"Everything's Closed" (2020 "Anything Goes" rewrite) - YouTube
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Rep. John Clyburn is a self centered threat to our Republic.
THEY ARE ALWAYS SWINGING
BUT THEY NEVER GET A HIT
At the 11th hour Nancy Pelosi –- undoubtedly inspired by James Clyburn’s view that the economic crisis was “a tremendous opportunity to restructure things to fit our vision” dropped a 1,100 page competing rescue bill into the hopper. That proposed bill was so out of line with what had been agreed upon in the Senate and so replete with goodies having no observable relationship to the financial crisis – that it brought all attempts to resolve the crisis to a halt. This disappointed even Schumer who – before Pelosi’s intervention – had expressed “delight and surprise at the bipartisan cooperation” with which Senate bill had been fashioned.
So Nancy — for the moment —finds herself the center of attention as she continues her jihad against President Trump. But that moment seems to be diminishing as even the usually compliant liberal media has turned on her for killing the stimulus bill. CNN – usually a bastion of pro-Democrat commentary –- called out the Democrats for their “political gamesmanship.”
Even MSNBC got into the act and blasted the Democrats for trying to include things in the Senate bill that had nothing to do with the crisis.
And of all things – the NYT – in its headline stated accurately:
“Democrats Block Action on $1.8 Trillion Stimulus Package”.
If— as it now appears (at this afternoon’s writing) that Pelosi is ripping up her 1,100 page alternate bill and signifying defeat – it is yet another ignominious one for her— coming so soon after her failed impeachment effort. To be sure, she will claim that she was trying to appease her very progressive base. But even if that is the case –- one questions her political “smarts”. That so-called base — which seems to have unwarranted influence in Democratic precincts — could not even deliver Massachusetts for Pocahontas in the primary and didn’t even show up in significant numbers to prevent the vaporization of Bernie’s campaign.
OTHER NOTINGS:
Since we have noted here with affirmation that the usually liberal press came down very hard on Pelosi – it is appropriate also to note that Bloomberg News and the Los Angeles Times both reported that the Obama administration depleted face masks during the H1 and N1 epidemic and failed to replace them — though required to do so. While it is not to be expected that this is anything more than a one-day story — it nevertheless presents a small contrast to the drumbeat suggesting that Trump had not done enough in the early days of the virus.
As for Trump – early on and in the face of virtually all expert opinion —he declared our borders closed to folks from China. That act is now considered as having been both courageous and prescient as even Doctor Fauci and the NYT acknowledged that he saved many thousands of lives.
Did Joseph Biden — then still on the campaign trail and seeking progressive votes — react to this act with any understanding or with any sensitivity to what our country was about to face? Oh no — he went right to the jugular—pulled out of his arsenal the progressives most used and abused word—and quickly branded Trump a racist for closing our borders to China. To Biden — that was an act of unabashed racism — not worthy of even a moment’s consideration as to
what might have compelled it:
“this is no time for Donald Trump’s record of
hysteria and xenophobia, historical xenophobia
and fear mongering.”
And not surprisingly, the compliant media fell into place — happily characterizing Trump as a racist (for the umpteenth time). But they were soon silenced by the facts and by the wisdom of Trump’s decision.
Recognizing that they were now silenced by reality, but
nevertheless not willing to abandon their new slant on
Trump’s “racism” — they switched their focus to “Trump’s persistence in describing the corona virus as the “Chinese Corona Virus or the Wuhan Corona Virus.”
Oh—what wails of despair this engendered. What crocodile tears were shed as they apologized for our insensitive President. Who — they asked — but the most heinous of individuals — would affix the name of the country of origin to an invading virus?
But once again our disheveled friends are trapped by the facts—this time showing not only how common it was to name viruses for their place of origin—but that this was the regular practice of their own journalist compatriots. Indeed, your humble reporter counted at least 25 separate instances when reporters for CNN, CNBC, CBS and the NYT—in their normal reporting of the events and without hesitation or embarrassment — described the virus as the Chinese Corona Virus or the Wuhan Corona Virus.
Nor was there any reason for them to be hesitant in including the place of origin of the virus, or to think that their description was novel or a pejorative one. In fact — by last count — at least 17 viruses have been named for their places of origin including: German measles, West Nile Virus, Guinea Worm, Rocky Mountain Spotted Fever, Marburg Ebola, Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS), Japanese Encephalitis, Spanish Flu, Lassa Fever — to name a few.
Surely, the masterminds who directed the media to refrain from further using a place of origin when describing the corrosive virus and to urge them instead to report that Trump’s use of that expression was xenophobic and racist — must have known that their attempt to show that Trump was acting out of the mainstream ultimately would be exposed. But they didn’t and don’t care—because finding any reason for tagging Trump a racist (no matter how thin) was worth the effort as part of the exercise to get Trump.
The conduct in this regard is so obvious as to be childish. Only a few days ago in a conference call with governors made in connection with the procurement of ventilators etc.—Trump said “try getting it yourselves—we will back you up, but try getting it yourselves. Point of sales, much better, much more direct if you can get it yourself.”
In reporting on that call, virtually all of that quote was
cropped and the only part quoted had the president say with respect to the equipment “try getting it yourselves” leaving out that portion of the quote where Trump said “we will be backing you up.” Thus the impression was created that the federal government had abandoned the States which is totally contrary to the facts and to the full quote.
So again we see our progressive friends spare no effort in contorting things so as to make them appear harmful to Trump. They know that their falsehoods will be exposed—but they don’t care because they are not engaged in the pursuit of truth but in accomplishing the death of a thousand knives with each little cut harming the whole.
But the good news is that in the over three years that this has been going on they have had not one winner— not in the big stuff like the Russian collusion and not in the little stuff like this equipment quote.
In short — they seem always to be at bat without ever
getting a hit.
+++++++++
The mass media, lamentably, has become another threat to our Republic either because the new young reporters are incompetent or because they purposefully want to destroy Trump because they are biased or both. (An example below.)
The Truth About the Charge That Trump ‘Eliminated’ White House Pandemic Office Before Coronavirus
By Fred Lucas
A chief line of attack during the coronavirus crisis from former Obama administration officials and leading Democrats is that President Donald Trump shut down a White House office on pandemics that might have stopped COVID-19 from spreading—or at least alleviated the threat.
The attack is based on a 2018 decision by then-national security adviser John Bolton to reorganize the White House’s National Security Council.
But the top National Security Council official at the time of the change stressed that no office was closed.
“We consolidated three directorates into one,” Tim Morrison, former senior director for counterproliferation and biodefense on the NSC, told The Daily Signal in a phone interview. “This eliminated layers in the reporting chain and in the accountability chain.”
In these trying times, we must turn to the greatest document in the history of the world to promise freedom and opportunity to its citizens for guidance. Find out more now >>
The National Security Council is made up of officials detailed from other agencies, primarily the Defense Department and the State Department. Part of the NSC’s mission is to identify emerging threats and inform the president and Cabinet officials about options.
The accusation that Trump got rid of a pandemic office is among the left’s politicized attacks on the White House since the coronavirus outbreak began. The administration assembled a coronavirus task force run by Vice President Mike Pence to address security and medical issues.
President Barack Obama closed the White House Health and Security Office in 2009, according to The Washington Post. But after the emergence of the Ebola virus in 2014, the Obama administration opened the Directorate for Global Health Security and Biodefense as part of the NSC.
As part of a larger reorganization, Bolton in 2018 merged the Directorate for Global Health Security and Biodefense with two other functions into a new Directorate of Counterproliferation and Biodefense.
The move was based on what Bolton believed would be a natural overlap. Not a single staffer lost his position, according to Morrison, now a senior fellow specializing in Asia-Pacific security at the Hudson Institute.
However, former Vice President Joe Biden griped in a tweet referring to the NSC office on pandemics: “Donald Trump eliminated it—and now we’re paying the price.”
The Obama-Biden Administration set up the White House National Security Council Directorate for Global Health Security and Biodefense to prepare for future pandemics like COVID-19.
Donald Trump eliminated it — and now we're paying the price.
30.8K people are talking about this
As Democrats asserted that Trump closed the office and Republicans said he hadn’t, The Washington Post left-leaning Fact Checker column looked into it and did not make a ruling, stating:
One can see the dueling narratives here, neither entirely incorrect. The office—as set up by Obama—was folded into another office. Thus, one could claim the office was eliminated. But the staff slots did not disappear and at least initially the key mission of [the] team remained a priority.
Morrison ran the combined office starting in July 2018.
He told The Daily Signal that if anything, the combined structure had more clout and ability to inform the president than the previous office had.
However, amid the coronavirus pandemic, that hasn’t slowed Trump critics’ politicizing of the matter.
Ron Klain, the Democratic political operative who Obama named as his Ebola response coordinator, said in a video message that Obama’s White House set up a permanent pandemic prevention response office at his urging.
“That office was doing a great job. But in 2018, Donald Trump abolished that office,” Klain said. “So, when the coronavirus hit our country, no one on the National Security Council staff was put in charge.”
Aside from the fact that no related White House office actually was shut down, Morrison noted, the international climate was much different in fighting Ebola.
“During the Ebola response, we had a vaccine and the government of Congo worked with us, not blocking us at every turn as the government of China has,” Morrison said. “Our national security strategy with China has improved in that it’s military, political, and economic.”
Not all calls for restoring a single pandemic office were rooted in politics. In November, a study by the Center for Strategic and International Studies suggested restoring the office before the coronavirus threat was known. It states:
The U.S. government should re-establish a directorate for global health security and biodefense on the National Security Council (NSC) staff and should name a senior-level leader in charge of coordinating U.S. efforts to anticipate, prevent, and respond to biological crises. These actions will ensure that the necessary leadership, authority, and accountability is in place to protect the United States from a deadly and costly health security emergency.
Beth Cameron, who had served as senior director for global health security and biodefense with the Obama administration’s NSC, complained in a Washington Post op-ed wth the headline: “I ran the White House pandemic office. Trump closed it.”
“Biological experts do remain in the White House and in our government,” wrote Cameron, now vice president for global biological policy and programs at the Nuclear Threat Initiative. “But it is clear that eliminating the office has contributed to the federal government’s sluggish domestic response.”
But Morrison, who ran the NSC directorate that included pandemics under Trump, notes that the increased testing for COVID-19 in South Korea is not entirely comparable.
“The U.S. and South Korea are very different. South Korea is a small, urbanized, more homogeneous population,” Morrision told The Daily Signal. “Their ports of entry are much smaller and easier to control.”
The White House’s pandemic office wasn’t eliminated and its functions continue, said James Carafano, vice president for foreign policy and national security at The Heritage Foundation.
Regardless, Carafano contends that the NSC would have a minor role in fighting the coronavirus anyway.
“The NSC doesn’t play a real aggressive role in pandemic responsibility,” Carafano told The Daily Signal. “It’s there to coordinate operational activity. For example, if a hurricane hits, the NSC would have an advisory role, but it would be minor.”
The Federal Emergency Management Agency “would take the lead” in a natural disaster such as a hurricane, he said, while the Department of Health and Human Services would do so in a pandemic.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++Stratfor's Friedman calculates theCoronavirus risk.
By: George Friedman
We live in a world filled with risks, some large and some small. When we step off the sidewalk to cross the street as the light turns green, there is a risk the car to our left will suddenly accelerate and kill us. We see it stopped there, we evaluate our desire to cross the street, and we decide the threat is too small to delay us. Overwhelmingly we are right. On rare occasions, someone gets hit and dies. We do not respond to the risk by refusing to cross streets when cars are on the road. The cost of eliminating all risk is too high, and the probability of the risk materializing is too small. It’s a calculated risk, when the risk of doing something or not doing something is understood. Sometimes the calculation takes months. Sometimes it takes seconds. But it is always there, and you are always analyzing it and making decisions accordingly, rightly or wrongly. Risk and reward are at the center of human life.
And to be sure, humans are not averse to risk. Many cultivate risk as a gourmand chooses from a menu. There is a pleasure in choosing to confront a risk and an exhilaration in surviving it. My wife loves to scuba dive. We learn the mechanics of diving so that the risks are controlled to the extent they can be. The point is that risk is an integral part of life, even a rare pleasure, not solely a burden that we must live with.
Though most of us try to avoid risk, it is everywhere. Life itself is a risk that shares its place with rewards. Every relationship is a risk, for people we meet may carry with them some unknown and even uncontrollable threat. But it is impossible to live our lives alone, because man is a social animal, and even the most reclusive of us must make a decision based on uncertain and poorly glimpsed realities. We cannot eliminate it any more than we can refuse to face it. The best we can do is calculate the risk.
Which brings us to the coronavirus. It causes just one disease in a world filled with diseases, some of which are fatal, and any one of which could strike at any moment. Yet we press on. A big difference is that the coronavirus is new, and we fear new risks far more than old ones. It is highly contagious, but for 98 percent of those who contract it, it will cause a week or two of illness. For those of us older than 70 or suffering from other diseases, it is far more deadly. None of my research suggests Hungarian Jews over 70 are exempt from this calculus.
Our collective solution to combat the coronavirus is to avoid all human contact. We share no comments on the weather or laughter. There is little commonality among us, save the suspicion that this person in aisle three might cause my death. A disease that has a degree of calculability has caused us to fear not only the stranger but also the friend. And now we must keep our distance from each other, by the command of the state.
If this meant that the disease could be eliminated in a certain time, it would be worth it. But the fact that it might subside after we all hide doesn’t mean it won’t reemerge. Quarantine can mitigate but not eliminate the enemy. Our calculation is that we can push off the reckoning by living strange and inhuman lives. Sometimes, when the risk has grown out of proportion in our mind, and the reward seems to be life itself, the finely honed risk-reward ratio loses its bearing. The decision has been made that the disease must be battled at all cost, even if the battle can’t be won; any compromise with the fact that it exists and will not readily go away is considered reckless and dangerous.
And so we risk the consequence. With human contact rendered unacceptable, our ability to produce what we need to in order to live declines to the point of potential disaster. We have established a calculation in which the risk from this disease outweighs all other risks, from wreckage to our economy, to the solace of friendship.
We might hope that our vast medical-pharmaceutical complex will invent something to at least mitigate the disease. But the ethical foundation of that complex is risk aversion. So a vaccine can’t be produced in less than a year. The consequence is a vast fragmentation of humanity, and the threat of an economic failure not seen in 90 years. The avoidance of risk creates the apparent certainty of disaster. The idea of calculated risk, where the risk of harm is measured against the certainty of harm, is absent.
The attempt to shut down New York City is a loss of all proportion. COVID-19 is a nasty disease, but the possibility of being sequestered in a Bronx apartment like the one I grew up in, for as long as it takes, is appalling. And then there is the problem that we don’t know how long “however long it takes” is. But when you don’t know what to do, the most unbearable solutions seem the only reasonable ones.
Avoiding the pain of the novel coronavirus demands isolation and economic disaster. There should be a symmetry between the risk and the calculated solution, even if it is merely a temporary respite.
Perhaps, until the flawless vaccine is created, the calculated risk must be that we will endure this disease as we have others. The Black Death killed perhaps half of the people in Europe’s cities. HIV killed most it infected. Heart disease and cancer will kill many of us. We live with them by taking calculated risks. Some of us may die from the risks we take. Others will not. But a disease that likely kills less than 2 percent of those infected, the old and rarely the children, demands a different risk-reward ratio. There is a possibility that I will die from it. But there is the certainty that the current measures will create deep hardship for my children and grandchildren by wrecking the economy. For me the calculated risk is this: I probably won’t die, and if I do, I will not have to live with the vision of a shattered country, and the shattered lives of children I both love and must serve.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Has the drip, drip virus used against Justice Thomas, Judge Bork, Judge Kavanaugh , President Trump and many others, begun against Biden?
Democrats have perfected this effective protocol. Maybe they should be the ones appointed to find a cure for the Coronavirus.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
No comments:
Post a Comment