Mark Levin is without question one of America’s most adept Constitutional experts. He hosts a Sunday Night show on FOX News and is known for tackling some of our nation’s greatest problems — especially in political matters — and providing documented proof of many of the political rumors that are daily passed around by today’s fawning Leftist media as “factual.” Levin is adept at cutting to the chase in important matters. He is passionate, detailed, informed and adamant about ferreting-out truth in every matter he addresses and making certain Americans are given facts in every matter of importance.
Two days ago, Mark Levin on his television show presented the facts that expose the conspiracy theory of the Democrats and mainstream media about two critical matters right now in our nation. Today as we approach the final few months before our 2020 election. He has examined and found factual information regarding two of the hottest and most contested matters in 2020: Mail-in voting and Hydroxychloroquine as used to attack COVID-19. Levin tackles both.
First and foremost, voting by mail is the responsibility of states that are independent of the federal government, that is, Trump has no power over those elections.
Based on a report by the Politico, Levin pointed out the main factors that could make the mail-in election a complete disaster:
Ballots arriving on time: If ballots don’t arrive on time, you can’t vote and delays in the mail are commonplace.
In fact, some states have their own election laws; they require that ballots have postmarks on Election Day, others require that ballots arrive in the mail on Election Day.
Clerical errors on ballots: Clerks and people who fill the ballots make mistakes ranging from not putting the stamps in, to not closing the envelope properly, to not signing the ballot, to forgetting personal information. If any of these things fail, the ballot is invalidated. In 2018, 8.2% of votes were not counted due to human error.
Casting the ballots is one thing and counting them is another: the states are not prepared for a massive vote. The voting rolls are not updated properly. There have been cases of people who are registered in two or more states and the votes go both ways. Also, if all the votes arrive on the same day, it could take weeks to count them all.
This year’s primary elections which have relied on mail-in ballots have been decimated with errors and mistakes.
In the New York primary election just a month ago, 20 percent of the ballots were invalidated solely on the basis of outward appearance because they did not meet the requirements for filing.
In Wisconsin, 6% of the votes were rejected.ziI
In Nevada, 250,000 ballots were nullified.
With respect to the mailboxes, Levin pointed out the statistics of the period between 2011 and 2016, in the Obama-Biden era, when 14,000 mailboxes were replaced within the mailbox collection program. When a mailbox receives less than 25 pieces per day, it is removed, others are replaced due to old age or vandalism.
Levin wondered why the Democrats and mainstream media are so keen on voting by mail and he gave his theory: They want to flood the system, overwhelm it, create anarchy, and seize power.
Levin said the Democrats want to create a constitutional crisis. When the ballots do not arrive on time, when there are irregularities in the voting, when after weeks the results are not known, there will be a wave of litigation against the federal government and this can generate chaos and a collapse in the judicial system. In fact, Biden has hired 600 lawyers for these lawsuits, Levin said.
Levin asked his guest, Hans Von Spakovsky of the Heritage Foundation if the $25 billion the Democrats want to give the USPS will solve the mail problem. Von Spakovsky said it wasn’t a question of money. The mail has been mismanaged for decades, and attempts have been made to modernize it to function as a company like FedEx, for example, but the mail unions have been adamantly opposed.
“There is no sabotage here going on, except by the Democrats,” concluded Levin.
The second topic of the Life, Liberty & Levin program was the use of Hydroxychloroquine to treat patients with the CCP Virus for which Levin invited Yale University public health professor, Dr. Harvey Risch, to share facts.
Levin wondered why, when most studies say the drug is effective in CCP Virus patients, President Trump has promoted it, as have many doctors, the media and Twitter, and Facebook have censored or disqualified it.
Risch said, “The evidence is overwhelming that patients who are treated early with this drug substantially reduce the risk of hospitalization and mortality.”
Risch added, “And there’s been a massive disinformation campaign that stretches from the government to the media. That is either suppressing this message or is countering with a false message.”
Risch explained that the few studies that show negative or neutral results and which are used by FDA following Dr. Fauci’s advice, were performed on patients under 60 years of age without CCP Virus conditions, people who can overcome the disease on their own and in whom the drug shows no beneficial effects.
“So those are low-risk people, and we are not talking of low-risk people. We are talking about people who are over 60, or with corona conditions, or obesity, diabetes, and so on. Those are the people who are at risk of being hospitalized and dying from this illness, those are the people who have to be treated,” Risch explained. In this group of people, the results have been completely positive.
Levin asked the professor if people with asthma or heart disease are at risk of dying if they use this drug. The doctor said no. But like all drugs, it has to be prescribed by a doctor who knows the patient and can follow up. “In general, it is a very safe medication,” Risch said.
Finally, Levin consulted the professor about reports in the media, particularly one from The Washington Post, which accused the president of promoting a drug that is killing more and more people.
Risch responded that they did not specify what type of patients were those who had died. If they were people who were already in the last stage where nothing was working and they were given the drug, that relationship could be established.
“You have to be very specific about what kind of patients you are referring to when you make statements like that,” Risch said.
Risch concluded that “somehow politics overruled science” and the media has managed to silence this message, although now more and more people have stepped forward to speak publicly of its benefits.
An independent general physician, Dr. Mariana Colombres Garmendia, when asked what the reason might be behind this censorship effort, said that perhaps there is opposition to Hydroxychloroquine from Big Pharma because this compound is so cheap and easily available.
Isn’t it eerie that we in the 21st Century find ourselves in the greatest country in World history that is torn apart by political narratives shoved down our throats by a group of frantic politicians who are trying to use these lies and others to somehow achieve a specific goal? This all seems to me like an episode of that 1960s television series “The Twilight Zone.”
There is very little logic in these two footballs being battered around by Leftist politicians: Hydroxychloroquine and Mail-in Voting. Common sense plays NO role in this charade.
What is so mind boggling to millions of Americans is that millions of other Americans have fallen into this nightmare without even a question of what and why this is being foisted on this nation.
I have NO absolute answers for all this. And the temptation is to launch into some frantic reaction just to escape from what appears to be a nightmare and nothing more. But even if it IS a nightmare, it’s not about to go away any time soon.
It’s in a time like this our best resort is to clutch the things in our lives that are absolute and unquestioned: those things, events, and people which we have no doubt about motive and intention.
As Levin illustrated above, Mail-In voting can only be an opportunity to control our upcoming election to achieve the desired goal of driving Donald Trump from office. There is NO other reasonable conclusion.
It is an uncontroverted certainty that Hydroxychloroquine is a 60-year-old drug that was and has been laboratory tested in dozens of trials with decades of proof of its efficacy.
So why the efforts to force fear upon our nation?
That answer has still not been revealed. But one thing is certain: we will know before this plays out.
My suggestion for all Americans is be honest with yourself and others, even if in doing so you share your fears and concerns with others. Trust your gut feelings. Delay making major decisions until YOU achieve a comfort level in every such decision.
Other than that, consider prayer for guidance and peace.After all, this nation still is “One Nation Under God.”
He created this globe on which we live. He knows what we need to survive.
Let’s trust in that, especially with all else in question.
What and why are the Democrats doing what they are doing today? The answer has been purposely hidden during the decades while their plns have been implemented.
We’ve spoken in details of who today’s players are and how they operate in the roles they play. We’ve also discussed in Parts I and II what Joe Biden and Kamala Harris are positioned to be in this. Today we present the “Finale” — what the EndGame is for this Democrat Party.
It doesn’t involve just THIS Democrat Party. It reaches across oceans and national boundaries. It includes leaders from every sector of life in every nation. It is global.
This video that’s 20-minutes in length details who, what, and how this process has been implemented and unfolded until today. To understand all of this, you need to watch this!
If you cannot watch it now, stop here and come back to complete the video when you have time to watch it all. This is VERY Important!
I know: many extremists have claimed for years “the end is near!” Most of us have continually dismissed their claims, clinging to the confidence we have that the U.S. is too large, too powerful, too democratic to allow itself to fall into such a trap.
But understand this: we’ve watched for years as America’s left wing politicians have worked diligently to grow our government while diminishing the power of the American electorate.
Why would doing so be a concerted effort by so many who have given their lives to this cause if it isn’t real? Why do they need total control of the lives of every American to simply represent us in government to find and implement what’s best for us if this isn’t real? Remember: as it stands Constitutionally, today’s government is and is to forever be “government of, by, and for the People.”
For their plans to proceed, that type of government has to be eliminated.
For us, it began with the United Nations being established on our shores at almost entirely U.S. taxpayers’ expense but is run by a group of handpicked international Socialists? Why are members of the Left in America so supportive of giving our resources to fulfill international commitments made by American politicians that giveaway American assets?
We’ve known for years. You saw and heard American leaders who have for decades been part of the process of the creation of a global ruling class of people that calls the shots for everyone — including YOU! That group is comprised primarily of members of the U.S. Democrat Party, but not just Democrats. No, American RINO’s (Republican In Name Only) have spent millions in a campaign against the continuation of a Trump agenda. Globalist members of that group like former Ohio Governor John Kasich, Colin Powell, and even the wife of Sen. John McCain have already during the Democrat Party “Virtual” Convention spoke loudly in their endorsement of ending the Trump administration.
Why would these and so many other so-called Republicans already be in such unity against what America today stands for if they were not pushing for a government established for a ruling class to control in total? A Biden/Harris elected would initiate the process of the U.S. joining the globalist you say and heard from their own mouths their desire and intentions to work towards a global government.
It’s coming. It’s their singular objective. The most powerful nation on Earth with the greatest political and economic might is the singular resource necessary to push the “Start” button to awaken this behemoth that will control us all.
Are you committed to that end? Do you support making that move? Are you ready for every aspect of your life to be ordered by a group of individuals who hate what our country has been for 260 years and are more than ready to give it away?
Putting a Biden/Harris ticket in control of our government is the key to the initiation of this globalist plan. It will initiate the gradual loss of who this nation is.
With a Trump re-election, we will have four more years of not just pushing back against this global monster, but to eat away at its foundation. How do we do that? By continuing our aggressive attacks against those domestically who are stealthily giving away our freedoms.
By the way, the Globalists will NOT stop their efforts with a Trump victory. They are in this for the long-haul. But a win will show them Americans now understand who are our enemies and that we are willing to go to war with them to pushback against and ultimately destroy their purposes.
Today was the day Part III — the finale — of our bringing you the truth of where the Democrat Party is desperately working to take our nation. We are having to delay that finale one day.
As some know, Tuesday after our show “TNN Live” I rushed to the hospital for a scheduled back surgery. Everything went well! I appreciate the prayers from all of you who knew about it.
Because we did not want to cancel our Tuesday show so we scheduled it at noon. Problems with a surgery patient in front of me prevented my action for 3 hours. That resulted in my surgery not happening until late yesterday.
Again, it went really well! Unfortunately, it prevented the final production of Part III of our revelation.
Our story and our live program “TNN Live” will NOT be published or broadcasted today.
I apologize for the 24-hour delay, especially in light of this process we began on Monday of this week. But please know, our commitment has NOT changed nor will it: we give you the truth in all those things important to you — REAL truth. And we continue that in this case one day later. The finale of this will be published tomorrow, Thursday, August 20, 2020. And we’ll be back with “TNN Live” as well tomorrow at 9:00-11:00 AM Central.
Thanks for being a part of TruthNewsNetwork. And thank you for letting my 67-year-old body take an extra day to allow back surgery to release me to get back in the saddle!
Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA) was a surprise pick to be Joe Biden’s running mate. Why so? Biden has, for decades, been the “poster boy” for the Moderate wing of the Democrat Party. Going into his presidential bid this year, he has painted himself as a consummate Moderate. But Americans have watched as the former Moderate has allowed the far-left of his party to pull him away from the neighborhood of Mr. Rogers to the neighborhood of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ilhan Omar, Bernie Sanders, and Elizabeth Waren. He had to get their support.
There’s a problem: Democrat Party leadership is uncertain any far-left Democrat can win the White House right now. So what do they do? They prop-up the picture of Uncle Joe as the “forever-Moderate” to sell to the American people. And they think they can.
But this Democrat Party is anything BUT Moderate.
“If Democrats are no longer Moderate, what are they?” The Democrat Party is running quietly yet as fast as possible to the Far Left in American politics.
“Americans are not ready for the Truth.” That’s where this Democrat Party is in their thinking. Their conundrum in looking at this election cycle caused them to make some hard choices: how to retake full government party control by making voters think Democrats are all Moderates without letting voters know they aren’t.
Democrat Party leadership is not playing a “short game:” they are playing the long game.” The game is called “Who will control the World politically.” It’s not just the United States.
What does that mean?
In the next few days, TruthNewsNetwork will unfold a bit at a time the plan of the Democrat Party in tandem with others to control World Politics.
We’re NOT going to give you any conspiracy theories. We’re not going to play a blame game. We’re going to present to you facts through documents, audio files, video files, the words of particular people that support every bit of information we give to you. And it starts right now.
Yes, it Begins with Kamala Harris
I dropped my glass when I heard ABC’s George Stephanopolous portray Kamala Harris as a “Moderate.” Any American who pays any attention at all knows she’s is certainly not that.
We’re not drawing broad and unsupported conclusions. We are basing those statements on facts: facts of her legislation and political history. Let’s take a look at just a few of her legislative “offerings.”
Democratic running mate Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA) is one of the busier senators when it comes to introducing congressional legislation. Her 54 bills introduced in 2019 tied for 19th-most among all 100 senators, while her 52 bills introduced in 2017–18 put her in the top third among senators.
The Senate has been controlled by Republicans for all of Harris’s tenure, limiting her legislation’s odds of passage significantly. Still, four of her 131 bills were enacted into law — that’s good for a first-term Democratic senator. Let’s look at a handful of the bills she introduced to see what her legislation looks like, especially given the methodology ranking her as the most left-leaning senator in 2019, one spot above even Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT).
COUNT Victims Act
After the category 5 Hurricane Maria hit Puerto Rico in September 2017, the death count was originally listed as 64. Yet a George Washington University study from September 2018, by researchers at the school’s Milken Institute School of Public Health, estimated the actual death count as 2,975.
The significantly higher number was determined in part by including deaths determined to be indirectly caused by the hurricane but occurring up to five months later. The Puerto Rican government requested the study and officially accepted its revised death count, but the federal government did not.
Introduced in 2018, Sen. Harris’s Counting Our Unexpected Natural Tragedies’ Victims Act requested that the federal government conduct a study of how best to fully count the total number of victims from natural disasters. The provision attracted eight Democratic co-sponsors and was ultimately incorporated into the broader 462-page FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018, which was signed into law. However, the study doesn’t guarantee the federal government will adopt the new counting method.
“Whether it be Hurricane Maria or another natural disaster to come, the accuracy of the death toll has a direct impact on an area’s recovery,” Sen. Harris said in a press release. “We cannot allow our government’s failed response in Puerto Rico ever to happen again. The ability to accurately count victims of natural disasters will give accurate information to grieving communities, and help us understand how we can mitigate the damage of future disasters.”
Disaster Victims Passport and ID Relief Act
After 2017 wildfires and floods in Harris’s home state of California, some individuals had to pay to replace governmental identification documents, including $110 for a passport book or $455 for a green card for permanent residents.
Introduced in June 2018, Sen. Harris’s Disaster Victims Passport and ID Relief Act provides a waiver from replacement fees for six types of identification: a U.S. Passport, visa, green card, Declaration of Intention form, naturalization or citizenship form, and employment authorization form.
Despite attracting no co-sponsors, the bill was ultimately incorporated into the broader 462-page FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018, which was signed into law.
“Victims of natural disasters are forced to reconstruct their lives, and too often face high levels of financial stress,” Sen. Harris said in a press release. “We must do what we can to ease that burden including waiving fees associated with the replacement of critical documents and ensuring child care facilities have the funding they need so families can get back on their feet.”
Justice for Victims of Lynching Act
Lynching is considered one of the most gruesome ways to kill somebody, primarily associated with racially-motivating killings by white people against Black people in the antebellum and Jim Crow-era South. Even though the last documented lynching in America occurred in 1981 — or perhaps because of it — the act was never officially made a federal crime. Introduced in June 2018, Sen. Harris’s Justice for Victims of Lynching Act would have done just that.
The bill attracted 39 cosponsors — 28 Democrats, nine Republicans, and two independents — and passed the Senate in mid-December 2018 on a voice vote, a procedure used for relatively noncontroversial legislation without significant opposition. However, the bill never received a House vote, possibly due to there being less than two weeks in the session of Congress.
Sen. Harris reintroduced it in February 2019, where it attracted 47 co-sponsors — 29 Democrats, 16 Republicans, and two independents — and again passed on a voice vote. The identical House version was introduced by Rep. Don Bacon (R-NE) and has attracted 14 co-sponsors, 12 Democrats and two Republicans.
In February 2020, the House instead voted on the similar — but not identical — Emmett Till Antilynching Act, introduced by Rep. Bobby Rush (D-IL). The vote was 410–4, with Democrats unanimously supporting 222–0 and Republicans mostly supporting 188–3. Now to become law, either the Senate will have to vote on the House-passed version or vice versa.
That’s hardly guaranteed. Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) has blocked a potential Senate vote on the House version, arguing that the existing language is too broad. “The bill as written would allow altercations resulting in a cut, abrasion, bruise, or any other injury no matter how temporary to be subject to a 10-year penalty,” Sen. Paul said. “My amendment would simply apply a serious bodily injury standard, which would ensure crimes resulting in a substantial risk of death and extreme physical pain be prosecuted as a lynching.”
Sen. Harris disagrees. “Lynching is a dark, despicable part of our history, and we must acknowledge that, lest we repeat it,” Sen. Harris said in a press release. “From 1882 to 1986 there have been 200 attempts that have failed to get Congress to pass federal anti-lynching legislation. It’s time for that to change.”
Marijuana is currently classified on a federal level as a Schedule 1 drug, the strictest classification alongside other drugs such as heroin and meth, and higher than Schedule 2 drugs including cocaine.
Introduced in July 2019, Sen. Harris’s Marijuana Opportunity Reinvestment and Expungement (MORE) Act would legalize the drug federally, expunge certain past marijuana-related offenses from people’s criminal records, and introduce a 5 percent federal tax on marijuana.
The bill has attracted five Democratic co-sponsors but has not yet received a vote in the Senate Finance Committee. A House version introduced by Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) has attracted 81 cosponsors, 80 Democrats plus Republican Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL). It was approved by the House Judiciary Committee in November 2019 and awaits a potential full vote in the chamber.
“Times have changed — marijuana should not be a crime,” Sen. Harris said in a press release. “We need to start regulating marijuana, and expunge marijuana convictions from the records of millions of Americans so they can get on with their lives. As marijuana becomes legal across the country, we must make sure everyone — especially communities of color that have been disproportionately impacted by the War on Drugs — has a real opportunity to participate in this growing industry.
(Harris said in a 2019 interview that she had smoked marijuana in college while listening to music from Tupac Shakur and Snoop Dogg, even though both of their debut albums came out after Harris attended college.)
Rent Relief Act
Renters currently comprise the highest percentage of households at any time in the past 50 years. This occurs as wages have remained largely stagnant, making rent harder to afford. More than 11 million Americans pay more than half their income to rent.
Introduced in July 2018, Sen. Harris’s Rent Relief Act would give a tax credit to anybody who spends more than 30 percent of their income on rent plus utilities, so long as they make less than $125,000.
The bill attracted five Democratic co-sponsors, but never received a vote in the Senate Finance Committee. In April 2019, Sen. Harris reintroduced the bill, where it has attracted three Democratic cosponsors but again not yet received a vote in the Senate Finance Committee. Sens. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) and Jeff Merkley (D-OR) signed onto the previous version, but not yet the current version.
A House version introduced by Rep. Danny Davis (D-IL) has attracted 10 Democratic cosponsors and awaits a potential vote in the House Ways and Means Committee.
“America’s affordable housing crisis has left too many families behind who struggle each month to keep a roof over their head,” Sen. Harris said in a press release. “This bill will ensure no family is priced out of the basic security of a place to live. Bolstering the economic security of working families would strengthen our country and increase opportunity.”
ENOUGH Act / SHIELD Act
The Ending Nonconsensual Online User Graphic Harassment (ENOUGH) Act would federally ban “revenge porn,” or posting explicit pictures of somebody else — often an ex — without their consent. Almost every state banned the practice during the 2010s, but there is no federal ban.
Sen. Harris introduced the bill In November 2017, with one Republican and one Democratic co-sponsor, Sen. Richard Burr (R-NC), and future presidential campaign rival Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN). It never received a vote in the Senate Judiciary Committee.
“Perpetrators of exploitation who seek to humiliate and shame their victims must be held accountable,” Sen. Harris said in a press release. “It is long past time for the federal government to take action to give law enforcement the tools they need to crack down on these crimes.”
Harris introduced it again in the current Congress, in July 2019, as the renamed Stopping Harmful Image Exploitation and Limiting Distribution (SHIELD) Act. It’s again attracted one Republican and one Democratic co-sponsor, still Sens. Burr and Klobuchar, but has not yet received a vote in the Senate Judiciary Committee.
A House version introduced by Harris’s fellow Californian Rep. Jackie Speier (D-CA14) has attracted 87 Democratic and four Republican co-sponsors and awaits a potential vote in the House Judiciary Committee.
Shirley Chisholm statue
One of the major news stories of 2020 has been the debate over controversial statues, from Confederate generals and politicians to Christopher Columbus, George Washington, and Thomas Jefferson — including in the U.S. Capitol Building.
In February 2018, Sen. Harris introduced a bill to include a statue of Shirley Chisholm, the first Black woman elected to Congress and the first Black woman to run for president in 1972, in the Capitol Building. It attracted 16 co-sponsors, 15 Democrats and one independent, but never received a vote in the Senate Rules and Administration Committee.
“Shirley Chisholm created a path for me and the 40 Black women members of Congress who have served after her,” Sen. Harris said in a press release. “While there is still work to be done for equal representation, we must also stand back and celebrate our triumphs along the way. Shirley’s legacy is one that encourages us to keep up the fight for our most voiceless and vulnerable, and deserves to be cemented in the United States Capitol.”
Sen. Harris reintroduced it again in the current Congress, in March 2019. It’s attracted 17 co-sponsors, 16 Democrats and one independent, but again has not yet received a vote in the Senate Rules and Administration Committee.
A House version introduced by Rep. Yvette Clark (D-NY) has attracted 70 Democratic co-sponsors, and awaits a potential vote in the House Administration Committee.
Census Equality Act
Gallup estimates that 4.5 percent of the U.S. population identified as LGBT — lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender — in 2017, a number rising every single year since they started the survey in 2012, because the stigma keeps lessening. But what is America’s LGBT population exactly?
Introduced in July 2018, Sen. Harris’s Census Equality Act would include a question on the decennial Census asking respondents about their sexual orientation and gender identity, starting in 2030. The idea is that America could get a precise count of that group’s population.
The bill attracted 21 Democratic co-sponsors, but never received a vote in the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. In June 2019, the similar LGBTQ Data Inclusion Act was introduced by Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), with Sen. Harris signing on as one of the 18 Democratic co-sponsors, though it has again not yet received a vote in the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
A House version introduced by Raúl Grijalva (D-AZ) has attracted 142 Democratic co-sponsors and awaits a potential vote in the House Oversight and Reform Committee.
“The spirit of the Census is that no one should go uncounted and no one should be invisible,” Sen. Harris said in a press release. “We must expand data collections efforts to ensure the LGBTQ community is not only seen, but fully accounted for in terms of government resources provided. This information can also provide us with better tools to enforce civil rights protections for a community that is too often discriminated against.”
Family Friendly Schools Act
Some schools get out as early as 2 P.M., even though the standard workday goes until 5 P.M. or 6 P.M., putting pressure on many working parents, particularly parents of elementary school-aged children.
Introduced in November 2019, Sen. Harris’s Family Friendly Schools Act would establish a grant program to keep 500 elementary schools open until at least 6 P.M. on weekdays. After five years, the Education Department would be required to produce a study about whether this model could or should be expanded nationwide.
The bill has attracted five Democratic co-sponsors but has not yet received a vote in the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee.
“My mother raised my sister and me while working demanding, long hours,” Sen. Harris said in a press release. “So I know firsthand that, for many working parents, juggling between school schedules and work schedules is a common cause of stress and financial hardship. But this does not have to be the case. My bill provides an innovative solution that will help reduce the burden of child care on working families. It is time we modernize the school schedule to better meet the needs of our students and their families.”
Access to Counsel Act
After her election in 2016, Harris’s first-ever bill in February 2017 would have clarified under federal law that undocumented immigrants held or detained have the right to a lawyer during their legal proceedings.
The bill attracted seven Democratic co-sponsors — including presidential campaign rivals Sens. Cory Booker (D-NJ), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), and Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) — but never received a vote in the Senate Judiciary Committee.
“Detention without access to representation goes against the basic values of our judicial system,” Sen. Harris said in a press release. “Refugees, immigrants, students, and tourists all deserve to be able to access their lawyer in legal proceedings that could change the course of their lives, whether they enter the country at an airport or come across the border. Interactions with immigration enforcement officials are often confusing and disorienting, and no one should be exploited because of their lack of knowledge of our legal system.”
Sen. Harris also re-introduced the bill in the current Congress, in July 2019. It’s attracted six Democratic co-sponsors, but again has not yet received a vote in the Senate Judiciary Committee. Six co-sponsors are the same as the seven who signed on the previous Congress, but Sen. Tom Carper of Delaware hasn’t co-sponsored this new version.
In July 2020, the House passed the Access to Counsel Act as an amendment to another bill, voting 231–184, with Democrats unanimously in favor and Republicans unanimously opposed.
Aretha Franklin Congressional Gold Medal Act
The Congressional Gold Medal is the highest civilian honor that Congress can bestow, awarded to 19 people from arts and entertainment throughout American history, including Walt Disney, actor John Wayne, singer Frank Sinatra, and Peanuts illustrator Charles M. Schulz.
In August 2018, Sen. Harris proposed the late singer and civil rights activist Aretha Franklin, a mere five days after Franklin’s death. The bill attracted 41 co-sponsors — 35 Democrats, five Republicans, and one independent — but never received a vote in the Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee.
In February 2019, Sen. Harris reintroduced it with a smaller 25 co-sponsors to date: 23 Democrats and two Republicans. Again, it has not yet received a vote in the Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee.
A House version introduced by Rep. Brenda Lawrence (D-MI) has attracted 68 co-sponsors, 64 Democrats and four Republicans, and awaits a potential vote in either the House Administration or Financial Services Committee.
“From listening to Mary Don’t You Weep, to standing in the living room dancing to Rock Steady over and over again, to hearing from the Queen herself how lucky I was to be young, gifted and Black — Aretha’s songs were the soundtrack of my childhood,” Sen. Harris said in a press release. “Aretha was simply a legend. Her work and impact will be felt for generations to come, and it’s long past time Congress honor her with the Congressional Gold Medal.”
I know: you probably skimmed this entire list of Harris legislation or simply quit. But to understand the importance of what Americans each are facing in this election, one must have a good understanding of who are the players, where did they originate, and where each is headed.
These bills introduced by Sen. Harris may appear to be little more than a freshman Senator spreading her “legislative” wings, but they are far more than just that. She, in being so aggressive as a young Senator, showed all the political heavyweights looking-in that she is ready to become a “player” in important politics — the type of politics that are now in full swing in our country. She wants to be on stage and not sitting in the back.
That’s important to understand. It will help explain what shows up tomorrow about the California Senator, her role in the “Big Game,” and how today’s Democrat Party have surreptitiously been initiating their plan for us all while we were busy watching Russia-Gate, Ukraine-Gate, Impeachment, COVID-19 Pandemic, and Racial Anarchy during the last four years.
You don’t want to miss a day of this! Day by day, chapter, by chapter, the future of our nation as Democrats hope to see it play out is unfolding before your eyes.
I don’t remember a time when the United States has experienced anything similar to what we are watching play out daily today. Who could have fathomed cities would be torn apart by protests that quickly morph into violent demonstrations that almost as quickly morph into full-blown riots? It’s happening daily throughout America.
It hasn’t been surprising to watch and listen to Democrats blame all of it on President Trump. They seem to forget that each of the cities in which this violence occurs has mayors, local police and fire departments, and the states in which they are have governors that direct their state police forces that are fully equipped and trained to handle violence of these kinds. Why haven’t the cities or states acted in whatever fashion is required to quell the violence? That answer is beyond my comprehension.
Add to that the madness of each of these city’s mayors and each state’s governors have symbolically (and in some cases literally) given President Trump the middle finger placing 100% of the blame for all these travesties on his shoulders. To make matters worse, each of these local and state officials has demanded that President Trump not even consider sending federal officers to assist local and state law enforcement officials in preventing the devastation that occurs nightly.
It should not (but it does) surprise me that in each of the impacted cities across America and in each affected state every mayor and every governor are Democrats!
Does that even mean something?
I think it does.
What DOESN’T surprise me is that President Trump from the beginning has been ready to act, has federal agency officers set to go, and even has National Guard commanders abreast of current status at these locations with an order to be prepared to go when called.
He sent federal officers to Portland when things deteriorated to the point the Federal Courthouse was not just being covered in graffiti on a nightly basis, but firebombed, sustained fireworks, bricks, and rock attacks that were hurled at the Courthouse. In addition to the physical damage already sustained by the multimillion-dollar facility at the hands of these rioters, federal employees working within the building were daily put in danger by this terror. For sending those federal agents, President Trump was excoriated in Portland and in other cities around the nation. He found himself in one of those “damned-if-you-do and damned-if-you-don’t” dilemmas.
One thing has been proven in these riotous cities: Donald Trump is a learned leader in a crisis. His actions have been swift, well-planned, and decisive. And he happily takes responsibility.
It is certain that the fault for the violence does NOT lie at the President’s feet. It was laughable to hear former President Obama in his eulogy of Congressman John Lewis (D-GA) blame this administration for “attacking peaceful protestors.” Each of these nights in Seattle, Portland, and even Louisville and Atlanta have begun with peaceful protestors and demonstrators. But shortly after sundown in each city, the looters, rioters, and rabid activists sweep into the streets and begin their destruction.
It’s not “peaceful” to bring a club to a demonstration. It’s not “peaceful” to bring a knapsack full of bricks. It’s not “peaceful” to throw small bombs into a courthouse building that explode and leave holes where they strike. It’s not “peaceful” to shine lasers in the eyes of policemen trying to keep safe citizens on the streets. It’s not “peaceful” when those terrorists permanently blinded with lasers three of those policemen.
President Obama was dead wrong. Those people are violent rioters. And to clarify that statement, Portland authorities have legally labeled these “wars” in their city as “Riots.”
Is the President really responsible for the division in the United States?
Think This Through:
I know many are saying today that Trump divided America. Did he really divide us? Let’s together prove or disprove that claim against Mr. Trump. Let’s together determine if he did so when the division of America actually happened.
How about when NONE of the Democrats showed up for his inauguration? Do you think that started the division? He hadn’t yet taken the Oath of Office, and except for Clinton and Obama, not one Democrat showed up. Is that when Trump divided America? Can you imagine if the Republicans didn’t show up for Obama’s inauguration because they lost? Can you even begin to imagine what would have happened?
How about when 19 minutes after Trump was inaugurated, the Washington Post declared, “The Impeachment of Donald Trump Begins!” Was that when Trump divided America?
What about when Nancy Pelosi ripped up Trump’s State of the Union address before the entire World, showing her disrespect for the office of the President of the United States? Did that bring the country together or is that when Trump divided America?
How about when Americans endured three years and over 40 million dollars spent on trying to prove that Trump only won because of Russian collusion and not because Americans voted in sufficient numbers to beat Hillary Clinton? Seventeen Democrats did everything in their power to prove that there was Russian Collusion and found NO proof. Was that when Trump divided America?
How about the press he’s received since his surprise win. 90% of the Mainstream Media are owned by corporations controlled by major Democrat Party Donors. Add to that 90+ percent of all national press stories about this President have been framed in a negative fashion? Could that be when Trump divided America?
Remember the Big campaign donors to Hillary? Michael Bloomberg gave $27 million, Tom Steyer gave $17 million, George Soros gave $9 million, and many others gave millions of dollars to Hillary. Do you think those donors gave millions just because they loved Hillary? Those weren’t campaign donations, they were “investments” in whatever Hillary Clinton had promised them she would do for them when she became president. They were certain she would win and they would then be showered with massive returns. When it didn’t happen, they lost all those millions of dollars of their campaign “investments.” It was those big donors that lost their dreams of more power, more control, and even more money with Hillary’s defeat. They were angered by their losses. They needed to punish Trump and those deplorables that voted for him. Was that when Trump divided America?
Here’s a question: If you’re a Democrat who does not support President Trump, have you ever listened to Trump or thought through any of the accomplishments or campaign promises he’s kept? Have you ever gone to one of his rallies or watched one from start to finish on television? Or have you just closed your mind to ANYTHING he has accomplished for ALL Americans?
When you determine your answer to that, then ask yourself the following questions:
What did Joe Biden do for America during the last 47 years in which he’s held office?
What did Joe Biden do for African Americans when he and Obama were in office for eight years?
What did Joe Biden do in his entire life to create private-sector jobs?
What did Joe Biden do to help the American middle-class workers?
Why do you think there are so many people tearing down statues, burning our flag, beating up police officers, disrespecting our founders, and hating our country? Their doing so is a direct result of today’s educators that have carefully denigrated the United States history.
If you are a teacher reading or listening to this today, please answer for yourself the following:
Do you teach that it was Democrats who founded and operated the Ku Klux Klan; that the leader of the KKK was Robert Byrd, who was elected to Congress and served as a representative for West Virginia for decades? It was Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton, and Barack Obama that eulogized Byrd at his funeral. Each claimed that Byrd was their mentor, their friend, and who taught them much about fairness. Was that when Trump divided America?
Do you teach that Democrats in America that fought the Civil War to keep slavery?
Do you teach that inner-city ghettos were created by Democrats to maintain control of slaves after they were freed?
Do you teach that Planned Parenthood was founded in inner cities to control the black population by killing their unborn children?
Do you allow a student to speak when he/she disagrees with you to say that Trump is a horrible president, or the electoral college must be eliminated? If you do allow that student to speak, you’re allowing the exercise of Free Speech. But do you teach the reason for the establishment of the electoral college occurred was to guarantee that even Americans who do not live in large cities have a Constitutional assurance their vote counts as much as those who do live in big cities?
President Trump’s family members and close friends have, since the day of the 2016 election, been vilified, chastised, demeaned, and hated by many Americans for one simple reason: He won the election.
Maybe THAT was when President Trump divided America!
Have you noticed that Democrats and other Leftists object to everything he does and have not once supported or applauded any of his actions that have helped make America stronger and more economically stable than in decades? Why haven’t they supported any of his considerable actions that have dramatically improved the lives of all Americans?
Answer: They can’t afford to support those things that have helped Americans. If they do, their support will help him win a second term in office.
If Mr. Trump wins in November, it will destroy the Democrat Party – and Democrats are scared to death.
By the way, did you forget about those cages that Leftists claimed President Trump used to cage illegal immigrant children? Those cages were built or used first by President Obama. He created the cages and put them in place to house illegal immigrant children. Was that all over the news when Obama did it? During Trump’s administration, those were the same cages used for the same purpose as did Obama’s Homeland Security.
Donald Trump recently commuted the sentence of Roger Stone and was demonized by the Left for doing so. There was not even a whisper of criticism when Obama commuted the sentences of 1715 inmates of which 330 were given their commutations on Obama’s last day in office. 405 of those were people who were sentenced to life without parole.
Don’t forget that Biden and Obama allowed the “H1N1” virus, or “Swine Flu,” to infect 60 million Americans before declaring it a health emergency seven months after the first confirmed infection. (So far, only four million Americans have contracted COVID-19) Did the media ever call that flu the “Obama Flu” or blame the Obama Administration for it reaching our shores? Compare Obama’s Swine Flu media coverage to the flurry of attacks levied against President Trump when he quickly halted travel from China at the end of January of this year. In February, Nancy Pelosi went to Chinatown and said, “Come on down! There’s no virus problem in Chinatown!” Joe Biden called President Trump a xenophobe and a racist for implementing that China travel ban. U.S. medical experts later stated that the President’s doing so saved Americans from hundreds of thousands of additional COVID-19 infections. Did you see those congratulatory Trump stories for that success for America?
Imagine what this country could accomplish if the Democrats worked with President Trump and the G.O.P. to further improve the economy, eliminate the coronavirus, restructure our inner cities where he’s already created Opportunity Zones that encourage minority home and business ownership and include new job training programs.
Do you know that more than 60% of African American parents are desperate for School Choice? When President Trump offered it, teacher unions and their members threatened to walk away and leave teaching. Their doing so was simply a demand to allow them to keep control of those inner-city schools that are devastating to African American children and are solely responsible for the horrible educational status for those children from those schools.
There’s just one important question that is critical for every American to answer honestly, but only after thinking-through the pluses and minuses of the candidates running to be the residents of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue for the next four years. Who is best suited to finish our war against COVID-19 and quickly get us back on track to recovery? Your honest answer to that question should be the ONLY determinate you use for your decision to vote for Joe Biden (or whoever may end up replacing him on the Democrat Party ticket) or President Trump.
Today on TNN Live, we are exposing the latest bombshell about a pending indictment of former Vice President Biden by the nation of Ukraine. We go into great detail in the story plus we give you audio sound from several telephone conversations between the former Ukrainian President and then Vice President Biden about the incident on which Biden’s pending indictment(s) are based. It’s a mind-blower!
TNN Live is a two-hour conservative talk show that airs right here streaming live beginning at 9:00 AM Central time. To join us, at 9:00 AM Central click on the blue horizontal banner above this story that says “Live Now, Click to Listen.” It will bring you right to the show. We’ll see you then!
Most in the U.S. don’t know what “caste” means, probably because very few believe “caste” even exists in the U.S. Let’s get first things done: what is “caste?”
Caste: A caste system is a class structure that is determined by birth. Loosely, it means that in some societies, if your parents are poor, you’re going to be poor, too. And there is NO way for anyone to break-out and change their own caste.
The discussion of a “not-yet-confirmed” American caste system has been brought to light recently in dramatic fashion. The African American billionaire, Oprah Winfree, pointed to an author of a book Oprah is touting as “the greatest book I have ever read.” Isabell Wilkerson wrote that book titled simply, “Caste.” Oprah has made it a best seller with her promotion. Wilkerson is a well-known author and Pulitzer Prize winner who formerly worked at the New York Times.
In promotion material, a writer described Wilkerson’s writing on a caste system with this: “While at New YorkTimes, Wilkerson reported on a range of topics whose underlying themes of race, class, and citizenship in the U.S. and beyond would be echoed in Caste, a book that puts the U.S.’s caste system in conversation with India’s and Nazi Germany’s.”
We won’t today dive into her book, but we WILL dive into the “caste system.” We’ll start with a few words from another writer who happens to be a professor of English at the University of Hawaii: Subramanian Shankar. He shared some poignant perspectives on the REAL caste system on Earth: that in India. He is a native Indian who describes what a caste system has been for centuries in his country.
The original caste system appeared centuries ago in India. People’s entire life was determined at their birth: if born into a wealthy or politically well-connected family, that baby would grow knowing from birth he/she would have the same privileges as did their fathers. Caste was determined for them. They retained it forever.
For those who were born into poor or impoverished families, nothing they could ever do in their lives would enable them to break out of that place in India’s caste system just because of their caste at birth.
Both Ms. Wilkerson and Mr. Shankar are confident the U.S. contains a caste system and always has. With that comes an automatic that cannot ever be changed: “you are and will always be in whatever financial and political class in America into which you were birthed.
Let’s look at what Mr. Shankar said:
Many Americans would be appalled to think that anything like caste could exist in a country allegedly founded on life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. After all, India’s atrocious caste system determines social status by birth, compels marriage within a community, and restricts job opportunities.
But is the U.S. so different?
What is caste?
I first realized that caste could shed new light on American inequality in 2016 when I was a scholar-in-residence at the Center for Critical Race Studies at the University of Houston-Downtown. There, I found that my public presentations on caste resonated deeply with students, who were mostly working-class, black, and Latino. I believe that’s because two key characteristics differentiate caste from race and class:
First, caste cannot be transcended. Unlike class, people of the “low” caste cannot educate or earn their way out of being “low.” No matter how elite their college or how lucrative their careers, those born into a low caste remain stigmatized for life.
Caste is also always hierarchical: As long as it exists, so does the division of people into “high” and “low.”
What distinguishes it from race, is that people in a caste system cannot dream of equality.
Caste, in other words, is societal difference made timeless, inevitable, and cureless. Caste says to its subjects, “You all are different and unequal and fated to remain so.” Neither race nor class nor race and class combined can so efficiently encapsulate the kind of social hierarchy, prejudice, and inequality that marginalized Americans experience.
In Houston, that sense of profound exclusion emerged in most post-presentation discussions about caste.
As children, the students there noted, they had grown up in segregated urban neighborhoods – a geographic exclusion that was federal policy for most of the 20th century. Many took on unpayable student loan debt for college, then struggled to stay in school while juggling work and family pressures, often without a support system.
Several students also contrasted their cramped downtown campus – with its parking problems, limited dining options, and lack of after-hours cultural life – with the university’s swankier main digs. Others would point out the jail across from the University of Houston-Downtown with bleak humor, invoking the school-to-prison pipeline.
Both the faculty and the students knew the power of social networks that are essential to professional success. Yet even with a college degree, evidence shows, Americans who grow up poor are almost guaranteed to earn less.
The above is the opinion of a native-born scholar from India who lives and teaches in the United States. His perspective is one that obviously is drawn from both his early life in India (where caste classification actually began for the entirety of Planet Earth). That perspective compares life under a true caste system in India and makes comparisons.
In doing so, he draws broad assumptions and makes assertions as fact that are nothing more than his opinions, which he certainly is entitled to share. But often what we think — especially if taken out of context — prove to be untrue. In this case, he cannot truthfully assume that he knows how being born in the United States is different from those born into India’s TRUE caste system. He makes assumptions to support his theory about a U.S. caste system and does so based on NO logical fact.
So what about America?
Casteist ideologies in America
In the United States, we have a quasi-caste system, a welfare system, which incentivizes people to remain poor by staying on welfare and supporting the politicians who further their benefits. Star Parker, a former welfare single mom who worked her way out of the system, later founding Urban Cure, states, “It is no accident that the most loyal Democratic Party supporters are those most dependent on the government.” Democratic politicians mainly trade “free stuff” for votes, which keeps the poor in poverty and the elitist politicians in power. Sadly, many of its recipients have bought into the lie that welfare is good for them when, in reality, it’s only good for the politicians who exploit them.
In addition to the $1 trillion spent yearly by federal, state, and local government funding of roughly 80 welfare programs, the welfare-caste system incentivizes people to stay poor, rather than encouraging them to seek opportunity, take responsibility for their behavior, and care for their families. While the massive national debt incurred by welfare programs should greatly concern us, our greater concern should be for the victims of these programs. The system rewards broken families and penalizes in-tact ones. It encourages failure and creates a multigenerational group of people who don’t believe that they can achieve because the system has taught them that “not achieving” is its own achievement. This must change.
As a culture, we must champion the cause of the poor by empowering them to break free from the bondage of poverty. True compassion sees the value and dignity of each human being and helps them to achieve their potential. This occurs not through spending more government money but by incentivizing work, family, and responsibility. Gov. Sam Brownback’s reforms in Kansas illustrate just that. Brownback instituted both work requirements and time limits for welfare eligibility. Since then, able-bodied adults on food stamps (without dependents) dropped 75%.
Additionally, 60% of those who left welfare found employment within the first year. Their incomes increased by 127%. These people found opportunity. They found dignity. Most importantly, they found hope.
The state of Maine also reinstated the work requirement for able-bodied adults who saw their incomes increase by 114% in the first year, as they left welfare for a job. In addition to increasing their income, this good policy helped set free those souls trapped in the hopelessness of poverty, putting them instead on course to live a life of hope and dignity. All Americans should have an equal opportunity to build a life for themselves and their families, like those in Maine and Kansas.
The incredible story of Dr. Ben Carson recounted in the book “Gifted Hands” and the film of the same name, tells the story of a young boy raised in urban Detroit who ultimately becomes a world-renowned neurosurgeon. Later, of course, we know that he ran for president and now serves as the secretary of Housing and Urban Development. His story exemplifies the power of opportunity, hard work, and determination.
As a nation, we must pursue welfare reform that ends the politically created, socially stratifying welfare caste system. We must pursue welfare reform that gives all Americans access to the path of freedom and prosperity. We must remember our shared humanity and reject the caste system with its predetermined order and social stratification. If we truly believe in the value and dignity of the individual, and if we create our policies to encourage responsibility and hard work, we will see our brothers and sisters break free from generational poverty. We will show the poor that America is with them and for them. We will show them that the American Dream of self-sufficiency and self-reliance is not just for some but for all.
I’m tired of “outside” identification assignment! There are far too many people who today, for some reason, feel entitled to stick a label on anyone they bump into. They do that based on what?
Often when a person with whom they interact does or says something, these elitists just hang a tag on that person that says, “racist,” “bigot,” “homophobe,” “xenophobe,” or some other “phobia” that they can conjure up. If you want to call that a caste system, feel free to do so.
But what all this means to me is today in the United States there IS a group of people who are entitled to do such things. And their entitlement is real, and it comes from other Americans!
Think about it: we glorify professional athletes, professional singers and actors, politicians, and tycoons of business. In doing so, we actually create a caste of elite Americans. The style of caste in the U.S. IS slightly different from that in India. Those in India are generational and are based on nothing more than who are the parents of a newborn child. No person in India can change whatever caste they enter at birth.
That’s not the same as in the U.S. — thankfully. Because our country allows each to achieve and become whoever they desire, entering and leaving any caste system here is not solely based on a biological last name. It is based on just what price every American is willing to pay to achieve whatever caste membership they desire.
“But not everyone can be the President of the United States!”
That’s true — there have been only 45. But who on this Earth has the right to tell you that you cannot be the President!What determines that is almost solely on the shoulders of whoever is willing to pay the price to get there. It’s certainly not a role that anyone deserves just because of their last name.
I’ll leave you with a piece of advice: Don’t let WHERE you are in your life determine WHO you are. WHERE you are is just one stop on the road to WHERE you are going. YOU determine WHO you or — no one else.
Politicians speak about following the science to set COVID-19 policy, but their decisions are more about political objectives than they are about medical efficacy. Why else did California Gov. Gavin Newsom shut down retail businesses in March when the state had under 300 cases per day but allow them to be open in July when the state clocked in at over 10,000 cases per day?
Why else would Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear allow liquor stores to stay open but close down churches? Why did Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer insist that buying lottery tickets remain legal but made it illegal to buy garden supplies? And how did New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo use “science” to prohibit outdoor funerals but allow outdoor protests?
But as badly as our lockdowns have damaged local businesses, a potentially even bigger problem is created by the physical closure of schools. One of the most important functions of a civil society is to protect and educate its children, and the cancellation of in-person education stands to become one of the most detrimental acts of collateral damage during this pandemic.
California currently expects its 5-year-olds to complete kindergarten exclusively through online distance learning. For this dubious undertaking, the politicians are given passionate political cover. The Los Angeles Teachers Union maintains that “the only people guaranteed to benefit from the premature reopening of schools amidst a rapidly accelerating pandemic are billionaires and the politicians they’ve purchased” — as if billionaires typically send their kids to L.A. public schools. The wealthy will send their children to in-person private schools or hire additional tutors, while most American families will suffer from a widening education gap that could set their kids back years. Worst of all, none of this is medically substantiated.
There is a great deal of fear generated in the media about risk to children, but the truth is that children are incredibly resistant to coronavirus. So much so that children are far more likely to die from the flu, or even just from driving to school, than from COVID-19.
The CDC has recorded a total of 20 COVID-19 deaths in children ages 5-14 compared to almost 2,000 deaths from non-COVID causes in the same time period for the same age group. It means children have been 100 times more likely to die from non-COVID causes during the pandemic than from COVID. This puts the risk of COVID death for children 5 to 14 in the same ballpark as deaths by lightning.
Claims of long-term damage or mystery illnesses have not been backed by any definitive evidence and they therefore serve more as a scare and intimidation tactic than as a medical guide. The truth is that children so far have had around a 1 in 20,000 rate of COVID-19 hospitalizations, according to the CDC. While controversial to some, Sweden’s policy of keeping primary schools open even at the height of the pandemic serves as an excellent counterpoint. With over 1 million children, Sweden did not have a single death of a school-aged child despite full attendance and no masks.
Sweden is not alone in sending kids to school. Denmark opened its schools back up in April. Finland kept normal class sizes when it reopened. Parts of Montana opened schools back in May, as did parts of Canada and Germany. The Netherlands announced that Dutch students didn’t even need to socially distance anymore as they experienced very low transmission rates. Schools all across Europe have reopened successfully, both with and without masks. The risk to the children themselves therefore cannot be used as a justification for the massive damage created by ceasing in-person education. But what about the teachers?
A study in Switzerland, including a review of World Health Organization contact tracing, failed to find evidence of a single case of a child passing coronavirus to an adult. A comprehensive study in Iceland isolated SARS-CoV-2 samples from every positive case, sequenced the virus genome, and tracked the mutation patterns. This analysis, along with contact tracing, allowed researchers to identify definitively who passed the virus to whom. The study concluded “[E]ven if children do get infected, they are less likely to transmit the disease to others than adults. We have not found a single instance of a child infecting parents.” A study of schools in Ireland found “no evidence of secondary transmission of COVID-19 from children attending school.”
New Zealand conducted a study across 15 schools in which 18 individuals with COVID-19 were in close contact with 735 other students and 128 staff members, yet no teacher or staff member contacted COVID-19 from any of the initial 18 cases and only two students out of the 735 would later test positive. The New Zealand study concluded: “Our investigation found no evidence of children infecting teachers.”
Denmark, The Netherlands, Finland, Belgium, and Austria all opened schools and “found no evidence of increased spread of the novel coronavirus after schools reopened.” The same was found in scientific studies in France, Sweden, and Germany. A leading British epidemiologist goes even further to claim there is not a single known case of a teacher being infected of coronavirus from a student anywhere in the world.
Since there could still be a rare school outbreak, such as experienced in Israel, students with high-risk household members should be given a distance education option, and teachers who believe themselves or their households to be at high risk should be allowed to teach remotely, balancing the risk for all parties. This way healthy students can be be educated by healthy teachers. With science overwhelmingly pointing to reopening schools, why do so many schools intend to remain closed?
The Politics of Teaching
If children are at minimal risk, transmission to adults is rare, and both can be accommodated with optional distance learning, why are some schools suspending all in-person education?
It’s certainly not because of the parents, who would be the last people to send their children into a dangerous situation. The vast majority of parents support reopening schools with modifications, perhaps because they best understand the cost-benefit of depriving their children of a full education.
The reason many schools won’t open, just like why so many places originally locked down, comes back to fear and politics. The Los Angeles’ teacher’s union, for example, recently came out with a list of demands before returning to teach in person. These included defunding the police, ending charter schools, “Medicare for All,” and a new wealth tax. It was not until the union came out with these demands that Newsom announced closure of nearly all schools in California — overriding individual school districts that had planned to open.
In a brazen announcement, the union put in bold words the conclusion of their argument: “Normal wasn’t working for us before. We can’t go back” – openly conveying that this negotiation was more about changing what they didn’t like about American education and society before the pandemic, and certainly not about what is best for children. Despite overwhelming scientific evidence pointing to the safety of school reopening, union President Cecily Myart-Cruz labeled doing so “anti-science.” Yet, it’s also no wonder that so many teachers have concern for their safety now, as media outlets like CNN continue to run sensationalized stories building up school reopenings as dangerous while downplaying the actual science and evidence.
Day Care at School Gives the Game Away
Cities left with little choice due to their political environment are trying to mitigate the situation for parents. New York City will offer day care for 100,000 students attending schools that are only partially reopening, though this largely defeats the point of keeping children from being at school in the first place. If school closing advocates are correct, this would only expose children to a broader cohort of peers and would make teachers, children, and their caretakers less safe.
Some districts in California are offering day-care right-on school campus for half and full day programs, at a cost. So, parents can pay to send their kids to school to be watched but not to be taught. Ironically, a student might be physically at a school under the watch of paid day care while simultaneously “attending” the very same school online.
It is clear that science is not the driving principle behind any of these policies, which helps explain why both the CDC and American Academy of Pediatrics have advocated for opening on-campus education.
Teachers Are Essential Workers
There are few functions in society more essential than educating our children. “Education of our children is an essential Texas value,” Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton recently wrote in a letter directing that health officials cannot completely close schools, and they certainly cannot preemptively close schools with no evidence of local school spread.
The CDC recently concluded that “in-person schooling is in the best interest of students, particularly in the context of appropriate mitigation measures similar to those implemented at essential workplaces.”
The education of our children is too essential to be used as a political bargaining chip. If nurses can come to work every day and treat the sick and infected, then certainly teachers can be expected to come to work and teach the young and healthy.
On Wednesday, four big tech CEOs — Apple’s Tim Cook, Amazon’s Jeff Bezos, Google’s Sundar Pichai, and Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg — will come face to face with Congress, in a hearing held by Antitrust Subcommittee Chair David Cicilline. The hearing is one result of a yearlong investigation by Cicilline’s subcommittee into whether these four companies regulate more of the U.S. economy than our public officials do.
For some, this hearing seemed like a series of technical questions about market power, and for others, a mere congressional spectacle. But the stakes are high. This hearing was part of the only major investigation into corporate power by any Congress in recent memory. Its results may determine whether Congress over the next few years develops the confidence to break up and regulate these giants, will in many ways determine whether America remains a self-governing democracy.
Until recently, the harms of these giants were hidden from the public because they offer free or low-cost services to consumers. But low prices mask a deep threat to our society, starting with a surveillance architecture that has concentrated ad revenue and threatens free expression itself. Two-thirds of American counties have no daily newspaper, largely because Google and Facebook have diverted revenue from the free press to themselves. In addition, these companies propagate misinformation, harm mental health, and promote racial discrimination, with virtually no accountability. Even a giant ad boycott by a host of corporations opposed to Facebook’s hate speech policies drew a response fit for a monopolist: “My guess is that all these advertisers will be back on the platform soon enough,” said Zuckerberg. That’s power.
Amazon, meanwhile, has built powers that rival, or exceed, those of the government. In 2004, Jeff Bezos privately told Amazon executives that he wanted to “draw a moat” around the company’s customers. The analogy was clear: Amazon would control access to those customers, becoming the only bridge for hundreds and thousands of other companies to reach those consumers.
And 16 years later, it’s clear that Bezos fulfilled his goal to transform his company into the bridge through which American e-commerce flows, reaping profits from the tolls the Seattle-based monster imposes on the steady stream of goods. As of 2020, there are more than 118 million Prime subscribers domestically, versus 129 million total households in America. Bezos was so successful in digging his moat that it now surrounds virtually the entire nation, and the rules it sets for that commerce affects much of the rest of the consumer economy. As Harvard Law professor Rebecca Tushnet has noted, “Amazon, with its size, now substitutes for government in a lot of what it does.”
The harms here are real. America has lost over a hundred thousand local, independent retail businesses, a drop of 40 percent from 2000 to 2015, largely due to Amazon. And this is not good for consumers; Amazon allows thousands of counterfeit and unsafe products on its marketplace because it doesn’t have the same liability for products that normal retailers do. Because of its surveillance over its Marketplace, Amazon copies the design of successful products, which destroys the incentive to innovate.
In other words, these four corporations command bridges over which our news, entertainment, goods, and services now flow, serving as the digital infrastructure of swaths of the American economy. These dominant platforms, whose market capitalization surpasses the gross domestic product of many large nations, function as the quasi-governmental gatekeepers of America’s commerce and communications. In fact, Mark Zuckerberg once made this point explicitly: “In a lot of ways, Facebook is more like a government than a traditional company.”
Monopolies are Un-American
Technology corporations like to say they are the arbiters of the future, but to understand why this hearing mattered, it’s important to revisit a long-lost history of American battles against monopoly power. Most Americans, including our leaders, do not know that monopolies, in particular companies that draw a moat between the people and the marketplace, have always, until the past few decades, been seen as deeply un-American.
Because Americans and their leaders understood the importance of access to the marketplace, they naturally recognized that democracy requires eliminating concentrations of power. Congress broke up railroads, banks, aerospace companies, and prevented automobile and telephone giants from invading into adjacent markets. Congress used to regulate our markets, and in doing so, Congress governed.
Citizens Became Consumers
So what happened? How is it that four corporations can now command such heights? In the 1970s, American elites adopted a new philosophy of governance. Americans were no longer citizens but consumers, and monopolies could serve consumers well. And let the expert economists make decisions about markets, not the commoner rabble.
By 1998, this philosophy was so entrenched in our governing elites that Larry Summers linked American global leadership and power not to ideals of freedom, but to corporate dominance, noting that “whether it is AIG in insurance, McDonald’s in fast food, Walmart in retailing, Microsoft in software, Harvard University in education, CNN in television news—the leading enterprises are American.” Similarly, Senator Dianne Feinstein, in 2010, upon voting against a measure to break up large banks, said to a colleague, “This is still America, right?” We had forgotten so much about who we are that American leaders did not recognize in their own tradition the importance of public control over markets.
Buried in this confused anti-American ideology favorable to monopoly, the Clinton, Bush, and Obama administrations did not use merger laws, and Congress did not regulate data or online commerce, so Silicon Valley grew to gargantuan proportions. In other words, Jeff Bezos and his fellow CEOs aren’t powerful sovereign-like entities because they are brilliant as their boosters would say, or evil, as some of their opponents would offer. They are governing us because we the people have refused to do so through our public institutions. These men have merely stepped into the breach, filling up the void.
There are many complicated technical questions about how to get rid of Amazon’s moat, or that of the other three tech behemoths. But the political problem is simpler. To restore democracy, or rule by the many, in the commercial sphere, means to reassert the role of elected representatives. As Chair Cicilline and the members of the Antitrust Subcommittee demand answers from the CEOs of these tech giants, they are beginning to fill the gap that our last several generations of leaders have left.
If they fill it well, they will be reasserting a tradition that is 400 years old, and yet, surprisingly modern.
What Can We Rely On Will Happen?
It’s plain and simple that if somehow these and other tech giants are not reigned in when it comes to their almost unilateral control of so much of the lives of Americans, they will NOT just tread water: these companies did not become MASSIVE companies by just sitting around counting their pennies. They have continued to grow. And their growth results directly from innovation, creativity, finding and using new opportunities that all are simply puzzle pieces that are put in place at the right time to maximize companies’ financial growth, dominance, and control of more and more of our lives.
Have we as citizens allowed these giants to grow too big, become too dominant, while our elected officials have in large been rocked to sleep by diversion and, God forbid, huge dollars in campaign contributions that have bought their silence? What were the anti-trust laws crafted for? What’s different about the circumstances that led to the breakup of AT&T and today’s monopolies by these tech giants? Why haven’t our guard dogs in Washington looked-in with suspicion of the tactics being used so blatantly to take control of more and more of the American economy in multiple aspects?
Don’t believe for one minute that that House Committee hearing in D.C. on Thursday is a precursor to anything substantive from Congress to slow the swallowing of more American rights and opportunities. Be honest: if Congress really had your welfare in mind, none of this would have ever happened!
I remember a period not so long ago in which dozens of members of Congress from both parties united and examined big companies’ operations frequently to guarantee Americans that the monopolization of sectors of our economy were not being snatched away by anyone. CEO’s of America’s companies no longer fear Big Brother looking over their shoulders to make certain Americans were not taken advantage of. They have been lulled into a state of apathy.
No one can fault these are any other companies from seizing opportunities to grow, expand, and gobble up market shares for their stockholders. Remember this sage statement made long ago: “It’s always easier to ask for forgiveness than to ask for permission.” And Big Tech operates today in everything they do. Seldom are they chastised for their actions. Why? Somebody — a lot of somebodies — make lots of money when this happens.
Money is NOT everything. But money DOES MAKE everything else seem a little better! And the more, the merrier.
Finally this: Americans must understand that if Big Tech is not stopped, Big Tech will NOT stop!
Yep, “COVID-idiocy” is now a word. I made it up. Why? We need to create a new COVID-19 group in which we can relegate the ever-growing number of idiotic plans and ideas pulled from the air by private “experts” to assist Americans in the fight against our current pandemic — you know, the medical pandemic “thing” that, according to the CDC guidelines, ceased even to be a “pandemic” six weeks ago. That doesn’t matter at all! We still need to spoon-feed Americans with a daily dose of stupidity to guarantee American leaders are always the smartest people who breathe!
We had the mask: “to wear” and then “not to wear;” “to medicate with Hydroxychloroquine,” then it was “don’t dare take it cause you’ll die!” Then we could take it “only in a doctor’s direct care,” then “don’t take it cause you’ll die!” “Everybody stay inside,” then,” then “go back to work, but only in small numbers.” Then, once again, we hear the cries of “stay at home, don’t work. If you do, you’re going to die!”
Everyone responsible for the creation of these lines of “COVID-idiocy” needs to be marked so that everyone will know they are the manufacturing of caustic, hateful, demeaning, and fearful “musts” that have together torn apart the hearts and minds of good and honest Americans.
But there’s more.
As New York City schools grapple with how to handle a virus that has an under 1 percent infection rate in children, parenting boards frequented by the educated, monied-but-not-so-monied-as-to-send-their-kids-to-private-school set, are forming “pods.” A ‘pod’ will be a small group of children, usually no more than five, who will meet at each other’s homes instead of traditional schooling in September. You, and four other families in your same tax bracket, will hire a teacher to educate the five children in the pod. Parenting boards are overwhelmed with requests for these tutors. The families will agree to only interact with each other: an absurd and impossible promise that will surely be broken.
We’re in a time where there is a ‘right’ opinion on everything, and every other idea is stupid and likely racist. The right advice right now is that it would be just crazy to open schools in New York City in the fall. This is even though every other country is opening schools, and New York’s governor is on a prolonged victory tour on late-night television for his celebrated handling of the COVID crisis…which resulted in the death of 32,000 New Yorkers.
If you’re a parent who is pushing to open schools, well, you don’t care about the lives of teachers. Those sending their kids to private schools that plan to open must love their kids less than the podders. Pods have become the only acceptable way to educate your children this fall.
The idea that moving a group of children from house to house, and bringing in a commuting educator who is theoretically isolating herself from others in the name of teaching the group, is somehow seen as safer than just sending the kids to a traditional classroom, is a testament to how much science and reason have ceased to matter. It’s the latest in our COVID security theater, which now includes having a temperature check when entering certain restaurants or buildings. However, someone can be COVID-positive and asymptomatic, or ya’know, take Tylenol.
It would be one thing if parents revolted and asked for $25,199, the amount spent per student in New York City’s mainly failing school system, to be returned to them to educate their kids as they wish. But school choice is stupid, and racist and only those terrible Republicans want that. These parents are doing something very different than icky school choice. They’re choosing, you see, to keep their white, affluent kids safe and educated when their local schools won’t do it. As for the people who don’t have the money to hire a tutor, and need to be at their own jobs while their kids are either on some wacky part-time school schedule or fully remote, that’s their problem.
The one-two punch of pods, while not demanding the money be returned, will go so far to keep down poor kids across the city. It’s almost as though that is the intention. Anyone sane still left in New York City must demand funding to be returned to parents to use how they see fit for their child’s education. Don’t let the rich podders get to ignore the choices they are making that will further exacerbate inequality in education. Make them face it.
Anything other than that is pure “COVID-Idiocy.”
What Other COVID-idiocy Can we Expect?
Every TV Show Is Going To Have A Coronavirus Episode
Or at least all of the medical drama’s will. I’m not sure how they’ll work a coronavirus episode into The Simpsons or whatever, but I’m sure they’ll try, and I’m equally sure that it will be terrible.
It’s weird how we want to consume media about the things that scare us, but we totally do. The popularity of the 2011 drama Contagion has increased by about 9000% since the pandemic started. Do people think that they’ll find some secret code to surviving the virus in a movie about a similar outbreak? Or does watching Matt Damon go through what we’re going through while also being hot just make us feel better? Maybe we enjoy the superiority of seeing Meredith Grey get a slight cough and wave it off as nothing while we sit at home eating popcorn and saying, “Oooo girl, you got no idea.”
Will We Ever Wear Pants Again?
Global disasters always affect fashion. After World War I, skirts and haircuts got shorter. During World War II, pants became more widely accepted as casual wear for women. During the pandemic, very few people are choosing to get out of their pajamas.
With each global disaster, humanity has said “Heck No!”, fewer layers, more comfort. After working from home for possibly many months putting on real pants might as well be climbing into an Iron Maiden. A suit? Don’t even joke about that.
Not only are clothes going to get even more comfortable but now that we’re all used to seeing facemasks in public you might start seeing them in daily life outside of the hospital and airport. Yes, the Mortal Kombat Ninja look is going to be walking the runway at Paris fashion week next year.
Get Ready For Running To Become Stupidly Popular
While most of us are trapped inside feasting on those fancy Pepperidge Farm cookies that were all that was left in the snack aisle, apparently some people are using this pandemic to get swole. One of the few ways you can safely leave your home during a pandemic is to go for a run outside.
Once you start running, your brain produces some pretty great chemicals that tell you running is good for your body. After you’re done feeling like you’re going to die, you feel pretty great after a long run, and the hardest part of running is having the time and energy to get started.
The end of the pandemic will be the start of everyone running a 5K. Everyone you know will suddenly not shut up about running. I mean, I figured the apocalypse would involve a lot of running, but I hoped it would be from something rad like a big dinosaur.
Our Butts Will Never Be The Same
Bidets have been in America for a while. You probably know a few people who have one and at least one unfortunate soul who’s chosen to take on the personality of Bidet Guy. You know, Bidet Guy, the guy who will not stop talking about how clean his rear-end is. If there isn’t one in your current group of friends, there’s about to be.
The toilet paper shortage is causing more than just the obvious issues. Cities are concerned that people flushing non-toilet paper items like paper towels could royally overload sewer systems. Bidets are the most obvious problem to the lack of TP issue, and Amazon is still selling out of them like crazy. Once the hoards lust for butt paper is satisfied, and we have a stable toilet paper supply line again, lots of people are still going to have bidets. We’re going to discover that they’re not as scary and European and as we initially thought and why uninstall one when the next toilet paper shortage could happen eventually. Guess what? We’re all Bidet Guys now.
There’s Going To Be A Divorce Boom
Everyone has been talking about the potential for a quarantine baby boom, and I’m sure that’s a distinct possibility. Still, when people got out of quarantine in China, the first thing they wanted to do was get divorced. Allegedly there were so many people going immediately from quarantine to their divorce lawyer that there was actually a shortage of appointments. That’s right. We had a toilet paper shortage; China has a divorce shortage.
It’s tough being locked inside with anyone for months, even someone you have loved and cherished since you were nineteen years old, who may have for example had a job that required frequent travel and routine sixty to eighty-hour workweeks, and now he’s home all the time, and you’ve suddenly realized that he doesn’t know how to open a door. It’s like every door he encounters, he rams his entire body into and then at the last possible seconds remembers to turn the and nob and somehow at the same time as he full-body slams the door he burst into the room, every single time he opens a door! It’s like living with Kramer from Seinfeld.
Anyway, that’s just a totally random example. What I’m trying to say is if there is something insignificant about your quarantine partner that annoys you get ready for it to be amped up by a hundred after a month inside. Once that’s over, maybe you’ll be prepared to split up over it.
If we don’t get back to normal life — you know, getting up at 6:00, drinking a cup of coffee after showering and dressing for work, skimming the overnight news, jumping in the car and headed to the office or packing the kids’ lunches and hauling them to school — we’ll ALL be making shrink appointments! Don’t get me wrong: I love being with my wife of 45 years. But, 24 hours a day? That’s burning way to much time from the “Tolerance Clock.”
There’s plenty of COVID-idiocy to go around as we watch the Democrat big-city mayors and state governors face turn green and spew COVID-idiocy insults toward Washington D.C. But I’ll bet you one thing: you haven’t yet seen the craziness that will shock us all the longer we live in this semblance of sanity at the hands of COVID-19 and the lack of REAL information. It’s getting ugly now, but, in New York City, imagine how the parents and kids in the “pod-schools” are going to feel being cooped-up for another nine months. There might be some killings — both by parents AND kids before it’s over.
OMG…if we don’t have a 2020 World Series or NFL football, there’ll be dads running down the streets taking potshots at total strangers! Yep. And there’s plenty of COVID-idiocy to go around to all 330 million of us. We’ll probably use most of it!
I actually have a call-in to a Republican member of Congress who’s an attorney to get an answer to this question: “Are the government mandates (from ANY government) Constitutional?” There’s no science to support any justification for the mandates. Why do I say that? It’s the truth! There are countless opinions of some of the finest epidemiologists, immunologists, and infectious disease specialists who are actually split down the middle on the answer to that question. But what resolves the “science” question about mask efficacy of wearing masks for the purpose of stopping COVID-19 infection-spreading are numerous controlled laboratory tests over a period of years — a decade or so — that clearly state that NO mask of any kind stops viruses. And that includes N95 masks. Each of these tests conducted on thousands of individuals using every conceivable type of mask in addition to proving the inadequacy for any of these masks to stop the virus from impacting the “wearer” or persons around them show that often wearing masks for too long will negatively impact the person doing so.
I don’t have the “constitutionality” answer yet, but I will. But for the purpose of our conversation today, let’s assume that the answer will be, “No, a mask mandate does NOT pass constitutional muster.” So what about the “now” if the response follows science and confirms we shouldn’t wear masks.
Let’s dive in!
Next time Donald Trump poses for a photocall in one of those ridiculous, unnecessary and completely off-brand face masks, maybe he should remember the history of his good friends the Chinese.
In the 17th century, China’s Ming dynasty was overthrown by the Manchu invaders of the Qing dynasty. The Manchus imposed their will on the conquered Han majority by forcing them to adopt their hairstyle. Where the Han had traditionally worn their hair long and tied in a bun, they now had to wear it Manchu-style, shaved at the front and sides with the top grown long and plaited into a queue. The sentence for failing to have the correct new haircut was death by beheading.
Does this scenario sound vaguely familiar? Sure all those U.S. states now enforcing the wearing of face masks may claim they’re acting in the interests of public health and safety — and sure it’s not a capital crime — yet. But really, all those corona-fascist state governors imposing this unnatural and unfamiliar dress code are doing it for the same reason the conquering Manchus did it to the Han: to show the lowlifes — that’s you and me — who’s boss.
I can understand why Democrats and other liberal-lefties are unable to see the problem here: why should they when they so adore regulation and the firm hand of Big Government? What does puzzle me greatly, though, is why the entire conservative movement isn’t united in outrage at this blatant exercise in judicial overreach.
This ought to be THE civil liberties issue of our era: an intrusive, economically damaging regulation, irrationally imposed on Americans for the flimsiest of reasons. Yet instead of fighting it tooth and nail, far, far too many Americans are just shrugging their shoulders and saying: “Well if it saves a few lives, why should I mind having to wear a bit of cloth over my face when I go to the mall?”
Well, the reason you should mind is that the number of lives it may end up saving is likely even smaller than our personal number of brain cells.
Even at the very height of the pandemic about two months ago, cloth masks (as opposed to the professional medical variety) would have been next to useless in preventing viral transmission: as a number of studies and medical experts have noted, the mesh is too large to stop a virus and anyway, they’re often incorrectly worn.
But now that the virus has begun to retreat — as viruses tend to do in the summer months — and the number of deaths has tumbled almost to nothing, the rationale for imposing masks is more nonsensical still. It’s like surrendering your arms to an enemy you’ve just beaten in battle: again, something liberals might find appealing, but which all conservatives ought to find incomprehensible.
Granted, the mainstream media continues aggressively to promote the narrative that the crisis is far from over — and will continue to get worse until we find the Holy Grail vaccine. But conservatives really ought to know by now that what the MSM tells you about coronavirus should be taken with a massive pinch of salt. The MSM reports a “surge” in infections as something shocking when it fact it’s just the inevitable result of more widespread testing; it cherry-picks localized “spikes” in death rates to signify impending catastrophe when a) the national trend remains downward and b) increases which may look large in percentage terms are actually tiny in terms of numbers. Furthermore, as Senator Ron Paul (R-KY) recently noted, the figures are deeply suspect anyway. One twenty-something listed as having died of COVID in Florida turned out, on closer examination, to have been killed in a motorcycle crash. In South Carolina, the state health agency admitted that the recent “spike” in deaths was simply the result of delayed reporting.
This is what makes it so especially disappointing seeing Trump wearing one of those masks. He ought to be taking a stand on this issue: signaling to the world that whatever Dr. Fauci, Bill Gates and the World Health Organization may say to scare us into cowering under our beds until Big Pharma can come up with an expensive vaccine, he Donald Trump remains on the side of the Ordinary Joe who refuses to wear one of those stupid muzzles unless there is compelling evidence that they’re going to make the slightest difference. And to blow the mask mandate out of the water is that hundreds and thousands of reports are showing-up that people who never even were tested are being reported: “confirmed COVID-19 infected!”
So who do we believe?
Currently, there is no such compelling evidence. We red meat conservatives love and respect our old folk at least as much as liberals do. (Probably more, actually, let’s be honest). But we refuse to be degraded by leftist elitists with emotionally blackmailing arguments about how, by not wearing masks, we’re putting these people at risk. If that were really the case, we’d all wear those masks, no problem. But it’s not the case: those masks are being imposed on us for the most cynical of political reasons which have nothing to do with public health. Shame on those of our brethren too ill-informed — or simply too hard-headed — to realize this.
So what do we do?
For this conversation, let’s put away any thoughts of wearing masks that can actually negatively impact the Pulse-OX levels in a person’s blood. That IS happening and can be very dangerous. Be that as it is, consider the scenario where we keep a mask in our cars, at our desks at work, or in our pocket or purse when we’re out and about. When we are going to be exposed to or in a group of people, or we go to the grocery store or a restaurant, we just pop the mask on. Certainly, we’re not going to be in that environment for an extended period of time, so the Pulse-OX issue will not become an issue. When we leave the populated area, we take it off.
What will that accomplish?
There are millions of Americans that have listened to Dr. Anthony Fauci, Dr. Deborah Birx, local and even nationally acclaimed physicians that have amazing credibility all on television, social media, and speaking in groups telling Americans, “We must wear those masks because we are each COVID-19 dispensaries.” These normally astute, educated behemoths in Healthcare in saying this is simply expressing a personal opinion. And they shouldn’t be doing so! Why? Because NOTHING in science supports their allegations. And, yes, they are nothing more than allegations!
Don’t let this seem like an accusation or insult to your doctor. It’s not. It’s coming from science and is NOT diminishing in any way the veracity or credibility of any doctor. If it’s not true, why would they continue to say this again and again?
It’s simple. In my business, for thirty years we have dealt daily with doctors of all specialties, all degrees of practice, (sole practice, medical clinic, researchers, hospitalists, specialists, etc.) of every age, origin, ethnicity, and with various stages of medical education. They’re all different, BUT, they’re all the same in one way: they are experts at EVERYTHING, especially their trade: MEDICINE!
No, they’re not all narcissists and know-it-alls. But most are. To that end, they seldom accept even a remote possibility of being wrong, of not having critical information that they have personally researched or learned scientifically, but they seldom let their lack of specific knowledge of anything pertinent to anything in medicine stop their pontificating to all who listen what is little more than an opinion.
That’s a fact!
Ironically, all of the pushback I hear regarding the mask issue is about the purported rejection of science by those who reject mask-wearing. Logically thinking, however, doctors are certainly the folks who SHOULD know the science, SHOULD study all the controlled laboratory research on mask use that has happened exhaustively over the last ten to twenty years. I cannot answer for certain why they do not. But, obviously, if they demand all to wear masks using as justification for saying so that masks stop COVID-19 (or any virus at all), they are ignoring the science of the matter themselves.
So what should we do? I will NOT give you advice on the subject! But I HAVE read and heard hundreds of “experts” tell us that we must wear masks. I have also heard hundreds of “experts” tell us that we should NOT wear masks. And they all claim they’re referring to the “science” of the matter, but they never volunteer the “science” that supports that theory.
What should we do?
I’ll answer by telling you what I do: I’m one who keeps a mask handy. And when I’m going into a grocery store, restaurant, or some other public place expecting to face other people, I wear the mask. “If the science doesn’t support a need to do so, why do you do it at all?”
Good question. And there’s a good answer:
If I can keep one person — one 70-85-year-old person — from feeling a panic attack coming on when they see me at Kroger without a mask walking down an aisle toward them, I’ll voluntarily pay the price.
Does that make sense to you?
I’m all-in on that. But: there’s more.
What is tearing at my mind every day about this issue is this one thing: there obviously are people who really know the answers to this issue that refuse to share it with all Americans. Why does that bother me? Their doing so can only be for one purpose: to use fear for some political purpose. That can be the only REAL answer that makes sense.
I’ll close by saying this: Steve Rasmussen — a famous and very accurate national pollster — today reported about a poll just taken by his firm of 1000 Americans from every possible background and political affiliation. The poll asked this question: “How do you feel today about the state of our nation — economically, socially, etc. — but WITHOUT factoring into your feeling of well-being the state of politics?”
When tossing their feelings about the political state of our nation, 75% of those polled said everything’s OK!
My final thought for you is this: whether you know beyond any reasonable certainty that masks work or don’t work, consider wearing one for others. Fear is a horrible state in which to live at any time in our lives. But to be forced to live there regarding a medical condition with which many people have died makes life unnecessarily caustic and difficult. No one deserves to live there, especially not those the most vulnerable in the U.S. today.
So I’ll carry my mask around with me. And I’ll pull it out and harness up.
I just had this thought: what if the answer comes back from that constitutional expert that tells me these politicians DO have the right to force us to wear masks? Easy answer: I’ll already be doing so!