Posted originally on the conservative tree house on May 10, 2022 | Sundance
Even with dementia I doubt seriously Joe Biden believes the nonsense he read from his prepared script today. Every economy policy the Biden administration has triggered, specifically including the Green New Deal energy policy, has caused massive inflation.
The national average price per gallon of gasoline was $2.33 in January 2021, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA). It has increased nearly 84% when compared to the current national average price of $4.28 per gallon {link}. Petroleum and refined gasoline costs are embedded in every aspect of the production economy. Additionally, Biden’s restrictions, and later policies, on natural gas and coal have caused overall energy costs to skyrocket. Again, these are cornerstones of economic inflation.
During a ridiculously obtuse speech today [Full Speech Here], part of which is in the excerpt below, Biden claims there are only two sources of inflation: (1) the pandemic (covid-19); and (2) Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. I often accuse democrats of pretending not to know things, however these false attributions are far beyond pretense, they are purposeful lies. WATCH:
Beyond the claims about inflation, a visible pile of bovine excrement is noted in the sentences around Ukraine grain supplies. Notice there is no supply chain issue pushing thousands of tons of military hardware into Ukraine; however, Biden claims they cannot get grain supplies out of Ukraine. He cannot even see the hypocrisy in his own script.
Sending more than $50 billion in U.S. taxpayer money to Ukraine while those same U.S. taxpayers are crushed under the weight of the inflation that type of spending creates, is beyond blood-boiling. We are currently in an abusive relationship with our own government and Joe Biden is the cognitively challenged, disposable front man sent to the cameras to gaslight the American people.
TrialSite Staff by Staff at TrialSite | Quality Journalism May. 10, 2022, 9:00 a.m.
After 16 months of major COVID-19 immunization initiatives worldwide, government appetite for COVID-19 vaccine products appears to morph into a more focused, market-based, targeted booster series, a change that vaccine producers are now adjusting to accommodate. With a confluence of forces, from COVID-19 vaccine gluts to increasing numbers of producers to leeriness of waning effectiveness due to highly transmissible variants, the market drivers, heavily driven by government, give way to an unfolding new reality.
In the United States, like in many other nations, including those aligned with the World Health Organization (WHO), centered responses to COVID-19 emphasized production and distribution of a maximum number of vaccines with targets of achieving at least 70% vaccination. That effort, again coordinated to some degree by groups such as WHO, led to the inoculation of about 4.68 billion people (according to Our World in Data) worldwide, or neatly 60% of humanity, representing an unprecedented pandemic response.
Vaccine producers such as Pfizer, Moderna, Johnson and Johnson (Janssen), AstraZeneca, and others understand that unless there are continued government mandates effectively priming the pump of demand, those individuals with a preference for COVID-19 immunization have already gone ahead with the procedure.
What’s left is a market for boosters and what could become some sort of annual shot available for targeted populations. Of course, in some markets, young children are still a target for COVID-19 vaccines. Regardless, companies now operate in a quite different environment now, than they did in the period of late 2020 through 2021: a period driven by massive government spending, heavy industry influence on the regulatory process, risk-sharing, and the like to a more traditional competitive marketplace.
The Last Market: Young Children
While the children’s markets in places like America are still relevant, awaiting approval, what’s becoming apparent will be the emphasis on booster shots. In the world’s most lucrative drug market, America, Pfizer, and Moderna will more than likely persist as market leaders vying for the parental demands of children as public health agencies such as the CDC continue to emphasize that the risk-benefit analysis of the COVID-19 vaccine favor by a long-shot vaccination. The point of view is that there are no risk-free choices and that it’s better to be safe than sorry with the very youngest members of society.
To date, the CDC recommends the Pfizer vaccine for both the 5-11 age and 12 to 17 cohort while not recommending Moderna. Under 4 is the last market segment the vaccine makers vie for, and if the FDA authorizes, then Pfizer would own that market. A potential battle emerges over this cohort (aged 4-11) as a growing movement concerned for the safety associated with the vaccines, especially the mRNA-based products, gains momentum to question the mass vaccination on this young population. Critics argue that the original premise for mandates and the like was to control community transmission. Given substantial waning vaccine effectiveness combined with mutating variants, critics suggest the risks of serious infection and death are too low, and the safety issues are higher than the government is letting on.
Demand for Vaccines Wane
But demand for vaccines is flat in much of the world. In America, there is little uptick in vaccination as the “fully vaccinated” defined as receiving the two jabs of either Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna or one jab from Janssen equals 66.8% of the population while about 30.7% of the population opted for a booster dose.
Meanwhile, TrialSite, on several occasions, has chronicled a global glut of COVID-19 vaccines and therapeutics, especially in places like India, the world’s second-highest populated country. In places like Australia, where the death rate associated with COVID-19 has absolutely skyrocketed despite high immunization rates, the public health agencies and politicians continue to promote booster doses as the answer. TrialSite reported recently that Australian politicians in an election season essentially pretend that times are back to normal despite record numbers of cases, near-record hospitalizations, and double the deaths in the first months of 2022 than all of 2020 and 2021 combined.
Some Possible Explanations
Reuters’ Michael Erman and Manas Mishra write that vaccine producers such as Novavax and CureVac, the German mRNA-vaccine maker in partnership with GlaxoSmithKline, seek to target this booster market. Novavax still awaits FDA authorization despite the fact that much of the developed world, from Europe to Canada and Japan to the WHO, have authorized the use of the Novavax vaccine.
Meanwhile, the outlook for Janssen and AstraZeneca (Oxford) is that bright, report the Reuters journalists. According to Hartaj Singh, an analyst from Oppenheimer & Co., “It becomes a very competitive game with companies battling it out with pricing and for market share, even for vaccines that are considered to be the best, like Pfizer and Moderna.”
Interestingly, Pfizer’s CEO Albert Bourla went on the record in an interview recently that those adults that have opted to receive a COVID-19 vaccine are not likely to start accepting shots now in a recognition that the mega push for vaccine administration has come and gone.
Moderna has pegged the unfolding market as the annual shot market, targeting the following:
Adults 50 and above
People with comorbidities or other risks
High-risk occupations (e.g., healthcare, etc.)
According to the estimates of Stephane Bancel, Moderna’s CEO, this emerging annual shot market totals 1.7 billion, representing 21% of the global population. The mRNA-based vaccines are more expensive and cumbersome to distribute and store, hence a sizeable chunk of that estimated target may opt for other vaccines such as the two recently touted by vaccine insiders at WHO including a plant-based vaccine from Canada and one from China.
More than likely Western Europe and America will represent central markets for sales for Pfizer and Moderna who will move toward more competitive, targeted responsive strategies as large government pre-purchases are probably going to be far less. Moreover, TrialSite suggests what were cozy relationships between industry and government agencies will become less so as the various governments’ responses to the pandemic will be a hot topic, especially in democracies in current election cycles.
Key Question: A flu shot model or something else?
The Reuters writers posed an important question in the recent piece: will the likes of Pfizer and Moderna starting this fall market a tailored, redesigned vaccine targeted relevant variants of concern (e.g., Omicron, BA.2, etc.)?
Both Moderna and Pfizer executives are on the record that they are developing Omicron-targeted vaccines.
This becomes an important topic as even the mainstream media starts to become slightly critical of the pandemic response, including mRNA-based vaccine makers that never modified the vaccine product once. The vaccine authorized and approved in the United States was developed based on the original Wuhan variant of SARS-CoV-2 which didn’t seem to make it in circulation to America nor most of the world.
Revenues Decline (but still unprecedented)
2023 sales numbers, while still staggering as compared to historical precedent in the pharmaceutical industry, are nonetheless, on the decline. Reuters reports $17 billion projected for Pfizer-BioNTech (down nearly half from $34 billion) and $10 billion for Moderna as compared to $23 billion in 2022. Sales will continue to drop because enormous fortunes were generated in the winner-take-all pandemic market.
TrialSite suggests the COVID-19 pandemic response must be seriously evaluated due to levels of bias, political interference, and potentially corruption at an unprecedented level. Should the political conditions change in the United States for example, leading to serious inquiries, the pandemic winners may incur unexpected costs.
After 16 months of major COVID-19 immunization initiatives worldwide, government appetite for COVID-19 vaccine products appears to morph into a more focused, market-based, targeted booster series, a change that vaccine producers are now adjusting to accommodate. With a confluence of forces, from COVID-19 vaccine gluts to increasing numbers of producers to leeriness of waning effectiveness due to highly transmissible variants, the market drivers, heavily driven by government, give way to an unfolding new reality.
In the United States, like in many other nations, including those aligned with the World Health Organization (WHO), centered responses to COVID-19 emphasized production and distribution of a maximum number of vaccines with targets of achieving at least 70% vaccination. That effort, again coordinated to some degree by groups such as WHO, led to the inoculation of about 4.68 billion people (according to Our World in Data) worldwide, or neatly 60% of humanity, representing an unprecedented pandemic response. TrialSite Staff by Staff at TrialSite | Quality Journalism
May. 10, 2022, 9:00 a.m.
After 16 months of major COVID-19 immunization initiatives worldwide, government appetite for COVID-19 vaccine products appears to morph into a more focused, market-based, targeted booster series, a change that vaccine producers are now adjusting to accommodate. With a confluence of forces, from COVID-19 vaccine gluts to increasing numbers of producers to leeriness of waning effectiveness due to highly transmissible variants, the market drivers, heavily driven by government, give way to an unfolding new reality.
In the United States, like in many other nations, including those aligned with the World Health Organization (WHO), centered responses to COVID-19 emphasized production and distribution of a maximum number of vaccines with targets of achieving at least 70% vaccination. That effort, again coordinated to some degree by groups such as WHO, led to the inoculation of about 4.68 billion people (according to Our World in Data) worldwide, or neatly 60% of humanity, representing an unprecedented pandemic response.
Vaccine producers such as Pfizer, Moderna, Johnson and Johnson (Janssen), AstraZeneca, and others understand that unless there are continued government mandates effectively priming the pump of demand, those individuals with a preference for COVID-19 immunization have already gone ahead with the procedure.
What’s left is a market for boosters and what could become some sort of annual shot available for targeted populations. Of course, in some markets, young children are still a target for COVID-19 vaccines. Regardless, companies now operate in a quite different environment now, than they did in the period of late 2020 through 2021: a period driven by massive government spending, heavy industry influence on the regulatory process, risk-sharing, and the like to a more traditional competitive marketplace.
The Last Market: Young Children
While the children’s markets in places like America are still relevant, awaiting approval, what’s becoming apparent will be the emphasis on booster shots. In the world’s most lucrative drug market, America, Pfizer, and Moderna will more than likely persist as market leaders vying for the parental demands of children as public health agencies such as the CDC continue to emphasize that the risk-benefit analysis of the COVID-19 vaccine favor by a long-shot vaccination. The point of view is that there are no risk-free choices and that it’s better to be safe than sorry with the very youngest members of society.
To date, the CDC recommends the Pfizer vaccine for both the 5-11 age and 12 to 17 cohort while not recommending Moderna. Under 4 is the last market segment the vaccine makers vie for, and if the FDA authorizes, then Pfizer would own that market. A potential battle emerges over this cohort (aged 4-11) as a growing movement concerned for the safety associated with the vaccines, especially the mRNA-based products, gains momentum to question the mass vaccination on this young population. Critics argue that the original premise for mandates and the like was to control community transmission. Given substantial waning vaccine effectiveness combined with mutating variants, critics suggest the risks of serious infection and death are too low, and the safety issues are higher than the government is letting on.
Demand for Vaccines Wane
But demand for vaccines is flat in much of the world. In America, there is little uptick in vaccination as the “fully vaccinated” defined as receiving the two jabs of either Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna or one jab from Janssen equals 66.8% of the population while about 30.7% of the population opted for a booster dose.
Meanwhile, TrialSite, on several occasions, has chronicled a global glut of COVID-19 vaccines and therapeutics, especially in places like India, the world’s second-highest populated country. In places like Australia, where the death rate associated with COVID-19 has absolutely skyrocketed despite high immunization rates, the public health agencies and politicians continue to promote booster doses as the answer. TrialSite reported recently that Australian politicians in an election season essentially pretend that times are back to normal despite record numbers of cases, near-record hospitalizations, and double the deaths in the first months of 2022 than all of 2020 and 2021 combined.
Some Possible Explanations
Reuters’ Michael Erman and Manas Mishra write that vaccine producers such as Novavax and CureVac, the German mRNA-vaccine maker in partnership with GlaxoSmithKline, seek to target this booster market. Novavax still awaits FDA authorization despite the fact that much of the developed world, from Europe to Canada and Japan to the WHO, have authorized the use of the Novavax vaccine.
Meanwhile, the outlook for Janssen and AstraZeneca (Oxford) is that bright, report the Reuters journalists. According to Hartaj Singh, an analyst from Oppenheimer & Co., “It becomes a very competitive game with companies battling it out with pricing and for market share, even for vaccines that are considered to be the best, like Pfizer and Moderna.”
Interestingly, Pfizer’s CEO Albert Bourla went on the record in an interview recently that those adults that have opted to receive a COVID-19 vaccine are not likely to start accepting shots now in a recognition that the mega push for vaccine administration has come and gone.
Moderna has pegged the unfolding market as the annual shot market, targeting the following:
Adults 50 and above
People with comorbidities or other risks
High-risk occupations (e.g., healthcare, etc.)
According to the estimates of Stephane Bancel, Moderna’s CEO, this emerging annual shot market totals 1.7 billion, representing 21% of the global population. The mRNA-based vaccines are more expensive and cumbersome to distribute and store, hence a sizeable chunk of that estimated target may opt for other vaccines such as the two recently touted by vaccine insiders at WHO including a plant-based vaccine from Canada and one from China.
More than likely Western Europe and America will represent central markets for sales for Pfizer and Moderna who will move toward more competitive, targeted responsive strategies as large government pre-purchases are probably going to be far less. Moreover, TrialSite suggests what were cozy relationships between industry and government agencies will become less so as the various governments’ responses to the pandemic will be a hot topic, especially in democracies in current election cycles.
Key Question: A flu shot model or something else?
The Reuters writers posed an important question in the recent piece: will the likes of Pfizer and Moderna starting this fall market a tailored, redesigned vaccine targeted relevant variants of concern (e.g., Omicron, BA.2, etc.)?
Both Moderna and Pfizer executives are on the record that they are developing Omicron-targeted vaccines.
This becomes an important topic as even the mainstream media starts to become slightly critical of the pandemic response, including mRNA-based vaccine makers that never modified the vaccine product once. The vaccine authorized and approved in the United States was developed based on the original Wuhan variant of SARS-CoV-2 which didn’t seem to make it in circulation to America nor most of the world.
Revenues Decline (but still unprecedented)
2023 sales numbers, while still staggering as compared to historical precedent in the pharmaceutical industry, are nonetheless, on the decline. Reuters reports $17 billion projected for Pfizer-BioNTech (down nearly half from $34 billion) and $10 billion for Moderna as compared to $23 billion in 2022. Sales will continue to drop because enormous fortunes were generated in the winner-take-all pandemic market.
TrialSite suggests the COVID-19 pandemic response must be seriously evaluated due to levels of bias, political interference, and potentially corruption at an unprecedented level. Should the political conditions change in the United States for example, leading to serious inquiries, the pandemic winners may incur unexpected costs.
After 16 months of major COVID-19 immunization initiatives worldwide, government appetite for COVID-19 vaccine products appears to morph into a more focused, market-based, targeted booster series, a change that vaccine producers are now adjusting to accommodate. With a confluence of forces, from COVID-19 vaccine gluts to increasing numbers of producers to leeriness of waning effectiveness due to highly transmissible variants, the market drivers, heavily driven by government, give way to an unfolding new reality.
In the United States, like in many other nations, including those aligned with the World Health Organization (WHO), centered responses to COVID-19 emphasized production and distribution of a maximum number of vaccines with targets of achieving at least 70% vaccination. That effort, again coordinated to some degree by groups such as WHO, led to the inoculation of about 4.68 billion people (according to Our World in Data) worldwide, or neatly 60% of humanity, representing an unprecedented pandemic response.
The FDA has finally admitted what we knew all along – the vaccine is not safe. The FDA said it is limiting the availability of Johnson & Johnson’s COVID-19 vaccine as it does indeed cause blood clots. The agency also noted that the vaccine presents a risk of thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome.
The health agencies are still pushing the vaccines from Moderna and Pfizer. How are they any different? The US government has a long history of punishing Johnson & Johnson for their illegal activities, from asbestos-laced baby powder to cancerogenic sunscreen. Yet, all pharmaceutical manufacturers are exempt from penalty for the COVID-19 vaccine, citing a national emergency.
FDA’s vaccine chief Dr. Peter Marks said that the risk of death is still better than not getting the jab and said Johnson & Johnson’s version may be used as a last resort. Johnson & Johnson was hoping to rake in $3.5 billion this year from the vaccine alone. All of this comes down to money and control. The government and businesses forced mandates with complete disregard for public health. The talking heads gaslit the world for years into believing anyone who questioned the vaccine was a conspiracy theory lunatic, unfit for society.
They have known the truth all along. The Johnson & Johnson vaccine came into question in April 2021. Here is Fauci maintaining that the Johnson & Johnson vaccine was “safe and effective” despite knowing it could be deadly:
Gavin Newsom’s goal to become the most woke governor in America has backfired as all words are now deemed offensive as well as hand gestures. The internet is ablaze with angry voters who want Gavin out of office for his transphobic comment. His crime? He stated that men cannot get pregnant. “If men could get pregnant, this wouldn’t even be a conversation,” the non-inclusive and intolerant governor stated in support of Roe v. Wade. Blaming cis-gendered males is OK and encouraged, but stating that they are unable to carry a child is not.
Newsom carelessly failed to mention the other 71 genders who can also give birth. Schools in the US will begin teaching children all 72 genders and will allow them to choose which ones they like the best. Biden has removed the word “mother” from all government documents in favor of “birthing person.” How will they explain to children that a uterus is necessary to produce life?
The Ministry of Truth will certainly clarify the situation for us. Gavin Newsom said abortion “will be the defining issue of the 2022 election,” which is exactly why the Supreme Court document was leaked. Newsom said he will fight to protect “women” – oh no, there he goes again. If his campaign is built on angering the left, he better tread lightly.
It is no secret that other nations see the president of the United States as a joke. In this video, Australian reporters are shocked that Biden openly laughed at a joke about record-high inflation. He is literally laughing AT you — the Great Unwashed. Sky News host Rita Panahi said The Ministry of Truth is “deeply sinister and Orwellian.” The corruption and tyranny have become so blatant that it is almost laughable — almost.
On April 25, 2022 – Twitter accepted Musk’s offer and two days later Biden took the same step as Hitler in establishing his ‘Disinformation Governance Board’ to fight ‘misinformation’ (a la George Orwell’s “Ministry of Truth”). Biden is clearly out to obstruct Musk and free speech.
Posted originally on the conservative tree house on May 5, 2022 | Sundance
This is the state of our union. These are the real Domestic Violent Extremists (DVE’s).
Democrat activists have listed the names and home addresses of conservative Supreme Court justices in an effort to organize violence against the court. A taller perimeter fence was installed around the Supreme Court building last night to stop any violent efforts by democrat activists, and personal security measures have been increased for the justices.
(Daily Mail) – An activist group called ‘Ruth Sent Us’ has published the supposed addresses of Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thmas, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, Amy Coney Barrett and Chief Justice John Roberts and are planning a ‘walk-by’ of their homes next Wednesday, May 11.
‘Our 6-3 extremist Supreme Court routinely issues rulings that hurt women, racial minorities, LGBTQ+ and immigrant rights,’ the group’s website reads. ‘We must rise up to force accountability using a diversity of tactics.’ (read more)
Unfortunately, and in keeping with all prior support precedent for Occupy Wall Street, Black Lives Matter, Antifa and other violent groups, the installed president and radical administration officials have aligned themselves with the violent confrontation. The White House has refused to speak out against the intimidation effort and/or condemn the violence.
This is the state of our union with Democrats attacking the institutions of government.
The security officials for Justice Alito cancelled plans for him to participate in the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals judicial conference starting on Thursday, as the associate justice is tasked with reviewing emergency appeals from the 5th Circuit. It is unclear if Justice Roberts and Justice Thomas, who were slated to get remarks at a similar conference for the 11th Circuit on Thursday and Friday, will still appear.
Posted originally on the conservative house on May 4, 2022 | Sundance
Kentucky Senator Rand Paul questioned DHS Secretary Mayorkas about what constitutes disinformation and what will the DHS Disinformation Bureau do about it? {Direct Rumble Link}
After multiple back and forth dodges by the DHS Secretary, at 06:40 Mayorkas slips a little and gives an example using the COVID vaccination program. After giving the example of a hypothetical claim of the vaccine containing fentanyl, Mayorkas asks “should I sit back and accept that,” meaning do nothing about it.
Right there Mayorkas gives away the intent and purpose of the Ministry of Truth. Identify disinformation, then communicate with the networked partnership of social media companies, and then target whoever made the claim. The government then controls the speech. The government then becomes the arbiter of what is true and/or false. The problem as Rand Paul is drilling down, is that ultimately government will approve speech. WATCH:
There is no such thing as “disinformation.” There is information the government approves of, and information that is averse to the interest of government. That’s the bottom line and the end of this regulatory slippery slope discussion.
Example: Ask the DHS Disinformation Governance Board if a fetus is a baby human?
Posted originally on the conservative on May 4, 2022 | Sundance
It’s not that hard to see the GOPe Club moves in Georgia, you just have to shake off the ‘battered conservative syndrome‘ to accept it.
Georgia is holding an open primary, where democrats can vote for republicans and republicans can vote for democrats.
The Democrat Governor candidate is Stacy Abrams, and she is running unopposed.
The AME Church Network (think prior Mississippi strategy for Thad Cochran by Haley Barbour and Mitch McConnell) have been activated to vote in the republican primary, so democrats in Georgia will choose the republican candidate who will run against Stacy Abrams.
Georgia Democrats will vote for incumbent republican governor Brian Kemp this month because that’s who they want on the ticket in the November general election, facing their candidate, Stacy Abrams. Georgia is the homebase of the AME church network and their political operations. This is part of the reason why Georgia politics is: (a) racially divisive; and (b) fraught with corruption.
As a direct result of democrats selecting the opposition, Stacy Abrams will win in November. Open primaries are club rules used to make red states turn blue. Allowing your opposition to choose your candidate is never smart. [Note: Texas is soon to follow if they are not careful.]
Everything at this level of electoral games is controlled by the state political clubs. The republican club in Georgia is ideologically against MAGA more than they are against Democrats. The GA parties control the rules and thereby the political outcomes, the voters in GA operate under the illusion of choice. This is not uncommon.
The key point is to note that republican governor Brian Kemp (pictured right) is going to be the predetermined primary winner. Kemp will have GOPe support, some smaller faction of conservative support, and he will have more than enough democrats voting for him to beat any challenge.
President Trump has endorsed former GA Senator David Perdue for the governor race. Likely Senator Perdue sought that endorsement, and Trump gave it to him despite Perdue being a lifetime member of the Mitch McConnell stable.
We can debate Perdue and McConnell’s motives for running this strategy, but the weedy point is essentially moot. Even with full MAGA support, David Perdue will not beat Brian Kemp in the GA primary because organized democrats (AME church network) are going to vote for Kemp.
There is no scenario where Kemp doesn’t win the primary, it is a done deal. The club is happy.
Into this scenario the GOPe club now have an opportunity to attack and diminish their real enemy, Donald Trump and the MAGA movement.
Donald Trump, trying to break the GOP corruption cycle in Georgia (noted by their activity in 2020) has endorsed David Perdue. However, Mitch McConnell and now George W Bush are very publicly supporting Kemp. Duh, the Kemp victory is assured.
When Kemp wins the primary, the MAGA-ino (in name only) candidate, David Perdue, will be defeated. This allows the GOPe club to push the narrative that Trumpism is dead within the republican party. We are dealing with an internecine battle between the old guard and maga inside the RNC club.
The Mitch McConnell/George W Bush crowd will use the Kemp primary victory to diminish MAGA and the national media will put the massive spotlight on the Trump-endorsed loss in order to diminish Donald Trump and MAGA. It’s a familiar playbook and repeated pattern (see Tea Party).
GEORGIA – The [Kemp] fundraiser with Bush this month will put Kemp in front of an influential room of Texas donors just days before the Georgia primary on May 24. Hosts of the May 16 event include Crow; Jim Francis, a major Texas bundler; Republican strategist Karl Rove; and Ross Perot, Jr., son of the former presidential candidate. Tickets for a V.I.P. reception are listed at $15,200, while the general reception is going for $5,000. (read more)
The high information Georgia conservative voters know that Brian Kemp is corrupt and would have a very hard time voting for him. However, Brian Kemp losing in November to Stacy Abrams is no big deal to the GOPe club. The Club would rather lose the Governor’s seat and retain power, than defeat a democrat opponent and be held accountable for political reform and federalism policies they really don’t support.
Besides, even in the unfortunate event that Kemp did win the general election (GA base voters all collectively decide to hold their nose), the Club knows Kemp’s crew will not reform or change anything; so, it’s a win/win either way.
On the other side of the Club dynamic (the democrat wing), the most likely scenario is Stacy Abrams winning.
This would flip the state from red to blue, and provide the fuel for the national press and DNC to proclaim that Democrat policies are on the rise and everyone loves democrats. Even if Abram’s is the only win in the entire 2022 mid-term election, that will be their message.
This outcome sets the stage for the return half of the AME Church Network quid-pro-quo that was established in 2020.
When Obama and James Clyburn cut the 2020 Biden deal, Obama got his third term to execute radical kamikaze policies without concern for reelection, in exchange for AME support of Biden. The 2024 return payment is Stacy Abrams as the 2024 democrat nominee.
It’s all club games. Unfortunately in the Georgia mid-term Donald Trump endorsed the candidate the GOPe club had specifically put into place in order to lose. David Perdue will land a cushy Wall Street organized corporate gig; Brian Kemp will land a cushy Wall Street organized corporate gig, and Stacy Abrams will be the Georgia governor.
Having looked carefully, I cannot see a countering move that would disrupt the Republican Club plan for this one.
With Democrats able to select the Republican nominee, unfortunately Georgia looks lost.
Posted originally on the conservative tree house on May 4, 2022
The democrat narrative for 2022 is from the exact same playbook used against the Tea Party in 2011/2012. Weaponizing the J6 committee to frame the construct this year, democrats are back to the playbook of calling their opposition “extremists.”
After resounding MAGA candidates won all the contested primary elections yesterday, Joe Biden takes to the microphones today and says:
…”this MAGA crowd is really the most extreme political organization that’s existed in American history.”
When Roe v Wade was decided, it was highly questionable both on a constitutional level as well as on a moral basis. The basic religious objection stems from the Ten Commandments – Thou Shalt Not Kill. You had a lot of people arguing that a child is not a child until it is born and thus abortion is not a crime of murder. The reasoning was akin to the distinction of killing people on a wholesale basis which is deranged murder as distinguished by being a soldier who is ordered to kill by your head of state which makes it patriotic. Then you have people carving out exceptions to kill people calling it a Holy War somehow sanctioned by God or the execution of a prisoner sentenced to death. Then there is the argument of self-defense and a police officer who shoots to kill because he thought the guy was reaching for a gun instead of his wallet. There has always been a gray area when it comes to killing someone else.
I have to look at this question from a rule of law perspective and not one of personal preference or based upon a religious belief or lack thereof. Appellant Jane Roe, a pregnant mother who wished to obtain an abortion, sued on behalf of all women similarly situated in an effort to prevent the enforcement of Texas statutes criminalizing all abortions except those performed to save the life of the mother. The other case being overruled is PlannedParenthoodv. Casey, which altered the standard for analyzing restrictions on the right of abortion, crafting the undue burden standard for abortion.
What NEEDS to be stated is that the promoter of abortion was none other than Bill Gates’ father who was the head of Planned Parenthood which promoted abortions. Aside from the scandal about Planned Parenthood selling body parts from abortions, it has long been pointed out that 86% of Planned Parenthood abortion operations have been in minority areas. This has always led to the question was this really about Eugenics.
To sell the idea of abortions like the insurance industry that could not sell Death Insurance so they called it Life Insurance, abortion was marketed as a woman’s right issue avoiding any discussion of the life of the unborn. It was often alleged that this was Eugentics to reduce the black population. So while Whoopi Goldberg is screaming it’s her body and sees everything else as racist, has she actually taken the blue pill when it comes to abortion that was intended to racially impose Eugenics?
Indeed, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsbergbluntly told the truth, when she was for equal rights for women. “Frankly, I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of.” Ginsberg spoke bluntly in an interview published in the New York Times Magazine which was an article on women in the court. So it was not simply a woman’s rights agenda. That was the cover story to hide the real agenda which has always existed – eugenics and to reduce the population of the minorities. Consequently, there are what girls on our staff call Feminine Nazis for they just have taken the blue pill. Others will lash out at me and say this is a man taking a man’s view or that based on religion. They close their minds to the truth for they do not want to admit that they have been manipulated in their thinking.
SORRY! It’s time to take the Red Pill. Today, they are still very much more concerned about population growth but Bill Gates has carried on his father’s concerns about the population growth of the wrong kind of people. Bill Gates has experimented with implanting chips to turn off and on a woman’s ability to even have children. He devotes his money to carry out his father’s alleged prejudice.
People like Whoopi have taken the blue pill and spit out the very argument that Gates has pushed to reduce the population using women’s rights. Gates is tormented at night worrying about all the black babies being born in Africa where he claims the population will double by 2050. Gates has moved to provide free condoms in Africa. Gates was offering rewards for those to create a condom that men would use. Gates selected 11 contenders. In the USA, this effort to depopulate the world has been the marketing of abortion as a woman’s right because it’s her body. Can you also throw your baby out the window because it cries using the same theory it’s your baby? Hence, the debate conjures up religion and those in support of abortion seem to argue there is no God so just F–K off!
The question of abortion from ancient times varied. Under the Persian Empire, it was a criminal act. The Hippocratic Oath from Greece varied somewhat according to the particular translation. Nevertheless, it was unanimously clear:
“I will give no deadly medicine to anyone if asked, nor suggest any such counsel; and in like manner I will not give to a woman a pessary to produce abortion,” or “I will neither give a deadly drug to anybody if asked for it, nor will I make a suggestion to this effect. Similarly, I will not give to a woman an abortive remedy.”
Abortion was practiced predominantly among the poor and slave class in Roman times. Abortion was considered amoral lacking any law forbidding it. Tertullian, the early Christian apologist, described how doctors of the time performed abortions using instruments that would effectively chop up a child in the womb dissecting it. A woman could be prosecuted for having an abortion if she failed to tell the father since the right of an heir was critical in property inheritance.
When Roe v Wade was announced, there was deep concern over the logic of the decision. It was based on an earlier decision Griswald v Connecticut which established the Right to Privacy. That was a law that married people would not use birth control. How do you enforce such a law? Does a police officer have to inspect you before having sex? It was held that such a law could not be enforced and there was the right to privacy. Therefore, Roe v Wade has rooted in that principle aside from if you agree or disagree with the subject of abortion. It is indeed inconsistent as a matter of law that you can mandate vaccines but uphold Roe v Wade and the Right to Privacy. It is entirely two different things to carry out an abortion by a doctor on the theory that the woman has a Right to Privacy.
Clearly, in this era of mandatory vaccines, you are fired if you refuse and cannot travel without one which is in direct opposition to Roe v Wade. The two are completely inconsistent. Honestly, this is becoming so messed up that it is hard to keep track of all the twists and turns. Logic has completely vanished today. I would argue if the court approves the vaccine mandate to protect society then there can be no Right to Privacy concerning your body. I previously argued that in light of Roe v Wade, then vaccine mandates would be also unconstitutional. The court appears to overrule this decision yet leave the Griswold Right to Privacy intact.
This leaked decision was clearly by someone trying to create a controversy to force the Supreme Court to uphold Roe v Wade. Ironically, it will now force the Supreme Court to maintain that position. The draft reads:
Constitution makes no reference to abortion, and no such right is implicitly protected by any constitutional provision, including the one on which the defenders of Roe and Casey now chiefly rely—the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. That provision has been held to guarantee some rights that are not mentioned in the Constitution, but any such right must be “deeply rooted in this Nation’s his- tory and tradition” and “implicit in the concept of ordered liberty.” Washington v. Glucksberg, 521 U. S. 702, 721 (1997) (internal quotation marks omitted)
Roe v Wade being overturned would simply remove the Constitutional Right to kill your unborn child. This will not prohibit abortions, but it will send it to the states allowing them to pass their own legislation. Some states have adopted legislation to govern the “right to die” which is the idea that a person has the right to end their life or be voluntarily euthanized. Eight states have enacted that legislation.
In Texas, once a heartbeat is detected, abortions would be illegal. In Florida, Governor DeSantis’ law, restricts abortion after 15 weeks – when babies are scientifically proven to be able to smile, yawn, feel pain and respond to their mother’s voice.
One email that came in asked:
“if this is about states’ rights then it seems that this upends voting or gay marriage or everything built on the 14th amendment. Is this what splits hastens the fall of the US and perhaps causes it to split as most of the country appears to want to overturn women’s right to their own body and not consequence to the sperm source or circumstances.
Rape is again legal it seems in this instance”
Legally, gay rights and the rape of a woman or an abortion to save the life of a woman are not impacted by overruling Roe v Wade. From a legal perspective, Roe v Wade is bad law. It is inconsistent and in fact when you have mandatory vaccines and mandatory masks and quarantines, then clearly there is no such thing as a Right of Privacy. So for this reason as a matter of law, Roe v Wade should be overruled.
That does NOT mean that all abortions would be outlawed. Let the states legislate the question as they do for just about everything else. While the United States may be one country overall, the cultural differences between California and the Midwest and South are completely different. If someone wants to die because of a disease, they can go to Oregon. If someone wants to have a totally unrestricted abortion, go to California. It is time that there should be fewer mandates from Washington and more states’ rights. We also have the right to live in a culture that meets our personal beliefs. What if those in Washington suddenly approved ancient law and stoned to death those who committed adultery? Would it be even moral to force the entire country to comply with that law even if it offends your personal religion?
What will break up the country is the attempt by either side to impose their view as mandatory upon the whole nation. There are cultural differences throughout the United States. Even people have sent in emails saying that vaccines and who you voted for are just two common issues that arise today in dating. This is reflecting the deep divide and if we DO NOT respect these differences, then the only resolution will be civil war. The very term, “United States”, is not a justification to impose one political belief upon the whole. This is what is wrong with socialism under the Biden Administration punishing some for the benefit of others.
Slavery was an issue that one human being cannot own another. There are those who equate abortion to that same logic – a mother has no right to terminate a child’s life for convenience. Hence Pro-Life argues it is the same principle to be against abortion as it is to be against slavery. These are philosophical questions that are also rooted in culture just as the Persians regarded it to be a crime if a woman had an abortion and the Romans were indifferent.
This is why States’ Rights are critical and federalism must be curtailed to save the United States. You can get grits in the south just as you can get Boston Cream Pie or clam chowder in Boston. There are cultural differences and we better respect that or there is no reason to be part of a UNION. If California allows wholesale abortions and Texas does not, then both must respect the culture of the other and let God sort things out.
Personally, my first son died shortly after birth. To this day, I will never forget that. So while personally, I would never agree to an abortion, my opinion is not sufficient grounds to force others to comply with my beliefs. This is a State’s Right Issue and it is time we begin to respect the fact that there was never to be a dictatorship of the majority over the minority creating an eternal battle to force the opposition to live by their rules. That is the recipe for the decline and fall of every empire, nation, or city-state.
I have created this site to help people have fun in the kitchen. I write about enjoying life both in and out of my kitchen. Life is short! Make the most of it and enjoy!
This is a library of News Events not reported by the Main Stream Media documenting & connecting the dots on How the Obama Marxist Liberal agenda is destroying America
Centinel2012 