DNC Club Cancels July 13th Convention…


Two things are very clear: 1. The Club was never dependent on using Joe Biden as the democrat presidential nominee; and 2. The Club knew something would happen this spring to erase the political norms.

Just like it took a few months to see the full picture around how democrats assembled the Ukraine impeachment hoax via Mary McCord (DOJ-NSD), Michael Atkinson (ICIG), Alexander Vindman (NSC), Eric Ciaramella (CIA) and ultimately to Pelosi and Adam Schiff; so too will we only assemble the COVID/DNC primary sequencing in hindsight.

WASHINGTON – The Democratic National Committee is postponing the party’s presidential convention in Milwaukee to August 17, the week before the Republican Party’s convention.

The delay from July 13 came after likely nominee Joe Biden publicly called for the convention to be rescheduled in response to the coronavirus pandemic. And it followed weeks of behind-the-scenes discussions with party leaders and the two remaining presidential candidates’ campaigns of Biden and Bernie Sanders.

The new date will put the DNC convention back-to-back with the RNC’s, which is set to begin August 24 in Charlotte. The proximity presents messaging challenges for both sides: Biden will not have as much time to enjoy a potential polling bounce before the RNC begins dominating coverage. And Republicans will not have as much time to plan out responses to speeches and events in Milwaukee.  (more)

Scientific Survey Shows Voters Widely Accept Misinformation Spread By the Media


Re-Posted from Just Facts By James D. Agresti

January 2, 2020

NBC News reporter and political director Chuck Todd recently railed against “misinformation” and singled out President Trump and “the right” for having an “incentive structure” to spread it. Todd, who according to NBC, “is responsible for all aspects of the network’s political coverage,” also stated that Republicans criticize the media for “sport” and “the loudest chanters of fake news” are “the ones who, under a lie detector, would probably take our word over any word they’ve heard from the other side on whether something was poisonous or not.”

Speaking directly to those unsupported claims, a scientific survey commissioned by Just Facts shows that many people are indeed misinformed—but contrary to Todd—this is a bipartisan affair. In fact, the survey found that the most commonly believed misinformation accords with left-leaning narratives spread by the press, and Democrat voters are more likely to accept these falsehoods than Trump voters. Furthermore, sizable portions of Trump voters have swallowed some of these media-promoted liberal fictions, as well as some conservative ones.

The findings are from a nationally representative annual survey commissioned by Just Facts, a non-profit research and educational institute. The survey was conducted by Triton Polling & Research, an academic research firm that used sound methodologies to assess U.S. residents who regularly vote.

While most polls measure public opinion, this unique one measures voters’ knowledge of major issues facing the nation—such as education, taxes, healthcare, national debt, pollution, government spending, Social Security, global warming, energy, and hunger. Every year, the poll includes a new question about a prevalent, controversial issue. This year, it is about poverty.

Results for All Voters

For each question, voters were offered a selection of two or more answers, one of which was true. Voters also had the opportunity to say they were unsure.

On average, voters gave the correct answer 39% of the time, gave an incorrect answer 54% of the time, and said they were unsure 6% of the time. A majority of voters gave the correct answer to only 5 of the 24 questions.

The highest levels of misinformation were found on questions relating to child hunger, tax burdens, poverty, landfills, health insurance copayments, and two elements of Social Security finances. For these 7 questions, 75% or more of voters provided an incorrect answer.

Among 8 of the 10 questions in which the electorate was most deluded, the wrong answers they gave accorded with progressive storylines propagated by the media. Moreover, these answers were often far removed from reality, not just slightly mistaken.

For example, 79% of voters think that the middle class pays a greater portion of their income in federal taxes than the top 1%. Yet, the Congressional Budget Office, the U.S. Treasury, and the Tax Policy Center have all documented that households in the top 1% pay an average federal tax rate that is about 2.5 times higher than that of the middle class. More specifically, the latest Congressional Budget Office data on federal taxes shows that on average in 2016:

  • middle-income households paid $10,100 in taxes on income of $75,900, or a tax rate of 13%.
  • the top 1% of households paid $595,900 in taxes on income of $1,789,800, or a tax rate of 33%.

Nevertheless, media outlets commonly report the opposite based on deceptive studies that exclude large portions of people’s taxes and/or incomes. A remarkable 93% of Democrat voters have accepted this canard, as well as 65% of Trump voters.

Results by Age, Gender, and Politics

The survey also recorded voters’ ages, genders, and who they planned to vote for in the upcoming presidential election (Donald Trump, the eventual Democrat nominee, or a third-party candidate). This allows the survey to pinpoint segments of society that are most and least informed about specific issues.

The results show deep partisan and demographic divides, with different groups being more or less knowledgeable depending upon the questions. In total, the rates at which voters gave the correct answers varied from a high of 46% for Trump voters to a low of 32% for Democrat voters, with others falling in between as follows

  • 46% for Trump voters
  • 43% for males
  • 41% for 35 to 64 year olds
  • 38% for 65+ year olds
  • 37% for 18 to 34 year olds
  • 36% for females
  • 32% for Democrat voters

The sample sizes of unsure and third-party voters were too small to produce meaningful data.

The questions, answers, full survey results and methodologies are below.

Education

Question 1: Relative to other nations, how do you believe U.S. fourth graders rank in terms of their reading and math ability? Are they in the bottom 50% or in the top 50%?

Correct Answer: Top 50%. In international tests administered to students in dozens of nations, U.S. fourth graders rank in the top 30% of nations for reading and for math. Confusion about this issue may stem from the fact that the relative performance of U.S. students declines over time, and by the age of 15, they drop to the bottom 50% in reading and to the bottom 20% in math. This suggests that the problems of the U.S. education system may occur in the later years, not the early years, as many have claimed.

Correct answer given by 47% of all voters, 46% of Democrat voters, 48% of Trump voters, 46% of males, 48% of females, 53% of 18 to 34 year olds, 49% of 35 to 64 year olds, and 42% of 65+ year olds.

Question 2: On average across the United States, how much do you think public schools spend per year to educate each classroom of students? Less or more than $150,000 per classroom per year?

Correct Answer: More than $150,000. The average cost to educate a classroom of public school students is about $332,000 per year. In contrast to a drumbeat of media stories decrying education funding cuts, Department of Education data shows that the average inflation-adjusted spending per public school student has risen by more than three times since 1960.

Correct answer given by 36% of all voters, 26% of Democrat voters, 45% of Trump voters, 46% of males, 28% of females, 25% of 18 to 34 year olds, 40% of 35 to 64 year olds, and 33% of 65+ year olds.

Question 3: In your mind, what portion of 17- to 24-year-olds in the U.S. are unqualified for military service because of poor physical fitness, weak educational skills, illegal drug usage, medical conditions, or criminal records?

Correct Answer: More than half. According to various agencies within the Department of Defense, two-thirds to three-quarters of all 17- to 24-year-olds are unqualified for military service because of poor physical fitness, weak educational skills, illegal drug usage, medical conditions, or criminal records.

Correct answer given by 43% of all voters, 37% of Democrat voters, 51% of Trump voters, 44% of males, 42% of females, 40% of 18 to 34 year olds, 46% of 35 to 64 year olds, and 41% of 65+ year olds.

Question 4: When conventional public schools are subject to school choice programs that allow students to leave for private or charter schools, do you think the children who remain in the public schools academically decline?

Correct Answer: No. At least 21 high-quality studies have been performed on the academic outcomes of students who remain in public schools that are subject to school choice programs. All but one of the studies found neutral-to-positive results, and none found negative results. This is consistent with the theory that school choice stimulates competition that helps public schools to improve.

Correct answer given by 46% of all voters, 40% of Democrat voters, 51% of Trump voters, 49% of males, 43% of females, 53% of 18 to 34 year olds, 47% of 35 to 64 year olds, and 43% of 65+ year olds.

Taxes

Question 5: The average U.S. household spends about $30,000 per year on food, housing, and clothing combined. If we broke down all combined federal, state, and local taxes to a per household cost, do you think this would amount to more or less than an average of $30,000 per household per year?

Correct Answer: More than $30,000. In 2018, federal, state and local governments collected a combined total of $5.1 trillion in taxes or an average of $40,000 for every household in the U.S.

Correct answer given by 43% of all voters, 36% of Democrat voters, 47% of Trump voters, 42% of males, 44% of females, 51% of 18 to 34 year olds, 46% of 35 to 64 year olds, and 38% of 65+ year olds.

Question 6: On average, who would you say pays a greater portion of their income in federal taxes: The middle class or the upper 1% of income earners?

Correct Answer: The upper 1%. The Congressional Budget Office, the U.S. Treasury, and the Tax Policy Center have all documented that households in the top 1% of income pay an average effective federal tax rate of about 33%, while middle-income households pay about 13%. These tax rates account for nearly all income and federal taxes. Claims to the contrary—often voiced by politicians and the media—are based on misleading calculations that exclude large portions of people’s taxes and/or incomes.

Correct answer given by 18% of all voters, 6% of Democrat voters, 30% of Trump voters, 21% of males, 15% of females, 11% of 18 to 34 year olds, 19% of 35 to 64 year olds, and 19% of 65+ year olds.

Spending

Question 7: Now, changing the subject from taxes to spending, suppose we broke down all government spending to a per household cost—do you think the combined spending of federal, state and local governments amounts to more or less than $40,000 per household per year?

Correct Answer: More than $40,000. In 2018, federal, state and local governments spent a combined total of $6.9 trillion, or an average of about $54,000 for every household in the United States. For reference, the average U.S. household spends about $45,000 per year on food, housing, clothing, transportation, and healthcare combined.

Correct answer given by 48% of all voters, 44% of Democrat voters, 53% of Trump voters, 53% of males, 43% of females, 53% of 18 to 34 year olds, 52% of 35 to 64 year olds, and 43% of 65+ year olds.

Question 8: Do you think the federal government spends more money on social programs, such as Medicare, education, and food stamps—or does the federal government spend more money on national defense, such as the Army, Navy, and missile defense?

Correct Answer: Social programs. In 2018, 62% of federal spending was for social programs, and 18% was for national defense. In 1960, the opposite was true, and 53% of federal spending was for national defense, while 21% was for social programs. Reporters sometimes mislead the public about the composition of federal spending by using a subset of spendingthat omits the vast majority of social programs.

Correct answer given by 36% of all voters, 14% of Democrat voters, 59% of Trump voters, 40% of males, 33% of females, 23% of 18 to 34 year olds, 36% of 35 to 64 year olds, and 41% of 65+ year olds.

National Debt

Question 9: What about federal government debt? The average U.S. household owes about $122,000 in consumer debt, such as mortgages and credit cards. Thinking about all federal government debt broken down to a per household basis, do you think the average federal debt per U.S. household amounts to more or less than the average consumer debt per U.S. household?

Correct Answer: More than $122,000. Federal debt is now $23.1 trillion or about $180,000 for every household in the United States. Such levels of debt can have far-reaching negative effects on wages, living standards, and government and personal financial security.

Correct answer given by 77% of all voters, 76% of Democrat voters, 81% of Trump voters, 75% of males, 80% of females, 84% of 18 to 34 year olds, 79% of 35 to 64 year olds, and 75% of 65+ year olds.

Question 10: From the time that the Great Recession ended in 2009, which do you think has grown at a faster rate, the U.S. economy or the national debt?

Correct Answer: The national debt. From the time that the Great Recession ended in June 2009, the national debt has grown by 100%, while the U.S. economy has grown by 49%.

Correct answer given by 77% of all voters, 89% of Democrat voters, 65% of Trump voters, 71% of males, 82% of females, 76% of 18 to 34 year olds, 77% of 35 to 64 year olds, and 77% of 65+ year olds.

During Obama’s presidency, the party split on this question was reversed, and 88% of Republican voters and 73% of Democrat voters answered correctly.

Global Warming

Question 11: Would you say the earth has become measurably warmer since the 1980s?

Correct Answer: Yes. According to both satellitemeasured data and groundlevel thermometers, the earth’s average temperature has increased by about 0.7 to 0.9 degrees Fahrenheit since the 1980s. This increase is greater than the range of measurement uncertainty. Providing a sense of scale for this change, a temperature analysis of a glacier in Greenland found that it was about 22ºF colder during the last ice age than it is now.

Correct answer given by 62% of all voters, 94% of Democrat voters, 29% of Trump voters, 57% of males, 67% of females, 83% of 18 to 34 year olds, 57% of 35 to 64 year olds, and 64% of 65+ year olds.

Question 12: Again, thinking about the whole planet, do you think the number and intensity of hurricanes and tropical storms have generally increased since the 1980s?

Correct Answer: No. Comprehensive global data shows that the number and intensity of cyclones and hurricanes has been roughly level since the 1980s. This data was originally published in the journal Geophysical Research Letters in 2011 and updated this year. Likewise, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has reported: “There is low confidence in any observed long-term (i.e., 40 years or more) increases in tropical cyclone activity (i.e., intensity, frequency, duration), after accounting for past changes in observing capabilities.” Regional data that extends back for more than century shows the same. Nonetheless, media outlets have spread false claims to the contrary by cherry-picking anecdotes and reporting computer model predictions instead of hard facts.

Correct answer given by 32% of all voters, 4% of Democrat voters, 59% of Trump voters, 40% of males, 25% of females, 19% of 18 to 34 year olds, 36% of 35 to 64 year olds, and 30% of 65+ year olds.

Pollution

Question 13: Now, just thinking about the United States, in your opinion, is the air generally more polluted than it was in the 1980s?

Correct Answer: No. EPA data shows that ambient levels of all criteria air pollutants have declined significantly since the 1980s. Criteria air pollutions are those that are deemed by the administrator of the EPA to be widespread and to “cause or contribute to air pollution which may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare….” Likewise, combined emissions of hazardous air pollutants have declined by about 50% since the 1990s. Lower pollution levels can improve human health and reduce problems like learning deficits and behavioral disorders.

Correct answer given by 56% of all voters, 44% of Democrat voters, 67% of Trump voters, 67% of males, 46% of females, 47% of 18 to 34 year olds, 63% of 35 to 64 year olds, and 49% of 65+ year olds.

Question 14: If the U.S. stopped recycling and buried all of its municipal trash for the next 100 years in a single landfill that was 30 feet high, how much of the nation’s land area would you think this landfill would cover? Less than 1%, 1% to less than 5%, or more than 5%?

Correct Answer: Less than 1%. At the current U.S. population growth rate and the current per-person trash production rate, the landfill would cover 0.06% of the nation’s land area. More realistically, the actual area in use will be an order of magnitude smaller, because:

  • the U.S. recycles, burns, or composts 48% of its trash.
  • landfills can be more than 200 feet high.
  • after 30 to 50 years, landfills are often covered and used for purposes such as parks, golf courses, ski slopes, and airfields.

Despite these facts, media outlets have been reporting for more than 30 years that the U.S. is “nearly out of space” to dispose of trash. NBC News recently published a series of videos called Wasteland that claims U.S. landfills are “set to reach max capacity by 2030” and “scientists are racing against time to find new ways to hack them for the future.” The video presents no source or evidence to support these statements.

Correct answer given by 7% of all voters, 8% of Democrat voters, 9% of Trump voters, 12% of males, 3% of females, 6% of 18 to 34 year olds, 8% of 35 to 64 year olds, and 6% of 65+ year olds.

Energy

Question 15: Without government subsidies, which of these technologies do you think is the least expensive method for generating electricity? Wind turbines, solar panels, or natural gas power plants?

Correct Answer: Natural gas power plants. Determining the costs of electricity-generating technologies is complex, but data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration shows that natural gas is considerably less expensive than wind, and wind is considerably less expensive than solar. Affordable energy has many important benefits, and for poorer people, it can mean the difference between life and death.

Correct answer given by 40% of all voters, 23% of Democrat voters, 57% of Trump voters, 53% of males, 29% of females, 25% of 18 to 34 year olds, 43% of 35 to 64 year olds, and 41% of 65+ year olds.

Question 16: Without government subsidies, which of these fuels do you believe is least expensive for powering automobiles? Gasoline, ethanol, or biodiesel?

Correct Answer: Gasoline. Data from the U.S. Department of Energy and U.S. Energy Information Administration show that in 2017, the unsubsidized cost of ethanol was 32% more than gasoline, and the unsubsidized cost of biodiesel was 119% more than gasoline.

Correct answer given by 46% of all voters, 35% of Democrat voters, 55% of Trump voters, 56% of males, 37% of females, 30% of 18 to 34 year olds, 48% of 35 to 64 year olds, and 49% of 65+ year olds.

Question 17: Worldwide, which of these technologies generates the most electricity? Solar panels, natural gas power plants, coal power plants, or nuclear power plants?

Correct Answer: Coal power plants. Due to the low cost and widespread availability of coal, coal power plants generate about 35% of the world’s electricity, as compared to 23% for natural gas, 11% for nuclear, and 4% for solar.

Correct answer given by 40% of all voters, 34% of Democrat voters, 43% of Trump voters, 55% of males, 26% of females, 36% of 18 to 34 year olds, 42% of 35 to 64 year olds, and 36% of 65+ year olds.

Hunger

Question 18: On an average day, what portion of U.S. households with children do you believe will have at least one child who experiences hunger? Less than 1%, 1% to 10%, or more than 10%?

Correct Answer: Less than 1%. Per the latest data from the USDA, 0.14% or less than one out of every 700 U.S. households with children have any child who experiences hunger on an average day. This includes children who are hungry due to poverty, not those who skip meals because they are late for school, don’t feel like eating, or are trying to lose weight.

Media stories claiming that child hunger is much more prevalent often falsely equate USDA data on “food insecurity” with “hunger.” Yet, the USDA explicitly states that “low food security” means “reports of reduced quality, variety, or desirability of diet” but “little or no indication of reduced food intake.” Prior to 2006, the USDA’s label for such households reflected this reality and was called “food insecurity without hunger.”

Correct answer given by 12% of all voters, 2% of Democrat voters, 22% of Trump voters, 15% of males, 9% of females, 3% of 18 to 34 year olds, 12% of 35 to 64 year olds, and 13% of 65+ year olds.

Social Security

Question 19: Do you think Social Security’s financial problems stem from politicians looting the program and spending the money on other programs?

Correct Answer: No. By law, all Social Security taxes and revenues can be used only for the Social Security program, and the federal government has never failed to abide by this law. What some call “looting” is actually a legal requirement (established in the original Social Security of 1935) that all of the program’s surpluses be loaned to the federal government. The government is required to pay back this money with interest, and it has been doing this since 2010.

Contrary to the notion that politicians have looted Social Security, they have actually added money to the program by repeatedly raising its payroll tax rate, increasing its inflation-adjusted taxable maximum, and injecting other taxes to its income stream. This has placed progressively higher Social Security tax burdens on successive generations of American workers. Yet, the program is still facing insolvency, mainly because the ratio of workers paying taxes to people receiving benefits has fallen by three times since 1955 and is projected to fall further.

Correct answer given by 20% of all voters, 28% of Democrat voters, 13% of Trump voters, 25% of males, 15% of females, 24% of 18 to 34 year olds, 23% of 35 to 64 year olds, and 15% of 65+ year olds.

Question 20: Some policymakers are proposing that individuals be allowed to save and invest some of their Social Security taxes in personal accounts instead of paying these taxes to the Social Security program. In your view, do you think such proposals generally improve or harm the finances of the Social Security program?

Correct Answer: Improve. As shown by analyses conducted by the chief actuary of the Social Security Administration and a bipartisan presidential commission, proposals to give Social Security an element of personal ownership generally strengthen the program’s finances. Although some tax revenues that would have gone to the program instead go to people’s personal retirement accounts, these tax revenues are more than offset by the savings of not paying these individuals full benefits. Media outlets like NBC and the New York Times have misleadingly portrayed personal ownership proposals in a negative light.

Correct answer given by 22% of all voters, 11% of Democrat voters, 33% of Trump voters, 28% of males, 17% of females, 31% of 18 to 34 year olds, 20% of 35 to 64 year olds, and 23% of 65+ year olds.

Health Care

Question 21: In 1960, governments paid for 24% of all healthcare costs in the U.S. Do you think governments now pay a greater portion or a lesser portion of all healthcare costs in the U.S.?

Correct Answer: A greater portion. In 2017, governments paid for 49% of all healthcare expenses in the United States.

Correct answer given by 57% of all voters, 42% of Democrat voters, 70% of Trump voters, 62% of males, 52% of females, 46% of 18 to 34 year olds, 57% of 35 to 64 year olds, and 59% of 65+ year olds.

Question 22: When health insurance copayments are high, people tend to spend less on healthcare. Do you think that this reduced spending typically has a negative impact on their health?

Correct Answer: No. Multiple studies have shown that when copayments are high, people generally spend less money on their healthcare without negatively impacting their health. This is because when people directly pay for more of their healthcare bills, they are more likely to be responsible consumers and use only those services that actually benefit their health. An exception to this rule is the poorest 6% of the population, who do experience negative effects when copayments are increased.

Correct answer given by 13% of all voters, 4% of Democrat voters, 22% of Trump voters, 18% of males, 9% of females, 14% of 18 to 34 year olds, 14% of 35 to 64 year olds, and 12% of 65+ year olds.

Question 23: In 2010, Congress passed and President Obama signed the Affordable Care Act, also known as “Obamacare.” This law uses price controls to save money in the Medicare program. Do you think these price controls will worsen Medicare patients’ access to care?

Correct Answer: Yes. As explained by Medicare’s actuaries, the price controls in the Affordable Care Act will cut Medicare prices for many medical services over the next three generations to “less than half of their level under the prior law.” The actuaries have been clear that this will likely cause “withdrawal of providers from the Medicare market” and “severe problems with beneficiary access to care.”

Correct answer given by 50% of all voters, 17% of Democrat voters, 80% of Trump voters, 53% of males, 46% of females, 38% of 18 to 34 year olds, 52% of 35 to 64 year olds, and 49% of 65+ year olds.

Poverty

Question 24: Including government benefits and private charity, how much worth of goods and services do the poorest 20% of U.S. households consume on average each year? Less than $20,000, $20,000 to $40,000, or more than $40,000?

Correct Answer:

According to the latest government data, the poorest 20% of U.S. households consumed an average of $57,049 of goods and services per household in 2010. The much-lower poverty statistics often cited by the media exclude about 80% of the material resources of the poor because they:

  • don’t account for “noncash benefits, such as food stamps, health benefits, subsidized housing,” and other forms of welfare.
  • are based on government household surveys, and low-income households substantially underreport their cash and noncash income on such surveys.

Correct answer given by 13% of all voters, 6% of Democrat voters, 20% of Trump voters, 13% of males, 14% of females, 15% of 18 to 34 year olds, 16% of 35 to 64 year olds, and 9% of 65+ year olds.

Methodology and Full Results

The survey was conducted by Triton Polling & Research, an academic research firm that serves scholars, corporations, and political campaigns. The responses were obtained through live telephone surveys of 700 likely voters across the U.S. during December 2–11, 2019. This sample size is large enough to accurately represent the U.S. population. Likely voters are people who say they vote “every time there is an opportunity” or in “most” elections.

The margin of sampling error for the total pool of respondents is ±4% with at least 95% confidence. The margins of error for the subsets are 6% for Democrat voters, 6% for Trump voters, 5% for males, 5% for females, 12% for 18 to 34 year olds, 5% for 35 to 64 year olds, and 6% for 65+ year olds.

The survey results presented in this article are slightly weighted to match the ages and genders of likely voters. The political parties and geographic locations of the survey respondents almost precisely match the population of likely voters. Thus, there is no need for weighting based upon these variables. The complete weighted and unweighted results are available here:

Power of the Church denied in the wake of COVID-19


Core beliefs, and thus our First Amendment rights, are being challenged.

A. Dru Kristenev image

Re-Posted from the Canada Free Press By  —— Bio and ArchivesApril 1, 2020

Power of the Church denied in the wake of COVID-19By whom?

The unexpected answer is, “By the Church itself.”

For proof, all one has to do is drive down the road on Sunday morning in the Bible Belt and see how many church parking lots are completely vacant. Why?

The short answer that is going to irritate most Christians is this – fear. But why do the majority of Christians fear the coronavirus? What ever happened to “we walk by faith, not by sight?”

Before Christians get huffy about the foregoing statement that challenges decisions to hunker down in their homes, bear with me and continue reading. This is not meant to be a condemnation of the Church, but to pose a query that deserves reflection by believers.

First, it’s worth the effort to re-examine the statistics coming out of the Center for Disease Control regarding the spread and mortality rate of the COVID-19. These numbers are not posted to be dismissive of the lives that are being lost. There is no way to address these tragic deaths without appearing callous but it is imperative to follow the reports as of the writing of this column, March 31, 2020. CDC lists approximately 164,000 cases in the U.S. with some 3,000 deaths. In order to locate the actual hospitalizations of cases you have to visit each state’s health department website individually but here’s one very pertinent example of government overreach that is changing the face of American Christianity:

Tampa, Florida – The River at Tampa Bay Church held two services Sunday, March 29, 2020 to minister to congregants. Monday, the Hillsborough County Sheriff issued an arrest warrant for Pastor Rodney Howard-Browne for violating a county order against large meetings. The following makes the pastor’s case for invoking First Amendment rights to minister to his flock…

  1. Current COVID-19 case numbers (3/31/2020) in Florida are as follows:
    1. 6338 confirmed
    2. 772 hospitalized
    3. 77 deaths
    4. Total tested: 60,639; Positive – 5,704; Negative – 54,285
    5. Influenza/Pneumonia cases: 3072 deaths (2018 latest statistics. Why nothing for 2019/2020?) indicating that flu and pneumonia are far more fatal than COVID-19.
  2. Current US flu/pneumonia numbers of 67.3% hospitalization and 7.3% death rates for the week of March 5, 2020 confirm that COVID-19 is nowhere near as dangerous, yet government has never issued draconian edicts to prevent flu infection.
  3. 3/31/20 CDC statistics are evidence that COVID-19 infection rates hit their peak March 16, 2020 despite continuing to confirm positive cases. The illness onset chart testifies: 3557 cases 3/16/20. The total mortalities at the same time were far less than the onset cases for that single date, coming in at approximately 3000. The recovery rate exceeds 90% yet the press will not report that information.
  4. The government cannot prove there’s a compelling public interest to close church services based on the meager numbers of infection rates in Florida or anywhere else in the United States.

This sparks pertinent questions that must be asked of our churches.

Has the Church finally handed over all authority to government by disallowing believers the right to gather for worship, which is ordained scripturally? Those who have been reading my columns for years will know that the first step to abdicating authority to government comes by incorporating to receive a 501(c)(3) letter from the IRSgranting non-profit status and implying it can be revoked.

As Christians, what do you say when asked what is the most powerful entity on earth? Answer: the Church, meaning the whole of believers who understand that Jesus’ sacrifice, death and resurrection offers believers more than eternal Life. It delivers His power to the faith-filled. Matthew 6:9-13, Matthew 18:18-20, Romans 4, Hebrews 11.

Do Christians really believe in the power of God’s Word that protects them from all forms of enemy including pestilence? Psalm 91, Psalm 103:3, Isaiah 53:4-5, 1 Peter 2:24, etc. Or do they fear gathering to study, worship and pray thinking it will allow disease to spread rather than bind it?

Should churches lock-out members from regular services and is this practice, being enforced by some government agencies, meant to weaken the Church by isolating worshippers and impeding one of the vital aspects of assembling and most powerful expressions of faith – corporate prayer?

Taking just the mentioned passages into consideration, how important is it to come together as the Word exhorts believers to do – to meet regularly for edification, worship, prayer and support?

Scripture calls for the elders to anoint with oil and pray for those who request it to assist their healing. James 5:14. The church appears to be attending to governmental agencies’ decrees that override implicit passages of the Bible that promote healing, not disease and infection. Jesus’ said “…upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” Matthew 16:17-18. The question must be asked of believers if the coronavirus is stronger than the “gates of hell” over which the Church triumphs. Further, Isaiah 54:17 states that “No weapon that is formed against thee shall prosper…”

Are believers, in effect, denying the credence of God’s Word in favor of government guidelines? Obviously, where there is doubt and/or fear, it’s best to follow worldly wisdom. And much of the church is acting according to that doubt, what Christ called unbelief.

In the end, walking completely by faith isn’t as simple as it looks. The situation requires each person and each congregation to consider their teaching about healing and protection from disease. That will be the deciding factor as to whether a church welcomes congregants to gather under one roof during this fear-ridden time or if it is prudent to rely on social media to keep social distances in check. Perhaps some pastors will encourage meetings of a dozen in individual homes “where two or three are gathered together in my name.”

Core beliefs, and thus our First Amendment rights, are being challenged.

It comes down to fear or faith. 2 Timothy 1:7 “For God hath not given us the spirit of fear; but of power, and of love, and of a sound mind.”

What says the Church?

(Although this column may appear to, it does not question the considered response of individuals suffering from compromised immune systems to self-quarantine just as they would probably do during a virulent flu season. Though they may wish to think about inviting elders in to pray for them.)


America needs a New Declaration of Equal Justice under the Law


The Emancipation Proclamation focused on equality

Scott Powell image

Re-Posted from the Canada Free Press By  —— Bio and ArchivesApril 1, 2020

America needs a New Declaration of Equal Justice under the LawIn prior times of war, crisis, suffering and loss of life from causes outside the U.S., Americans of both parties would pull together and focus on what can be done to quickly help, alleviate and solve the problem.  No longer.  The COVID-19 crisis provides us a window into our national social and spiritual health, and what we see from much of America’s Left as expressed in the media and Democrat Party reveals a degree and strain of moral impoverishment we haven’t seen before.
The COVID-19 crisis in America will pass as all such virus epidemics do, but an overriding issue and question that will remain for the American future is: do we have sufficient courage and determination to successfully deal with the real internal threats and contradictions that jeopardize the future viability of the United States and its Constitution?

What has been allowed to grow in the American cultural and political petri dish over the last two generations is a mixture whose contagious influence is as harmful as it is riddled with absurdities.  A partial list would include:

  • an unequal two-tiered justice system;
  • open borders;
  • preferential treatment of illegal aliens over American citizens;
  • the dominance of political correctness and its de facto censorship of free expression;
  • fake news;
  • rewriting history;
  • the 1619 project;
  • renaming Columbus Day;
  • the abolition of traditions of every size and shape;
  • destruction of American historical monuments;
  • the trampling the American flag and other symbols of democracy;
  • the eradication of family values while celebrating and elevating relationships counterproductive to procreation

An imperative for any civilization that wants to survive; election fraud and dismantlement of the electoral process; an attempted coup that would have nullified the Constitution and the peoples’ sovereignty; a baseless and wasteful impeachment; the disgraceful character assassination of nominees to the Supreme Court; the pervasive infiltration of education with academics hostile to America; the adoption safe spaces and the prohibition of trigger words on college campuses; union control and influence on public school educational curricula whose net effect dumbs down students and often paints America as the great villain.

Any one of these is no little thing.  But together, the collective influence of all these factors presents us with a reality that is disheartening and threatening.  How did this happen and what are patriotic Americans to do?

We find ourselves in this perilous and incendiary state in large part because we were asleep or preoccupied, while over the last generations, internal enemies of America were gnawing away at our institutions and public civility—following the playbook of Italian communist Antonio Gramsci, the father of the “long march through the institutions.” Gramsci called for a gradual radicalization of the knowledge industry and the cultural institutions—“the superstructure of our society”—so as to transform the values and morals of society. Gramsci believed that as society’s morals were softened and confused, its political and economic foundation would be more easily transformed.  The evidence surrounding the current state of affairs confirms the validity of Gramsci’s theories and suggests he was right.

But the story is not over. 

It’s time for a new approach to fighting back with a more powerful playbook—one that the founders used at a time of overwhelming discouragement when odds of success were extremely low.  That same playbook was again used by Abraham Lincoln, a president who presided over a very divided nation and who was reviled by many, similar to today’s conditions.

Washington’s colonial army war efforts were disastrous in the first year. The first version of the Declaration of Independence—signed by just John Hancock, president of the Continental Congress and its secretary Charles Thompson, was the only version in circulation for the first six months after July 4, 1776.  But after Washington’s successful surprise attacks on Trenton and Princeton, the Declaration was edited, reprinted and rereleased with all 56 signatories, vowing “a firm reliance on the Protection of Divine Providence,” and “mutually pledg[ing] to each other our Lives our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.” That declaration seems to have changed the fortune of the Continental Army and even determined the outcome of the War of Independence, even though the final Yorktown victory was still four years away.

Lincoln’s war efforts were largely unsuccessful in the first year and a half of the Civil War, and he struggled with the question of why, so far, the Almighty was permitting the bloodbath to continue with more favor being shown toward the South.  Through prayer, Lincoln had an epiphany of moral clarity.  He realized that it was not enough to win the war, put down secession and preserve the status quo of tolerance of slavery in the southern states, as he had stated in his First Inaugural address upon taking office.  He now realized the simple truth that if his objectives were aligned with God’s will and announced to all, that the Union would be blessed and prevail. And so it was that after the Emancipation Proclamation was signed into law on Jan. 1, 1863 that things on the ground began to change.

Whether we call it a Declaration or a Proclamation, a statement of moral clarity is needed to reestablish the foundation and fortress from which to fight and prevail. The Declaration of Independence focused on liberty.  The Emancipation Proclamation focused on equality.  Such a time as this would be well-served by a Declaration of Equal Justice under Law—the very words etched in stone on the front façade of the Supreme Court.

Our greatest advantage over the material secular progressive left is our connection with a higher power—a spiritual power.  Most of us take for granted and pay little heed to the words inscribed on all our currency—“In God we Trust.” A Declaration for Equal Justice under the Law would summon new help from the Divine and fundamentally change the future as it did in previous crisis times.  We should even ask and implore that such a Declaration lead to taking down America’s internal enemies and enable us to win the battles ahead for what is good and right.

Scare Mongering Predicted Coronavirus Deaths with a Vague Mitigation Graph


It’s surely an irony that When President Trump turned to health experts to advise him how to grapple with the spread of COVID-19, he ended up with two Obama holdovers

Judi McLeod image

Re-Posted from the Canada Free Press By  —— Bio and ArchivesApril 1, 2020

Scare Mongering Predicted Coronavirus Deaths with a Vague Mitigation GraphThe most terrifying thing about the ubiquitous Mitigation Graph The White House Coronavirus Task Force is counting on to keep the American virus death rate at 100,000 to 200,000 or less rather than 2.2 million, is that power-crazed Democrats are counting on any number of deaths to blame on President Donald Trump to impeach him.

Ominous indeed that Doctors Deborah Birx and Anthony Fauci—the two top stars of the Coronavirus Task Force—are Barack Obama holdovers.

When Birx threw her annual Christmas Party at her Northwest Washington house on Dec. 20, 1919, her current job as the White House coronavirus coordinator didn’t yet exist.

“She was only the United States global AIDS coordinator, in charge of the American fight to try to end HIV.” (Washington Post, Mar. 26, 2020)

Birx’s husband, is former Clinton advance man Paige Reffe.

According to WaPo, it was on Feb. 27, 2020 when Birx left a marathon meeting in Johannesburg of the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, or PEPFAR, the massive global program she’s run for the past six years:

“Flying economy class, as she always does to save money for PEPFAR, she returned to Washington to take on the position of coronavirus response coordinator at the White House.(WaPo)

“After years of looming large in the relatively insular world of international AIDS work, Birx is now on the global stage in an unprecedented way — joining the White House for its daily briefings, urging millennials to take precautions, explaining what she has figured out about different respirator masks. Each time she takes the stage alongside President Trump, she’s alternately pilloried and praised on social media for hanging tough through his freewheeling, fact-flouting remarks.”

A physician and a trained immunologist who has run vaccine trials, Birx’s august title is global AIDS ambassador.

“During her immunology fellowship at the National Institutes of Health in the early 1980s, she met Anthony Fauci, now the head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and the other star physician on the podium during the White House’s briefings on the outbreak. (WaPo)

“In 1996, lifesaving medications called antiretrovirals changed the face of HIV in the United States. At the time, ARVs were still deemed, by the United States and other wealthy nations, too expensive and too complex to deliver in low-income countries, particularly in eastern and southern Africa, areas that were and are home to the majority of the global population of people living with HIV. That changed in 2003, when George W. Bush surprised all but a handful of insiders by announcing PEPFAR, the largest disease-specific foreign-aid program in American history.

“Since 2014, Birx has been running the entire program, making her one of two Obama-era appointees to retain their position, as several stories have noted in recent weeks.

“In February, a report from the State Department’s Office of the Inspector General reviewed PEPFAR’s management processes and found that the majority of field staff didn’t feel they had much of a say in their annual plans. “In the last 2 years, there has been no negotiation [by headquarters] with the country [team working on PEPFAR],” one interviewee told the inspectors, adding that the office of the global AIDS coordinator “has set the targets using … estimates. It is ‘take it or leave it.’ ”

“Other employees said PEPFAR management was “dictatorial,” “directive” and “autocratic”.”

“This is going to be a very, very painful two weeks,” President Donald Trump told reporters of days to come at last night’s presser. (Daily Signal, March 31, 2020)

“Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, had mentioned before the possibility of more than 100,000 deaths from COVID-19, the disease caused by the new coronavirus.

“But the number now is the government’s formal projections.

“The computer models suggest the number of deaths will peak over the next two weeks, then begin to slowly decline. But deaths will continue into June.

“I want every American to be prepared for the hard days that lie ahead,” Trump said, adding:

“We’re going to go through a very tough two weeks. And then hopefully, as the experts are predicting, as I think a lot of us are predicting, after having studied it so hard, you’re going to start seeing some real light at the end of the tunnel. But, this is going to be a very, very painful two weeks.

“They’re shocking numbers,” the president later said. “Even at the low end, they’re shocking.”

“The president noted models showing that if officials took no mitigation actions, COVID-19 would have killed 2.2 million Americans.”

 

Months before Birx became coronavirus response coordinator at the White House, President Trump in the wrap-up of his rallies said:

“We will achieve new breakthroughs in science and medicine, finding new cures for childhood cancer and ending the AIDS epidemic in America in less than 10 years, we’ve already started. It should have been started in the last administration. Incredible, it should have been started earlier, but we started—in less than 10 years, the AIDS epidemic will be eradicated, will be gone.”

It’s surely an irony that When President Trump turned to health experts to advise him how to grapple with the spread of COVID-19, he ended up with two Obama holdovers.

Meanwhile, the nation and watching world must depend on a vague Mitigation Graph touted by a global AIDS ambassador, whose attitude is a “take it or leave it” one.

Prayer never more urgently needed.


Something Is Not Right


Ray DiLorenzo image

Re-Posted from the Canada Free Press By  —— Bio and ArchivesApril 1, 2020

42nd Street, New York City at mid-day - Getty Images“Your mind picks up signals very fast when something is not right…you don’t always have to figure it out completely, you just know.”—unknown author

Something is not right. Too many things do not add up.

Both Covid-19 and the influenza virus are contagious viruses that cause respiratory illness. The flu in America, so far this season, according to the CDC, has caused about 46 million illnesses, 550,000 hospitalizations and about 41,000 deaths. And yet, we have almost completely shut down our economy to the point of approaching collapse because of a comparatively small fraction of Covid-19 cases caused by another virus from China. Instead of preaching good nutrition, a healthy immune system, supplementing with extra vitamins A, C, and D, our political establishment is pushing for lock downs, face masks, and pressuring our president into creating fear and panic. Why?

“Brand-new generation of biowarfare weapons we haven’t seen before in the history of biological warfare”

Covid-19 is a new virus. Dr. Francis Boyle, who drafted the Biological Weapons Anti Terrorism Act of 1989 which was unanimously approved by Congress, suggests that this is a “brand-new generation of biowarfare weapons we haven’t seen before in the history of biological warfare. It literally travels through air at least 6 or 7 feet, including from human feces [think California’s homeless population].

In January of this year, the chemistry department chair of Harvard, Charles Lieber, and two researchers were arrested and charged with being biowarfare agents for China. Mr Lieber accepted over $1m from the Chinese government. One of the researchers, Yanqing Ye, falsely identified herself as a student, when, in reality she was in the Chinese army. The other researcher was arrested at Boston Logan Airport with 21 vials of deadly biological samples, attempting to smuggle the viruses to China.

China does have an advanced chemical and biological warfare program. They have the weapons. Two of their biowarfare labs are in Wuhan. The virus did leave the laboratory whether by accident or intent. It infected tens of thousands of Chinese, killing several thousand. As of March 23, about 3,500 people, if you can believe anything coming from China. The first case of Covid-19 was on the 17th of November, and was in Wuhan…they said nothing, allowing the virus to spread globally. We, early on, offered them help, they wanted none.

That is their cover. Thousands of Chinese have died. Business and travel is at a standstill. The Chinese Communists wouldn’t possibly kill thousands of their own people and damage their economy just to spread a disease that could kill millions of people around the world, especially in the West, would they? Well, why not? They murdered between 40 – 80 million of fellow Chinese to build their communist utopia. With a little luck they can destroy the nations of the West and their greatest economic and military adversary…and provide cover to get away with it.

Communist China wants to be the dominant economic, cultural, and military power in the world

Communist China wants to be the dominant economic, cultural, and military power in the world. Their goal is to unseat the United States and relegate our country, our culture, and our values to the trash heap of history, They are no longer satisfied with a piece of the pie, they want to own the pie. They are working tirelessly to be a power bloc unprecedented in the history of mankind. To that end, nothing else is sacred.

China’s Belt and Road Initiative, announced in 2013 is a massive international infrastructure building program, linking itself to more than 100 countries, that Beijing says is aimed at promoting global trade and economic growth. In reality, it is to expand their political influence and military presence. How better to militarily overwhelm any nation in the program than to utilize the railroad, highway, and airport infrastructure they built?

The biggest impediment to their goal is the United States under Donald Trump.

President Trump has leaned on them pretty hard these last few years and the Chinese communists don’t like it.

To make this story even more strange, Wuhan City is the home of the first 5G network ‘Smart City.’ Over 180 scientists have complained that a 5G network has significant health risks. They contend that this new network generates radio frequency radiation that can damage DNA leading to cancer, premature aging, disruption of cell metabolism, and potentially other diseases through the generation of stress proteins.

Global moratorium of the 5G roll out until the health risks can be investigated

The launch of 5G, the scientists say, will be akin to building a global microwave oven, opening its doors and leaving it on. To date, there have been very few new cases of the virus in China and South Korea with an unconfirmed report that the 5G network has been shut down in both countries. These scientists have formally requested a global moratorium of the 5G roll out until the health risks can be investigated. To our knowledge, no investigation has occurred before or since.

To further add to this tale is either a stroke of luck or a nefarious back-story depending on whose side you’re on. Just at the right moment when Durham is probably about to announce indictments of scores of swamp creatures for treason and corruption, a world-wide pandemic occurs. Not the least of which is Joe Biden who has all but disappeared as of late.

When China, Russia, and Iran strongly deny any involvement in biological warfare, and accuse the U.S. of spreading the coronavirus, it tells me they doth protest too much.

I have learned after many years of watching politicians that when they brand their adversaries with odious activity, in many cases it is because they themselves are engaged in it and are busy providing cover for themselves.

Whether by intent or accident, did the Communist Chinese spread a virus around the globe to manipulate the economies of the United States and its allies? Did they hope to damage these nations and prevent Trump from being reelected, and used Chinese deaths as a cover? Could it be that China was attempting to quell the rioting in Wuhan? This is a story not well told in the West. Wuhan was in the middle of protests rivaling Hong Kong against rising prices, a disintegrating environment, and non-existent medical standards.

 

Chinese communists’ corporate thievery, unfair trading practices, objective of world domination

The Chinese communists could very well have had enough of Trump’s messing with their corporate thievery, their unfair trading practices and their objective of world domination.

Racist alert! Most of the world’s biggest epidemics come from China. At the same time, there is so much political correctness going around that we could all die of some [Chinese] virus without ever knowing why, lest we are all called racists, to many worse than death.

At the same time, the Left seems to not be allowing this crisis to go to waste. What a wonderful opportunity to terrorize the public, trash the stock market and our economy to the tipping point, predict a second possible Covid-19 wave, shun dissent of vaccines, add $400M to the stimulus for mail-in voting to create a voter fraud heaven, and push hard for more government control of everything and maybe, just maybe, get rid of President Trump.

If there is anything you can take away from what is going on, it’s this: I don’t believe we are being told everything. Until we know, we could just as easily die from the cure, as from the disease.

Something is not right.

Coronavirus & Next Great Depression $9.95


Is Commercial Real Estate in Trouble?


COMMENT: Dear Marty,
I am located in the intermountain west where many national tech companies are re-locating. We are referred to as “Silicon Slopes” of the west. Since Covid-19 came to light and we have essentially a “stay at home” and work policy here in Utah, all the new beautiful office buildings packed with tech companies are now empty. I was joking with some of my co-workers that when the dust settles many of these companies may realize that they were nearly as efficient/ productive without having their employees all in the same room. I believe that the fallout to commercial real estate may be an unintended by-product that will come from all of this. In speaking with a couple of different business owners, their leases come up for renewal in August and both have already said they don’t need the space anymore. I just find it interesting that this virus is the gift that keeps on giving with so many unintended casualties. Thanks for keeping it real.
Sincerely,
SB

REPLY: Yes, commercial real estate is crashing. This may be an area of unexpected consequences. If they keep raising taxes on businesses, they will simply convert employees to contracted independents. That will eliminate the employer matching taxes. These people have not realized the damage they have done to the economy. This is not going to be back to normal. Many small businesses that were finding it hard to compete with online businesses will not reopen.

We do see a sharp spike low during the 2nd quarter 2020. That has been our target for an initial low since our forecast back in 2015. We will be looking at updating our real estate forecasts given the recent events.

China & the Allegations of Cover-up


QUESTION: Hi Martin. I agree that the response to the coronavirus is agenda driven in the US and Europe. I lost my friend to the virus yesterday, but I still recognize that the death rate, especially in the US, is not statistically significant and destroying the economy is not warranted. I am curious though, about what drove the Chinese to take aggressive moves to contain the virus. What spooked the Chinese government? Why were they willing to let their economy take a big hit?

AG

ANSWER: First, I am sorry for your friend. My mother died at 99. Every flu season was a worry for that is often how many elderly dies. This is no different and it is why the death toll in Italy is so high when they have the oldest population.

Generally, China took a lot of heat for acting slow on SARS. Now we have US intelligence putting out reports that the Chinese understated the people infected. It is entirely probable that they did not know the extent of the outbreak. We had booked a hotel for our Shanghai World Economic Conference. It would have been a $100,000+ cancellation fee but they canceled. There is no question they took an economic hit. However, they probably overreacted just as the Ferguson model was based on those early numbers which would have been a higher death rate. However, here is the CDC breakdown on the flu. Reports from many have very minor symptoms. They may not even have known that they had the virus.

It is possible that there was the first wave during the flu season of 2018-2019 and this wave is actually the Second. This seems to be highly probable for there was clearly advance warning where I know people were told to get out of everything in January. Some have suggested this was manufactured. It was not a biological weapon for as I have stated plenty of times, that would have a kill ratio of 60+. Then there were the claims it was laced with AIDS. This is why I am cautious and prefer to get things verified rather than spinning wild tales because that is something I want to hear or to enhance some position in the market.

Clients have expected restraint from me and the real facts. There is far too much danger in spouting out while conspiracy theories that never prove to be valid.

There is no question this has been hyped so much by the press and it has become a political issue being used for the 2020 election and to federalize Europe. The truth does not lie in these headlines. The world is being manipulated right now for the gain of special interests.