confirms that ORR staff and care providers must not prevent UC from accessing legal abortion- related services and that ORR staff and care providers must make all reasonable efforts to facilitate access to these services if requested by the UC. This may involve transporting a minor to a state in which abortion is lawful and available, if the minor is currently in a state in which abortion is not lawful or available.

    I cannot find an age restriction within the document. So does that mean they can take little children to get abortions?

    ORR stressed the new policy is in compliance with the Garza decision. From the document (emphasis mine):

    When receiving a DHS referral for UC to ORR, ORR Intakes Team typically attempts to place the UC at a care provider program located in geographical proximity to the area where DHS encountered the UC, taking into consideration the individual needs of the UC (see UC MAP Section 1.3.2).

    In the case of any referral of pregnant UC and/or UC who are a victim of sexual based crimes:

    • ORR Intakes Team must prioritize placement of pregnant UC and UC who are victims of sexual-based crimes in states without abortion bans and with broad access to reproductive health care for minors. When bed space in those states is limited, the ORR Intakes Team must use their professional discretion and judgment and available information, to place UC in the least restrictive placement with available bed space, prioritizing facilities that are licensed to care for pregnant UC.
    The care provider staff must inform the pregnant UC of her “reproductive health care options.”

    The provider has to inform ORR immediately if the girl requests an abortion. That’s when ORR will move the girl to an abortion state.”

    Liked by 1 person

  4. If it’s all legit, why not hand count to be sure?

    You know the answer…

    https://hotair.com/jazz-shaw/2022/11/12/the-battle-over-a-100-hand-count-in-arizona-pulls-back-the-mask-n510334

    “Some day, perhaps even sometime this year if we’re lucky, when election officials in Arizona finally find someone capable of mastering preschool mathematics and they finish counting their ballots, we may know the outcome of the 2022 midterm elections. But that day is not today, my friends. They are somehow still flummoxed by the task of gathering up hundreds of thousands of ballots and feeding them into machines of dubious efficacy. Meanwhile, a different set of election supervisors appears to be ready to move forward with a hand count of nearly all of the ballots. Those officials are facing threats from state Democrats, however. The liberals have gone to court and obtained an order to forbid any such action, though the ruling seems to defy the state’s election laws. But even under the ominous threat of criminal charges, the group of election “radicals” appears to be ready to start the count as early as this weekend. (Associated Press)

    The board of supervisors in a southern Arizona county will meet next week to consider counting nearly all the ballots cast in-person on Election Day, despite an earlier court order limiting the hand-count driven by unfounded distrust in machines that tabulate votes.

    The actual count may start before Tuesday’s planned meeting of the Cochise County board, and the local prosecutor is warning starting it at any time may lead to criminal charges.

    The moves come just days after a judge ruled that state law bars expanding the normal small hand-count audit of early ballots. He also ruled that a 100% hand-count of Election Day ballots is illegal because any expansion for precincts chosen for those reviews must be picked at random.

    The details of the election law in question make it unclear how this judge’s ruling could withstand a challenge. The normal process typically only involves a handful of precincts undergoing a hand count. But that’s by tradition, not by law. The law only says that the precincts subjected to a hand count must be selected “at random.” The judge’s order even admits that the number could be increased.

    How much the number could be increased isn’t specified. So the rogue election officials are changing the percentage from two to 99.8. And they would indeed be chosen at random. If the Democrats want to prevent a nearly total hand count of the ballots, it seems as if they would need to first amend the state’s election laws.

    There is seemingly more being revealed here than any potential flaws in Arizona’s electoral process or voting machinery. Why would Democrats be so uniformly opposed to a hand count? What is the downside of doing it? When the “official” count as tallied by the machines is finished, they can release those results immediately. But even if it takes weeks to complete the hand count, those numbers could then be matched against the machine tally.

    In what universe is that a bad thing? If the counts match up (or come within a reasonable margin of error that wouldn’t change the outcome), then all is right with the world and the confidence of the voters will be enhanced. If the numbers are grossly different, then a serious problem will have been exposed and corrective measures can be taken prior to the next election. Even if it leads to the final result being changed, people will at least be able to walk away feeling that the election was fairly conducted and decided.”

    ———

    In the universe where Dems have things they wish to remain hidden.

    Liked by 2 people

  5. Hmmmmm…..

    What do they all have in common?

    https://townhall.com/tipsheet/miacathell/2022/11/11/these-counties-experiencing-election-issues-have-one-thing-in-common-n2615689

    “It suffices to say that Election Day didn’t go as planned for some polling places that experienced and are still experiencing ballot-counting issues. Despite the varying election-related difficulties, multiple jurisdictions share one foreseen commonality. There’s a common thread connecting five counties spread across several states that were in disarray on Election Day: federal “monitors.”

    On the eve of the elections, the Biden administration’s Department of Justice announced Monday it would be dispatching such monitors to as many as 64 jurisdictions in almost half of U.S. states on Election Day to oversee federal election law “compliance.”

    According to the DOJ’s watch list, Pennsylvania’s Luzerne County, Texas’s Harris County, Arizona’s Maricopa County, and Pima County, and Nevada’s Washoe County all had the feds there “monitoring” polls. The nationwide deployment is a notable expansion. Nevada wasn’t on the DOJ’s roster two years ago during the presidential election cycle in 2020. Still, it was on the DOJ’s radar this time, and Pima County—Arizona’s second-most populous, which holds Tucscon—is among the new additions.

    These five jurisdictions supposedly under in-person DOJ supervision throughout Tuesday suffered major muck-ups.

    Luzerne County, the most populous county in northeastern Pennsylvania, had a serious supply shortage of the paper used in voting machines to tabulate ballots. It was an egregious Election Day depletion that stopped voting in dozens of the county’s polling places, causing voters to be “turned away” and long lines for the patient Pennsylvanians who grinned and bared it. A court later issued an order allowing Luzerne County polls to remain open for two additional hours past closing time. The judge ordering the extension wrote: “Voters, through no fault of their own, were disenfranchised and denied the fundamental right to vote.”

    Voting sites across Harris County, the Lone Star State’s largest county encompassing Houston, opened late on Election Day, prompting groups to file suit for an extra hour of voting, granted by a district court judge. After the court order was challenged by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, a Republican seeking re-election and winning, the Texas Supreme Court ruled that ballots cast at any of the county’s 781 polls in the final hour should be placed aside for the time being.

    Texans who arrived to vote after the normal closing time at 7 p.m. but were in line by 8 p.m. had to cast provisional ballots. According to the state’s high court ruling, the provisional votes were to be kept separate from the overall tally. At the same time, the legal process played out, Houston Public Media reported, “sealed” away in an “envelope” instead of being inserted into the scanning machine and then tabulated at the “Central Count station” located inside of the massive Houston-based NRG Arena.”

    Liked by 2 people

  6. Time to purge the useless seat warmers.

    “Today’s Republican Party demonstrates the problem of putting new wine into old bottles.”

    https://americanmind.org/salvo/dont-crash-my-party/

    “Those who occupy the commanding heights of established authority are usually boring personalities by necessity, institutional design, and supporting culture. Mediocrity is the rule for the gatekeepers of established power.

    Think of onetime RNC chairman Reince Priebus—with his Pee Wee Herman good looks, wit, and charm—fielding candidates like Mitt Romney and Jeb Bush, trying to appeal to just enough rank-and-file Republicans in the primary and then general election voters in November to win.

    My position on the idea animating this symposium is the following: it’s to be expected that the RNC, like any established, institutional political player, will try to exclude folks whom it doesn’t like and who threaten its enduring interests. To do so is to fulfill its cornerstone, self-preservative function. It’s even a term of political science: “The Law of Conservative Exclusion.” (Pure Theory of Politics, Bertrand De Jouvenel, Part IV, Chapter 2, Liberty Fund Press.)

    The basic idea is that political entrepreneurs—dynamic personalities with a public design and purpose—give rise to movements that eventually transform into established institutions, eventually to be guided by folks like Reince Priebus. A modern party competing at all levels of government to run something as complex and powerful as the United States of America needs binders full of predictable, qualified, company men and women. The type of candidate who can satisfy the diverse and often warring internal interests that rage within a major political party is very rarely an exciting personality.

    Think of the retail political skill set required to found the Republican Party itself. It’s populist to the core. It takes a pretty dynamic and dangerous, “Here I stand and can do no other” type to found a new party, or a social or economic power. Men like Abraham Lincoln, Samuel Gompers, Martin Luther King, and Steve Jobs all hailed from the tribe of disrupters—better to meet them in history books than to have to deal with them when they manifest themselves in the flesh.

    Such characters are always resisted by the establishment. And the disrupters understand this. They know who they are. They expect those being overturned to fight for their status. Most disrupters fail. The establishment wins more then it loses. Those few who do succeed, and help build or rebuild institutions in their name, are always outnumbered by lesser types like Mitt Romney, Al Sharpton, and Tim Cook. This is a datum of politics.

    There is a tragedy in the Law of Conservative Exclusion. It can be too successful in keeping out the new blood—the dynamism—that it requires to fulfill its charge of maintaining institutional continuity and vitality in the face of change.

    The Kristol family offers an instructive example of how movements are born, and, when poorly managed, die. Irving Kristol was an intellectual entrepreneur who created first a neo-conservative persuasion and then a movement. Bill, his son, was not a creator like his father but a mandarin. His judgment was consistently poor up until Donald Trump forced himself upon the Republican Party, at which point things went terribly for Bill. He did everything in his power to deny Trump the Republican nomination, and, when beaten, shifted allegiance and made common cause with Democrats to purge Trump and his MAGA ilk. Sadly, the neoconservatives of days gone by are now neoliberals. There exists no circumstance under which they will be allowed to return to the Republican fold, let alone to leadership.

    Trump is presently knee-deep in trench warfare to remake the Republican Party into a populist party—an effort being resisted internally, though to little public note. After Trump won the White House, many of the establishment folks who opposed his hostile takeover became more open to the Republican populism. Trump saw cracks in the Democratic Party’s working-class blue wall and gave a Republican voice to their concerns with his candidacy, and later with his presidency and policies. He brought new life into the Republican Party—a popular energy and rootedness— that could transform it into a genuine rival to the Our Democracy Party and its progressive arc-of-history claim.

    My sense is that Ronna Romney McDaniel sees the enduring value of opening the Republican Party’s vision to more populist expressions. She is a respectful niece of a Republican aristocratic family, but at the same time she seems to understand that the future of the Republican Party is in becoming more populist.

    My two cents on the midterms.

    If you want to know what happened on a candidate level, follow the money. We are all talking about “candidate quality” as the reason behind the trickle instead of the wave. But it’s hard to accept the candidate-quality mantra, particularly when the only example that we can hang on is Dr. Oz. Fact: the Democrats got behind John Fetterman and outspent Oz, and won. Fetterman was certainly not a better candidate than Oz. Yes, Oz was a carpet bagger. In contrast, Fetterman is a Carhartt bagger—a trustafarian with a series of numbers on his arms that I believe is a running IOU list to his rich daddy. When a renowned heart surgeon and TV doctor does not win against a disabled stroke victim, it’s about money and organization, not candidate quality.

    I’d like to see a number on how much Republicans spent compared to the Democrats on the races that mattered. Mitch McConnell managed his chip count as you would expect, spending just enough to keep the narrative going on Donald Trump’s inability as party leader and stock picker of talent, and sowing a post-midterm division between Trump and Ron DeSantis. And, in Mitch’s defense, if Trump’s picks had won, he would be out of a job.

    Trump lacked the discipline to put his own sizable war chest where his mind, reputation, and populist future were on the line. It appears that Trump doesn’t know what he is up against, which does not inspire confidence.”

    Liked by 1 person

  7. Reverse discrimination and racism is still discrimination and racism….

    “Over 50 Percent of Companies Discriminate AGAINST White Men in Hiring, Survey Finds

    “Fifty-two percent of companies use ‘Reverse Discrimination’ according to hiring managers, and 1 in 6 are told to ‘deprioritize’ white men.””

    https://legalinsurrection.com/2022/11/over-50-percent-of-companies-discriminate-against-white-men-in-hiring-survey-finds/

    “A new survey by ResumeBuilder has found that more than 50 percent of companies discriminate against white men in their hiring practices.

    According to our intellectual betters in media and politics, we’re not supposed to believe this because white men are the most privileged class.

    The DC Enquirer reports:

    Stunning New Survey Shows 52% Of Companies Actively Discriminate Against White Men When Hiring

    A new study published by ResumeBuilder Monday has confirmed what many Americans struggling with employment post-COVID lockdowns have already noticed: in many roles, white men need not apply. Fifty-two percent of companies use ‘Reverse Discrimination’ according to hiring managers, and 1 in 6 are told to ‘deprioritize’ white men. Even worse, 95% of them believe their DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion) initiatives are improving their companies.

    In a well-documented, headlong plunge to embrace DEI, many firms have reportedly taken a stance of discrimination against white male job applicants according to a ResumeBuilder study.

    With affirmative action making its way to the Supreme Court, the practice has come under increased scrutiny. Even a recent column in The Washington Post in August took note:

    “I was chatting with one of my bosses the other day about a potential new hire. He let slip that the executive team ultimately did not extend an offer because “we didn’t need another White guy.” He literally said this out loud. I was taken aback,”

    ResumeBuilder surveyed 1,000 hiring managers across the country in early November to find out how many believe that reverse discrimination is an issue impacting the workplace. The findings were absolutely damning.

    “52% believe their company practices “reverse discrimination” in hiring”
    “1 in 6 have been asked to deprioritize hiring white men”
    “48% have been asked to prioritize diversity over qualifications”
    “53% believe their job will be in danger if they don’t hire enough diverse employees”
    “70% believe their company has DEI initiatives for appearances’ sake”
    Here’s more from ResumeBuilder:

    Sixteen percent of hiring managers surveyed say they have been told to deprioritize white men when evaluating candidates, and 14% have been told to deprioritize hiring white women. This is a consistent finding with past reports of “reverse discrimination”.

    —–

    https://www.resumebuilder.com/1-in-6-hiring-managers-have-been-told-to-stop-hiring-white-men/

    Liked by 2 people

  8. If you’re of the pearl clutching and hand wringing variety of Republican, you should probably sit down before reading this.

    “Not Even Ron DeSantis Can Stop Donald J. Trump for President”

    https://spectator.org/not-even-ron-desantis-can-stop-donald-j-trump-for-president/

    “The public may be under the fictitious impression that a feud, instigated by former President Donald J. Trump, spontaneously broke out between him and Gov. Ron DeSantis last week. However, political operatives connected to either of the Florida-based campaigns will tell you that that just isn’t the case.

    For over a year, stealth campaigns for the presidency have been underway by at least four men; Trump, former Vice President Mike Pence, former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, and DeSantis.

    These pre-campaigns start with consulting spouses to get buy-in, or in some cases it’s the spouse egging on the candidate. Then the courting of megadonors begins.

    All presidential candidates need an independent expenditure arm to hire familiar personnel and direct millions of dollars in spending on their behalf. Consultants and operatives are told not to take permanent jobs because their services will be needed early in the presidential primary cycle.

    All of that spilled into the public domain when Trump’s Save America political action committee scheduled a rally in Miami to support Sen. Marco Rubio — and only Rubio. The absence of the governor seemed to all but confirm the palace intrigue of a feud between the two. Hours later, after a DeSantis operative leaked to Politico that they hadn’t been invited or given advance notice, their team scheduled a rally to take place on that same date, on the other end of the state.

    More than a week later, in Pennsylvania and just a day before the South Florida rally, Trump, whilst reading polling results of various potential contenders, amalgamated the governor’s last name to “DeSanctimonious.”

    Media threw itself into a frenzy, as the president likely intended. Republican-aligned commentators who remain on Twitter, more moderate or less loyal to Trumpism, began to denounce Trump, some even endorsing DeSantis’ stealth campaign that was said not to exist. Many declared Trump too unsavvy to win a future primary election, none of them remembering 2016 when the bombastic businessman took out 17 challengers — arguably the GOP’s most talented bench ever.

    But at the Miami rally, the president encouraged Republicans to turn out and reelect the governor. And he did so again at his last stop before Election Day, in Ohio with the eyes of the nation wondering if he would officially announce his third bid for the White House.

    As in 2015 and 2016, no one took their eyes from Trump’s ever-escalating theater; just as the most effective living communicator designed.

    At this writing there’s not a single presidential primary poll — polls that DeSantis could opt out of if he were not already running for president — that shows the governor with even half the support of Trump. Even in a crowded field, Trump gains a supermajority of respondents.

    DeSantis has been intelligent not to respond to any insults or contrast in kind. Not yet anyway. But the same can’t be said for his billionaire donors and political operatives rushing to the liberal press.

    Hedge-fund billionaire political donor Ken Griffin wants the GOP to “move on” from Trump and nominate DeSantis. This has a familiar ring. In 2016, Griffin backed Marco Rubio, who was in a similar position of being dubbed the future of the party, loved by conservative magazine columnists, and flush with megadonor funds. But Rubio had been tainted with Republican voters because of his role in the Gang of Eight immigration bill prior to his presidential candidacy.

    The rising star and party darling fell hard to Trump’s mocking quips. Rubio attempted to earn votes by taking the high road before succumbing to attempts at similar banter that only led to the total collapse of his candidacy and exit from the race.

    Griffin, who donated $500,000 to Joe Biden’s inauguration and has a history of giving to candidates of both parties, has mostly center-left positions. However, he has spent $100 million this midterm cycle for Republicans, with $10 million of that benefiting DeSantis and the Republican Party of Florida, where he’s made his new home.

    DeSantis has more than $90 million of the $200 million he raised still sitting in the bank after his successful reelection. It appears Trump may have less than $69 million of the $161 million he raised this cycle.

    While DeSantis’ war chest is impressive, it’s fueled by the rich, and even billionaires only have one vote. Trump’s, on the other hand, is mostly fueled by online donations from his grassroots supporters. But even more than that, Trump bested a crowded field of primary contenders in 2016 because he was immune to the negative effects of political spending that targeted him. Trump is an anomaly: an exception to the rules of political science.

    Said more plainly: Money is not going to beat Trump in a Republican primary. It didn’t work when he had to climb up in the polls, and it certainly won’t work now that a majority of Republicans revere the former president.”

    ——-

    This will be fun to watch. 🙂

    Liked by 2 people

  9. Gross.

    “Canada is all in on medical murder”

    https://hotair.com/david-strom/2022/11/14/canada-is-all-in-on-medical-murder-n510646

    “Canada is one of the most civilized places in the world. We all like to tease Canada; we call it the 51st state. We make fun of their use of “eh” all the time. We wonder at their choice of Prime Ministers, who often seem goofy.

    But Canada has become a dark place recently. Their cities may be clean and the people are nice, but their government has become tyrannical and their Left wing murderous. Justin Trudeau is a Marxist with a pretty face.

    You do have to admit he is pretty. Not at all like his father Pierre.”

    —-

    coughs (Castro) coughs….

    —-

    “The Canadian Prime Minister’s admiration for Fidel clearly extends to and even beyond emulating Cuba’s decrepit health care system. While cleaner and brighter than Cuba’s, Canadian health care has replaced neglect as a killer with an antiseptic form of murder. It’s very Western, in a way. Rather than allowing people to die by neglect in hospitals, Canada sends doctors in white coats to dispatch their unwanted citizens.

    Both Ed and I have written about Canada’s disgusting medical murder industry. Most Americans probably believe that Northern Europe would lead the world in euthanasia, but they would be wrong. Canada now leads in disposing of human beings by white coated murderers, and is even about to legalize the suicide of so-called “mature minors” without parental consent.

    Hearing loss, depression, and indeed any physical or mental disability is considered a reason for murdering a person through assisted suicide. And if the idea doesn’t occur to you on your own, the medical professionals and even counselors will helpfully suggest offing yourself without prompting. In some cases they may even refuse a patient care as an incentive to wish for death.

    They can’t just kill you without permission, but they sure can make you want to die.

    That is the case with our latest victim of the Canadian health care system, Roger Foley.

    Roger is suffering from a debilitating degenerative disease, and his future is not bright no matter what the doctors do. He is an expensive patient to care for, and he doesn’t have deep pockets to pay for that care. The government does, although it will never see any return on an investment in keeping Roger alive and functioning. A broken arm or a heart attack survivor can return to work and start paying taxes again, but Roger’s economic value to the state is entirely negative.

    Best kill him, then.

    So that is what the Ontario government through its hospital administrators are pushing for, by pressuring Roger to choose death over continued life.

    “I’ve been pressured to do an assisted suicide,” he told The Post, alleging this happened with caretakers at Victoria Hospital, a primarily government-funded center in London, Ontario.

    “They asked if I want an assisted death. I don’t. I was told that I would be charged $1,800 per day [for hospital care]. I have $2 million worth of bills. Nurses here told me that I should end my life. That shocked me.”

    Canada has free health care, right? Well, not so much for Roger. They want their $2 million and $1800 a day to take care of him. Or they could provide him a comfortable death.

    While Foley — who suffers from cerebellar ataxia, a disease that attacks the brain and muscles — has Ontario’s provincially funded insurance, OHIP (Ontario Health Insurance Plan), it pays only for “basic medical and emergency services,” he said. The 47-year-old has been bedridden for around six years and needs continual help in order to eat, wash and sit up.

    Assisted suicide has been legal in Canada since 2016. According to Forbes, Canada leads the world in assisted suicides, with 10,064 in 2021 as compared to 7,666 in the Netherlands. Eighty-one percent of global requests for medically-induced deaths were honored in Canada.

    Tim Stainton, director of the Canadian Institute for Inclusion and Citizenship at the University of British Columbia, described the law as “probably the biggest existential threat to disabled people since the Nazis’ program in Germany in the 1930s.”

    I think we all would appreciate free health care if we ran into an emergency, but clearly there are downsides. Such as, perhaps, having bureaucrats consult their Excel tables to determine whether helping you out has a good return on investment. Roger undoubtedly doesn’t–and there is no conceivable case to be made that his life is worth saving if economic considerations were the only ones we cared about.

    In fact, there are large categories of people who are drags on economic productivity. However, as archaeologists can tell you, from the dawn of civilization human beings have looked after our old and weak to the extent we possibly can because–well, they are human beings and have ineffable value.

    Love trumps money. Even Neanderthals understood this.

    Not in Canada, though. Have hearing loss and depression? We can off you for free!”

    Liked by 2 people

  10. Just like in the beginning of Nazi Germany when the Lutherans who gave care to the handicapped (and all other institutions) were forced to give up their patients to be euthanized. The commands were, no doubt, prettied up in language at first. Even though the state was not paying for the handicapped, they were to be killed. No chance of them reproducing and/or draining away the regime’s funds. The right to die always becomes the duty to die–whether pressured by family or government officials. I am not in any way talking about patients refusing treatment or extraordinary intervention.

    Liked by 4 people

  11. Yes, I am concerned about this. I know patients with DS who were discriminated against. I know those who were refused access to their loved ones, although they had the legal right to make the decisions instead of doctors who were doing it. My granddaughter has DS, and she has as much right to live as any of the rest of us. Period.

    Liked by 5 people

  12. Enjoying helping our inept president break federal law and use our money to kill children.

    Just one more thing for the new House to investigate come Jan..

    “Biden Administration Providing Taxpayer-Funded Abortion Access For Migrant Youth

    https://www.dailywire.com/news/biden-administration-providing-taxpayer-funded-abortion-access-for-migrant-youth

    “The guidance instructs all ORR care providers to make all “reasonable efforts” to help migrant minors access abortions upon request.

    “This may involve transporting a minor to a state in which abortion is lawful and available if the minor is currently in a state in which abortion is not lawful or available,” the guidance reads.

    The ORR’s guidance includes two areas of focus. First, the agency is instructed to place pregnant migrant minors in shelters in states where abortion access has not been banned.

    Second, a pregnant minor in a shelter who requests an abortion in a state where it is illegal must be provided transportation to another state where the abortion is legal.

    “We applaud ORR’s decision to place pregnant unaccompanied immigrant youth in states where they can access the full range of health care they may need, including abortion,” Brigitte Amiri, deputy director of the ACLU Reproductive Freedom Project, wrote in a statement.

    Chelsey Youman, the national legislative advisor for the pro-life advocacy organization Human Coalition Action, blasted the change.”

    —-

    Murder Inc. thanks you for your contributions, which they will recycle into Dem campaign donations next cycle. It’s The Circle of Death.

    Liked by 2 people

  13. Just to clarify – OHIP pays for doctor’s visits, hospital care, and treatment. Other programs pay for long term nursing care and medical equipment. My 95 year old father now needs a hospital bed and wheelchair at home and PSW care in the morning to get up and ready for the day. The gov’t pays 75% of the equipment cost and then covers the full cost of minimal PSW care. For my father that means morning care only; my parents have some savings so we want to use it to pay for evening PSW care. Apparently there’s a shortage of PSWs though (I can understand; it’s low paying but hard work) . To help my mom, we hired a weekly maid service and my brother drops in daily to make sure everything runs smoothly.

    Given my experience with the health care system, I have a hard time believing the story of Roger Fooley. My father is costing the system hundreds of dollars a day yet we’ve never been asked about assisted suicide. In fact, they keep offering my dad OT and PT because they want him to walk again.

    As for the Castro-Trudeau connection, the calendar and timing isn’t possible. Trudeau is not the son of Castro. He is a pretty face and takes after his mom more than his dad. The real person in charge is the deputy PM and finance minister Chrystina Freeland

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.