Category Marxism

Dec 13 2021

mRNA technology researcher says pandemic-induced, censorship-based science is “mind-boggling”


Posted originally on TrialSite News on December 11, 20214 Comments

mRNA technology researcher says pandemic-induced, censorship-based science is “mind-boggling”

Aubrey Marcus, the founder of holistic health and lifestyle brand, Onnit, and New York Times best-selling author, invited three guests on his self-titled podcast. According to the podcast page, guests provide “expertise in mindset, relationship, health, business, and spirituality.” Episode #337, titled “The Inconvenient Injured w/ Vaccine Advocates Dr. Aditi Bhargava, Kyle Warner, and Brianne Dressen,” explores the perspective of Bhargava, molecular biologist, Professor, and Principal Investigator at UCSF who develops mRNA technology. The additional guests tell their personal stories of experiencing an mRNA vaccine injury which we will summarize in our Part II article.

An open mind is most definitely important with a novel, unfolding pandemic such as the one we now face. Marcus begins by prefacing the conversation for viewers/listeners to keep an open mind so that ideas and issues can be discussed, examined, and critically explored regardless of politics or the current scientific taboos.

Exposing Scientific Loopholes

Bhargava is concerned about the way that scientists have approached the pandemic. It seems like scientific standards, norms and ideals have been abandoned. However, she also believes that coronavirus research and publication speed has exposed many loopholes in the scientific process that should be addressed in a methodical manner.

For example, it took 11 years for scientists with differing opinions to come to a consensus regarding SARS-CoV-1 as the pathogen that caused the SARS epidemic in the early 2000s. The outbreak, she believes, was likely a result of gain-of-function research on bat coronaviruses being performed in many institutions and as highlighted by a laboratory-acquired infection in Singapore, in the case of bat CoV, gain-of-function entails intentionally creating mutations that could infect humans, not a natural host, simply to see what could happen. This seemingly unwarranted justification, says Bhargava, is “playing with fire” especially given that CoV in bats does not cause disease, just mild sniffles, and bats clear that virus fairly quickly; under the guise of pathogen discovery program, an ulterior purpose is “to develop biological warfare weapons.”

In contrast, the rigid consensus that Sars-CoV-2 is the cause of the current COVID-19 pandemic was made in less than two months; how to treat it or contain it, has been a chaotic and unscientific process, at best for the last two years. 

The Technical Term for Preventing Infection

In terms of mRNA vaccines, Bhargava says they do not meet the traditional definition because unlike live-attenuated vaccines, (MMR, chickenpox, yellow fever,) mRNAs do not qualify due to their inability to reduce the viral load or prevent infection, or transmission. They could more accurately be categorized as a drug, says Bhargava.

(In the summer of 2021, the CDC changed its definition of a “vaccine” by replacing the word “immunity” with “protection” which they have claimed is for accuracy. Merriam-Webster also updated their definition in May, as pointed out by Dr. Peter Doshi.)

Bhargava also states that there have not been well-controlled clinical trials control-group studies (which compare vaccinated vs. unvaccinated with a similar health history, age, sex, and exposure risk) to conclude that the vaccines are efficacious and safe.

The Claim that “the Science is Clear”

Bhargava is “puzzled” as to why the scientific community is “turning a blind eye” to severe side effects. To not objectively acknowledge and explore adverse events, “is contradictory to everything we know about developing drugs,” she explains. The media continually suggests that the “science is clear.” Yet, when she reviews peer and non-peer-reviewed scientific publications, it leaves her with more questions and less clarity, despite her expertise and experience.

The topic of biological science and research had never been so widely consumed by the media and the public in “real-time” until recently, she says. While the urgency for answers is understandable, studies that normally take months to establish and peer-review are fast-tracked, yet devoid of the cautionary mindset that “science is always changing.” For example, if a natural infection takes 2 weeks to train the immune system, so does the vaccine. And the vaccine only trains a small arm of the immune system. (The architect of mRNA technology, Dr. Robert Malone, echoes this issue, saying established scientific data, which health officials rely on, is usually six months behind.)

Mechanism of Action for Covid-19 Vaccines:

There are currently three categories of vaccines developed for Covid-19. They include 1) inactivated (e.g., India’s Covaxin or a couple of the Chinese vaccines such as SinoVac, CoronaVac) representing the traditional approach; 2) Recombinant (Johnson & Johnson and AstraZeneca) which use adeno-associated virus fused with SARS-CoV-2 spike protein (“the shell” of the virus); and 3) mRNA (Pfizer and Moderna). 

In the short-term (2-3 months post-vaccination), it may appear that vaccines decrease infection and transmission, the long-term effects of these vaccines on cellular and immune function is a complete unknown; it’s uncertain that these will be the only changes produced, says Bhargava. 

In the past, adeno-associated viral (AAV) vectors used in gene therapy caused issues when they were integrated into patients’ genomes randomly. Some of the patients in the gene therapy trials found the original disease being cured but development of other symptoms or cancers gene therapy trials experienced a cure of one disease, but other types of cancers resulted in their place,  causing death in every single trial, says Bhargava. Due to these unforeseen outcomes, the FDA wants a minimum five-year follow-up for adeno-associated viral vectors used in therapy.

Interestingly, many people are naturally infected with adenovirus but have no symptoms or disease; the virus lies dormant in their genome. “We don’t know if the recombinant AAV vaccine (with Sars-CoV-2 spike protein), a mutated adeno-vector, can somehow activate the virus which is latent in some people, and if that virus becomes activated…,” she says, it could essentially perform a “rescue” to the mutant version of the virus in the vaccine by providing the missing pieces; this could have unintended consequences.

These unintended consequences highlight the issue of the public-facing stance that Covid-19 vaccines are unequivocally “safe and effective.” Bhargava dispels the notion that these side effects are random and not causation from the vaccines because side effects “are clustered.” 

Warner agreed, stating that he recently attended a vaccine-injury press conference in which those who claimed to be affected had injuries in three main groups: neurological, cardiac, and autoimmune. (Warner experienced severe cardiac and autoimmune issues after his second dose of Pfizer.) He noted that the vax-injured cohort compiled a mixed demographic, with their only common denominator being the vaccine, says Warner. Prior to the pandemic, says Bhargava, scientists would proceed in investigating this perplexing commonality, instead of ignoring the reports. 

The Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System, (where patients and doctors can make vaccine injuries known to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services,) has been discounted by health officials, scientific publications, and the media, citing that self-reporting is not credible in determining that the vaccines are the causation of the injury. 

Warner says the in-depth amount of information that must be provided to make a valid claim gives credibility to the genuineness of the reports. Also, false reporting to VAERS is a federal crime. Warner references a study conducted by non-profit Harvard Pilgrim Healthcare called the Lazarus report, which found that “fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events are reported.” Given this determination, —even using the most conservative figure— the death toll would be alarming.

Warner clarifies that neither he nor Dressen (who experienced debilitating neurological disorders with one injection of AstraZeneca) are advocating for ending the vaccine initiative. However, if medical professionals continue to deny their patients a vaccine-related injury diagnosis, they cannot get the appropriate medical support. Warner also claims that doctors who do acknowledge and diagnose vaccine injuries are in jeopardy of losing their license.

Mandates vs. Fundamental Immunology

To Bhargava, mandates do not make scientific sense for several reasons. She provided her rationale including:

One, the vaccines fail to stop infection or importantly, transmission, so how will they end the pandemic? The CDC stopped tracking breakthrough infections in fully vaccinated people since May of 2021 (just a few months into the vaccine drive) unless they were hospitalized or had severe disease. In contrast, all cases, whether mild or asymptomatic in the vaccinated are being reported. This is skewing of data. The promise of herd immunity for Covid-19 is doubtful considering our failure to reach herd immunity with the flu—despite the widespread use of yearly flu shots. “Have we eradicated it?” asks Bhargava. “No.”

Two, even for mandated childhood vaccines such as chickenpox, there can be breakthrough infections and transmissibility. However, with natural immunity, the recovered patient cannot be reinfected and is therefore exempt from needing the pox vaccine. But somehow there is no exemption for natural immunity with Covid-19. Of course, TrialSite reminds it has followed studies that evidence reinfection with CoV-2 is a rare phenomenon, but it does occur. Some early data indicate Omicron may pose a larger threat for more reinfection, but the notion is mere speculation; re-infections have yet to be confirmed by sequencing and prior infection variant identity is seldom reported. Only time and data will tell.

Three, there are fundamental differences between RNA and DNA viruses. “You can’t compare Covid to chickenpox, because chickenpox is caused by DNA viruses. They don’t mutate as often, and they induce life-long immunity…” —even if they are around someone who is actively infectious—. In contrast, the flu (RNA) behaves differently, selectively, as does Covid. Household members may not contract it from a sick member, and if they do, symptoms and their level of severity can vary. 

Furthermore, it is rare to contract flu year-after-year, (evidence of a significant level of robust, ongoing immunity.) Upon reinfection perhaps five or ten years later, the subsequent infection is often milder. “The idea that people who have recovered from Covid also need to be vaccinated is completely mind-boggling to me, and to the whole principle of immunology.”

Four, “natural immunity has been known to be the gold standard for the longest time,” says Bhargava. Consider the development of the smallpox vaccine: 

It was observed in 1796, that milkmaids who contracted the cowpox disease were protected from smallpox. Therefore, scientists were able to inoculate others using some of the secretions in the cowpox blisters (gross but necessary,) and exposed it to people who became resistant to smallpox.

Historically, scientists unanimously recognized the value of natural immunity. Why won’t virologists affirm its crucial role in this pandemic?

Mass Vaccination Causing Evolutionary Pressure

Five, putting pressure on the virus by vaccinating during a pandemic causes it to mutate for its survival. Bhargava uses “a disguise” analogy: mRNA vaccines are built in a way that the body recognizes “the face” of the virus, (the spike protein.) So, when the virus wants to infect a vaccinated host, it puts on “a mask.” However, with natural immunity, the body is acquainted with all facets of the virus’ identity, making it harder to conquer its host. 

These ideas are shared by Malone, and Belgian virologist, Geert Vanden Bossche, who advocate that mass vaccination is compelling the virus to mutate, essentially training it to become more resilient.

Incomplete Data Breeds Public Distrust

Bhargava reviewed recent data from the United Kingdom’s Health Ministry. It examined alternate antibodies created in vaccinated vs. naturally acquired immunity cohorts, which fight other parts of the virus, such as the nucleocapsid protein. The vaccinated group was reported to have lower amounts of antibodies for the nucleocapsid protein than the unvaccinated, naturally infected group. “What that tells me is that the vaccine is interfering with the function of your immune system to mount a robust response against the virus when you get infected,” says Bhargava.

Most of the published research comparing antibody levels in vaccinated immunity vs. natural immunity are comparing spike protein antibodies only, “and disregarding other components,” says Bhargava. If our immune system’s antibody defense were a pie, the spike protein would only comprise 35 – 50%. Comparing the data this way often favors the vaccinated, while ignoring all the other antibodies that naturally infected persons produce.

There were also flaws in the way scientists evaluated the virulence of the Delta variant. In the studies, she read they did not track the symptoms of the unvaccinated which would provide necessary info for comparison against the vaccinated breakthrough cases. 

Without the Delta data of the unvaccinated, how can we know it is more virulent? To make such a conclusion, researchers would have to observe cases of more severe disease in the unvaccinated, ensuring that underlying health conditions were similar in both the vaccinated and unvaccinated. Of course, if that information was present in scientific publication, and it was determined to be the case, the media would have shared it worldwide, right? Is it possible that the unvaccinated experienced milder symptoms, which may explain why this data was not recorded or shared?

It’s also fair to note that the CDC no longer tracks breakthrough infections in the vaccinated unless there is death or hospitalization, so there is not truly a clear picture in which to make scientific determinations. The scientific community is “cherry-picking” their data, says Bhargava. 

Marcus confirms that these inexplicable actions on behalf of the leaders in scientific research provoke the mounting doubt of the general public. Things aren’t right, and their minds are compelled to search for or reach for answers. On the other hand, there are voices on both sides of the political spectrum who are allowing their conclusions to run off the deep end.

Confidence in Truth Emerging

“If people lose faith in science, that will be, I think, the end of medicine as we know it,” says Bhargava.

Bhargava acknowledges why physicians and nurses who see and treat patients adhere to the protocol given by health authorities, however, “in the lab, there are always deviations from the experimental protocol. That’s how discoveries are made.” Lab experiments fail 99% of the time. Protocol is only a guideline; she encouraged her surgical students to deviate from the protocols as needed and ask questions during experimentation that might lead to insight along the way. “If you do that, your chances of succeeding will be much higher.”

Final thoughts: 

With only incomplete data on hand, how can scientific inferences be made with strong confidence? Bhargava declared, “When there are no appropriate controls and no proper documentation of data,” the inferences made hold little value. She emphasizes the importance of accepting the inconvenient-yet-important data. Information such as adverse events or alternative therapeutics should be examined so that it can help us understand more about SARS-CoV-2 and the role that our current vaccines have in protecting the world from Covid-19. 

Call to Action: Check out Aubrey Marcus’ podcasts here. 

Related

Dec 13 2021

Loyalty – Family or Government?


Armstrong Economics Blog/Police State Re-Posted Dec 13, 2021 by Martin Armstrong

America’s sweetheart, Dr. Fauci, would like to divide families this holiday season by urging people to ensure their relatives and friends are vaccinated. Fauci said only vaccinated groups should gather so that “vaccinated people can feel comfortable.” So tell your grandfather with the pacemaker to stay home alone this Christmas. Perhaps tell your cousin not to bring her unvaccinated baby too. “That’s the reason why people should, if they invite people over their home, essentially ask and maybe require that people show evidence that they are vaccinated,” Dr. Fauci actually said out loud.

This is exactly what the Stasi did in former East Germany until the Ministry for State Security (Stasi) was abolished in March 1990. The Stasi encouraged people to spy on neighbors, friends, and relatives. Children were expected to turn their parents into the state. Under their premise, your loyalty should stand with the state first and foremost.

Snowden’s leak stated that today’s NSA can compile 5 billion mobile records per day, and 42 billion internet records per month. The FBI recently released a document stating they can hack into iMessage and WhatsApp within 15 minutes. The advancement in technology has paved the way for a police state to control the public far beyond anything the Stasi pulled. The government is not your family.

Dec 13 2021

Inflation Soared to 6.8% in November


Armstrong Economics Blog/Inflation Re-Posted Dec 13, 2021 by Martin Armstrong

Inflation is soaring with no end in sight. The Consumer Price Index rose 0.8% in November, marking a 6.8% increase in inflation YoY. According to the Labor Department, this is the fastest pace of inflation since June 1982. In addition, Core-CPI rose 0.5% last month, amounting to a 4.9% annual increase, the quickest advancement since 1991.

Energy prices alone have spiked 33.3% in the past year, and gasoline prices are up 58.1%. Over the past 12 months, food and energy prices rose at the most rapid pace in 13 years. Shelter costs, amounting to one-third of CPI, rose 3.8% on an annual basis. This level has not been seen since the 2007 housing crisis wreaked havoc on the US real estate market.

Despite pay increases of 4.8% this year, real hourly earnings decreased 1.9% over the past 12-months. Service costs rose at the fastest pace since 2007 as well, advancing 3.4% over the past year. Apparel costs are also up by 5% since last November. Everywhere you look, prices are drastically rising.

Overall, the cost of living is astronomical. Basic necessities such as food and shelter price increases have caused more middle-class Americans to begin living paycheck to paycheck. The Federal Reserve claimed it would step in if inflation reached an unsustainable level. A 6.8% increase is unsustainable, inflation is not transitory, and neither the government nor the Fed has made a valid effort to control this growing problem.

Dec 13 2021

Semiconductor Shortage Hurting Smartphone Industry


Armstrong Economics Blog/Technology Re-Posted Dec 13, 2021 by Martin Armstrong

COMMENT: Hi Martin. Thank you for your work. The chip and supply shortage has not improved. I live in America outside a major city. My cellular device failed at the beginning of November so I ordered a replacement directly from Samsung. Best Buy and my cellular provider were both out of the phone I was seeking, and I went to around five stores. Shipping from Samsung was supposed to take a bit over a week, then two weeks, and now the ETA is in January. The stores I went into had Apple iPhones but not Androids. Frustrating.

REPLY: Now is an unfortunate time to need a new phone. Numerous original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) reported failing to secure crucial parts this year due to semiconductor shortages. Counterpoint Research lowered their forecast of global smartphone shipments from 1.45 billion units to 1.41 billion. Their study further suggests that smartphone OEMs only received 80% of the crucial components they need this year to manufacture phones during the second half of the year.

Samsung completely canceled their Galaxy Note series this year as they knew they would not be able to obtain the components. “Samsung, Oppo, Xiaomi have all been affected and we are lowering our forecasts. But Apple seems to be the most resilient and least affected by the AP (application processor) shortage situation,” Tom Kang, a researcher with Counterpoint reported in October. Kang’s research did not indicate why Apple was more immune to the chip shortage. Numerous companies are racing to produce highly in-demand chips, but it will take time for manufacturing to begin.

Dec 13 2021

Sunday Talk Warning, Mohamed El-Erian Concedes His Economic Views Are Now Contingent Upon Climate Change Driving Policy


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on December 12, 2021 | Sundance | 145 Comments

Well, there’s another “economist” who can be set into the folder of ‘no longer useful’.  During his appearance today on CBS Face The Nation, Mohamed El-Erian, chief economic adviser for Allianz, finishes his segment by revealing his underlying precept: Climate Change policy is now the economic policy driver of all his investment advice.

Within the interview, El-Erian said the “characterization of inflation as transitory is probably the worst inflation call in the history of the Federal Reserve.”  Additionally, El-Erian said inflation is likely to remain high into the next year and perhaps beyond.  Unfortunately, other than those two points of generally well educated accuracy, everything else is wrapped up in the political correctness of climate change…. which, you don’t really discover until the very end of the interview. WATCH:

The baseline for El-Erian saying the Build Back Better spending fiasco is a good thing, is based on accepting the pretense that massive amounts of federal spending will be needed to structurally change the U.S. economy from fossil fuel use to the Green New Deal.   If you do not believe in this transformation, there is no merit to any component of the BBB spending proposal. It really is that simple.

As a consequence, El-Erian is staking the position that climate change agenda politics is now the focal point from which all other economic policy will be determined.  He has conceded in his mind and worldview, perhaps based on his associations and peer discussions, that any forward economic analysis must therefore establish itself from the alternative fuel position.

It is only from the position that climate change is baked into forward economic outlooks that El-Erian can state inflation is structurally survivable, at the current level, with additional spending by federal government.

If he’s right…if congress does pass the BBB/GND at a level they are currently debating, then inflation will rise at/near current levels through Jan, Feb, March, then plateau around March/April for a few months, and then spike again -even higher- sometime around the spring 2022.

Keep in mind, in order for inflation to spike again in 2022, it will be building upon the prior massive inflationary step of 2021, because inflation is a measure of the percent change in prices year over year.

In 2021, we experienced around a 5% jump in overall CPI prices starting in the spring.  That initial inflation jump cycles through at the same time next year, and you would expect the rate of inflation to drop or stabilize once the comparison period is passed in 2022.   If the BBB bill is passed, the rate will jump again even when it cycles through the calendar.

  • Example: December 2020 bread was $3.00
  • December 2021 bread is $4.00  (25% increase over 2020)
  • June 2022 bread at $5.00 is a 20% increase over 2021.  Price difference same, but the rate of inflation is lower.

.

Imagine the prices in the scenario above if the rate of inflation in 2022 is the same or higher than 2021.  That’s the part people need to start thinking about now.

  • Example-2:  December 2020 Gasoline was $2.00/gal
  • December 2021 Gasoline is $3/gal (50% increase)
  • June 2022 Gasoline is $4.50/gal (50% increase), $5/gal, $5.50/gal etc

.

The downstream consequences of interim energy policy shifts are major increases in current energy costs.

Few people realize how much everything jumps in price simply because oil, gas and energy costs increase.  The entire process of creating stuff (raw materials), moving stuff, processing stuff (intermediate), transporting stuff, finishing stuff, shipping stuff, storing stuff, distributing stuff and selling stuff becomes a rising cumulative cost inside the supply chain.

When energy prices go up, a snowball effect starts traveling down the mountain getting bigger and bigger as it heads towards your house.

As Obama said, “Under my administration, energy prices will necessarily skyrocket“, but he could never actually do the structural energy change because: (1) Republicans took control of the House in January 2011; and (2) the economic blast damage would have been just too catastrophic for any attempt at re-election in 2012.

Joe Biden frees the leftists from those ideological constraints.

Everything you would normally consider to be a concern, anything that would limit the extremes of any legislative effort, has been removed. They plan to lose next year, so they have nothing to lose right now.

Joe Biden is an appointed figurehead for a background agenda driven by Obama’s Chicago Marxists and the global leftists.

The Biden far-left policy agenda is strategically a massive throw everything at the legislative process, in an effort to create major change in a short period of time.  COVID is being used as the cover story, Biden is the disposable front man, and Nancy Pelosi is the facilitating legislative cohort.

Massive inflation, skyrocketing gas prices, collapsed supply chains, empty shelves or shortages in products, increased crime, devalued dollar, diminished international influence, horrible polling, predictable political consequences, none of this matters because Biden is disposable to the agenda.

Additionally, there are no limits to the obvious lies they will tell, because no one inside the administration cares about any public impact. This current effort is to drive the agenda regardless of political damage that can only catch them, or block them, in the 2022 mid-term election.

The “Green New Deal” legislation *is* the “Build Back Better” legislation.  Once they get that bill passed, it’s mission accomplished.  This is a legacy move for Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, Mitch McConnell and Joe Biden.  This is the fundamental change part.

It appears in the interview with CBS Margaret Brennan, Mohamed El-Erian is accepting this Build Back Better legislation (or something similar) will pass the Senate and be enacted into law.   At the very least, he is accepting that ‘climate change policy’ is now fundamentally accepted by U.S. voters.  That perspective forms the baseline for him saying the climate change agenda is now baked into the U.S. economy, and inflation will have to be accepted – albeit at a debatable scale.

I hope El-Erian is wrong, because he is massively underestimating the scale of what will happen with total economic inflation as a consequence.

Factually, I think his analysis is corrupted by his associations on Wall Street.  The elites (in his circle) think We The People are not smart enough to see what can happen if this complete transformation of the U.S. energy system is changed; or as healthcare policy architect Jonathan Gruber later said publicly, “We relied upon the stupidity of the American voter” to create Obamacare, the transformation in the healthcare system.

I am cautiously optimistic they are both wrong right now, although I can also see how this COVID noise is providing them a lot of cover.

.

Dec 13 2021

Panic Hits Meet The Press as They Contemplate Collective Media’s Inability to Destroy Donald Trump and Manipulate Public Opinion


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on December 12, 2021 | Sundance | 319 Comments

The NBC media panel for Meet the Press is absolutely apoplectic about their inability to destroy President Donald Trump and his supportive base of pragmatic, awakened Americans.   The pearl-clutching and fear are palpable, as the leftist roundtable contemplates future elections that may deconstruct decades of election control, manipulation, fraud and falsehood.

What the panel of John Heilemann, Marianna Sotomayor, Kimberly Atkins Stohr and Brendan Buck really fear is the pesky system within our constitutional republic we call ‘federalism’.   They need to keep their attacks against Donald Trump cast in the role of eliminating baby Hitler simply to avoid confronting the flaws in their own ideological arguments.  They fear freedom. They need the collective. Individual liberty is against their own sense of self and purpose.

If you listen through their nonsense (not for the faint of heart), all of the panel apoplexy boils down to individual states in control of their own elections.  What they fear is federalism itself, which makes sense when you remind yourself there are two generations of leftists who were taught that collectivism (the we are the world crap), where only one centralized federal government, of all consuming power and authority, should be allowed to make decisions.  WATCH:

While it would be fun to debate a group like this, the core of their fear is a diminishing ability to control.  As CTH reminds frequently, the need for control is a reaction to fear. This applies in all levels of social society from elections to COVID responses.  Elites need control, because at their core they fear the inherent inequity of freedom.

Sally Struthers pleads into the camera for donations to feed the starving child in her arms in Africa… leftists swoon, and the U.N. activates.  Meanwhile, some pragmatist watching the commercial leans over to her husband and says, “I wonder why the cameraman didn’t just give the kid a sandwich”?

Control is a reaction to fear. Think in terms of politics and society – the fear behind leftist politics is the fear that someone might withhold things (opportunities, money, whatever) from me.  Fear that if you live your life in a way I dislike that it might affect my life. Fear that if you get that job, there will be nothing left for me. Fear that if you make tons of money, it means there’s less money out there for me. So, people who believe in leftist ideologies seek control as a means of trying to create guarantees and safeguards against those circumstances they fear.

The DC UniParty knows exactly how to exploit that fear, and both Democrats and Republicans love to provide those guarantees and safeguards.

Modern “liberals”, leftists, try to control the world and people to enable their comfort and happiness. Which, as we know, is an endless quest. Trying to control others does nothing in the way of making oneself happy. By extension, voting in this mindset so that government can try to control others will also – shocking – not lead to a happier, more comfortable life.

The conservative (and moderate, independent, but for the sake of expediency, the conservative), on the other hand, relies on himself to meet his own needs. And the trade off of being free to live his life as he wishes, is also understanding that he has to make peace with how you live yours. By extension, aware that he wants to be able to hold onto this liberty and freedom forever, the conservative votes accordingly, so that everyone can remain free and in charge of his or her own life.

But here’s the crucial difference, perhaps, particularly where misery on the left stems: The conservative does not worry, so to speak, about you. The conservative knows that you were born with the same access to self-love, self-empowerment, self-determination and self-reliance that we all were, no matter the circumstances into which you were born. (Think about the millions of people this country has allowed to crawl up from poverty into prosperity – the conservative KNOWS this is possible.) And the conservative believes that if you want prosperity, or a good job, or a good education, you can make it happen – but you have to work hard.

The conservative hopes and intends that the free markets bring you all of the affordable and positive opportunities and resources that you need. The conservative also knows that on the other side of that hard work is great reward – material and, more importantly, emotional, spiritual and mental.

The conservative understands that not only is it a waste of time to try to control you, it’s actually impossible. Humans were born to be free. And if we put a roadblock in front of you, you’ll find another way around it. So we see attempts at control as a waste of resources, energy and time at best, and at worst, creating detrimental results that serve to hinder people’s upward mobility or teach dependence. We see much more efficiency, as well as endless opportunity, in leaving you to your own devices. And we want the same in return.

This is where modern democrats misview conservatives as heartless. But really, the conservative believes that there is one and one path only to sustainable success and independence – and that is self-empowerment. All other avenues – welfare, affirmative action, housing loans you can’t actually afford – ultimately risk doing a disservice to people, as they teach dependence on special circumstances, the govt, or arbitrary assistance (that can disappear tomorrow). And the real danger – they will ALWAYS backfire, and leave the recipient in equally or more dire circumstances. Any false improvement will always expire.

The conservative believes in abundance. The liberal believes in scarcity.

The conservative believes man is born free and will be who he is, no matter what arbitrary limitations or rules are put on him. The leftist believes man is perfectible, and by extension, believes a society at large is perfectible, and command and control is justified in the quest to a “perfect” utopian society. (Sounds familiar!)

The conservative tends to be more faithful – and not necessarily in God, but in the ability of the individual to find great strength in himself (or from his God) to get what he needs and to be successful. Therefore the conservative has an outlet for his fear and disappointment – trust and faith in something bigger.

The leftist believes the system must be perfected in order to enable success. Therefore disappointment is channeled as anger and blame at the system. Voids are left to be filled by faith in the govt, which they surely then want to come in and “fix” things.

And therein lie the roots of love and fear respectively. For the conservative, when life presents great struggles, he knows he has the power to surmount them. Happiness stems from internal strength and perseverance. For the modern leftist, when life presents great struggles, the system failed, therefore they were at the mercy of a faulty system, and they believe that only when the system is fixed can their life improve. Happiness is built on systemic contingencies, which they will then seek to control or expect someone else to.

One blames himself. The other blames anyone and everyone but himself.

And there it is. There’s where the meanness comes from. The leftist ideology causes that person to cast anger at the world when things go wrong or appear “unfair.” He constantly chooses only to see the “injustices” – and that makes for a very miserable, mean, blame-casting existence.

One last point that we have seen over and over and over with many (not all) of our leftist friends: Extreme stinginess and cheapness.

In our conservative community growing up, we were always taught that you give when people are in need – make donations to the Red Cross when there’s an earthquake, donate to charity when you can afford it, etc. Even if it’s just $50 here and there – it’s the right thing to do. Conservatives see this as the responsibility that comes with gaining from the capitalistic system; if you happen to benefit greatly from the system, it’s your duty to give back.

The liberal, on the other hand, does not seem to share this same viewpoint, at least not in my experience. They perhaps think this is linked to believing in scarcity, and that your dollar comes at the cost of mine. So it seems that liberals, on some level of consciousness, feel guilty about not being voluntarily charitable. Therefore, to write off their guilt, they outsource their “generosity” to the government by voting for wealth re-distributive policies. Thus, the liberal cheats himself of the joy and addictiveness of direct generosity. (Not to mention – redistributive policies ALWAYS end up disempowering those who they’re meant to help.)

We think the Treehouse is a good armory for those who are doing long distance walking for the sake of our nation. We hope you’ll think so, too. Find yourself a good branch….or just pull up a rock to the campfire.

Dec 13 2021

Even ABC/IPSOS Cannot Manipulate Polls Heavily Enough to Protect Joe Biden from His Pro-crime and Hyper-Inflation Policies


Posted Originally on the Conservative tree house on December 12, 2021 | Sundance | 123 Comments

ABC/IPSOS are trying hard, very hard, to provide cover for Joe Biden. [IPSOS Release Here – pdf data Here]  However, even within what they call a “probability-based sample of pre-selected” Americans, aka “the knowledge panel“, the responses toward Joe Biden show a nationwide rejection of the White House occupant.

A heavily weighted sample of 28% support Biden’s efforts on inflation.  The rest of their pre-selected panel say he sucks.

Another weighted sample shows 36% think Biden is doing a good job on crime.  The rest of their pre-selected panel say no, Biden sucks.

(Via ABC) President Joe Biden is facing significant skepticism from the American public, with his job approval rating lagging across a range of major issues, including new lows for his handling of crime, gun violence and the economic recovery, a new ABC/Ipsos poll finds.

[…] More than two-thirds of Americans (69%) disapprove of how Biden is handling inflation (only 28% approve) while more than half (57%) disapprove of his handling of the economic recovery. 

[T]he survey also reveals weaknesses from Biden’s own party with only a slim majority of Democrats (54%) approving. Biden’s orbit is also hemorrhaging independent voters, with 71% disapproving of his handling of inflation.

[…] As the national murder rates see historic jumps, only a little more than 1 in 3 Americans (36%) approve of Biden’s handling of crime, down from 43% in an ABC News/Ipsos poll in late October. (read more)

The White House strategy to deny chaos created by their policies, and yet demanding that media report good things about Main Street collapsing, does not seem to be working.  Apparently, an overwhelming majority of Americans now believe what they see and feel for themselves. 

Dec 13 2021

Swamp Gatekeeper Chris Wallace Leaving Fox News Effective Immediately for New Position at CNN


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on December 12, 2021 | Sundance | 359 Comments

It was always Chris Wallace’s job to protect the DC interests by tamping down any sunlight upon corrupt UniParty politics.  That’s the reason why CTH called Wallace the deep swamp ‘gatekeeper‘ for a decade.

Wallace, the top player amid many such players at Fox News, was always a narrative platform provider to distribute media points that supported the institutional administrative state in DC.    However, thanks to the rise of pragmatic conservatism, a movement created by Donald Trump and commonly identified as MAGA, in recent years more people have caught on to how this insufferable media game is played.

Chris Wallace was increasingly becoming naked to his audience, and as a direct outcome, increasingly useless for propaganda distribution.  Today, the functionally obsolescent gatekeeper announced, effective immediately, he was leaving Fox News.  Moments later, CNN announced Chris Wallace was joining them.  In essence, Wallace moves from controlled opposition to direct opposition. WATCH:

The CNN welcome announcement is AVAILABLE HERE.

Wallace was not the first departure.  The increased public awareness of the manipulative construct that is Fox News (writ large) is the same reason why Steve Hayes and Jonah Goldberg were released.  That is also the same motive for Fox hiring Dan Bongino.

Although it is yet to be announced, the Fox News contracts for Sean Hannity and Laura Ingraham also will not be renewed after their current terms expire.   With more people finding more places where genuine source material facts are cited with sunlight, the ability for controlled opposition pundits to thrive is demonstrably lessened.

Traditional cable news is modifying itself accordingly with subscription based services.

If you want to avoid uncomfortable truth, if you want to be fed propaganda, if you want to get talking points just to support your skewed and ideologically flawed world view, and if you want to avoid confronting your own preconceptions, the subscriber services from both Fox News and CNN will now provide the direct injection of propaganda and misinformation you need to retain the status quo.  This is the new business model for cable news platforms.

An entirely new media infrastructure has assembled outside the influence of corporations.  Understanding current events, real news and information based on fact, is no longer dependent on corporations.  Independent researchers and information providers are giving the raw material citations directly to audiences on a variety of platforms.

In the bigger picture, these are the consequences from identifying “fake news” publicly, and yes, we can thank Donald J. Trump for that.  This is the biggest gift that Donald Trump created outside of his America First political agenda.  Donald J. Trump was/is a walking red pill; a “touchstone”: a visible, empirical test or criterion for determining the quality or genuineness of anything political.

Without Trump, the business models of CNN, MSNBC, Fox News and the alphabet broadcasters would never have collapsed as quickly.  He alone accomplished that.

.

Dec 12 2021

Dr. Peter McCullough speech at the ReAwaken America Tour 12/10/21


Posted originally on BITCHUTE First at 20:01 UTC on December 11th, 2021.

Dr. Peter McCullough speaks about early treatment suppression and Vaccine injuries.

Dec 12 2021

New Zealand’s Tobacco Industry to Become Obsolete


Armstrong Economics Blog/Regulation Re-Posted Dec 12, 2021 by Martin Armstrong

New Zealand plans to make the tobacco industry obsolete among future generations. Associate Health Minister Dr. Ayesha Verrall announced plans to pass the Smokefree Aotearoa 2025 Action Plan, with the goal of eliminating tobacco in the country in the next four years. As a result, cigarette companies will be prohibited from advertising in New Zealand. When the law goes into effect, teenagers under the age of 14 will never have the ability to purchase legal tobacco in their lifetimes. In addition, the majority of controversial flavored e-cigarettes aside from mint, menthol, and tobacco were banned in August as they are said to appeal to the youth.

The government is also taking measures to help older generations quit by gradually reducing nicotine content in cigarettes and removing filters. Currently, 8,000 retailers have the ability to sell tobacco products in the nation, but that will be reduced to only 500 locations. In four years, the only cigarettes available will contain a very low level of nicotine before they are phased out completely.

Verrall claims the move will save New Zealand $5 billion in healthcare costs. According to estimates, the average smoker in New Zealand spends $238 per week on cigarettes, amounting to $12,400 annually. The move will make New Zealand’s tobacco industry the most restricted in the world, behind Bhutan where cigarette products are prohibited entirely. However, tobacco sales compose around 40% of total convenience retail revenue in the nation. Opponents say that prohibition has never worked, and the ban will lead to an unregulated black market. Small dairies (i.e., grocery stores) are upset over the law as it will deplete much of their revenue, and the government has said it will not step in to bail out businesses affected by the mandate.