Sunday, April 18, 2021

The 10 Worst Epidemics In History

The bacteria yersinia pestis was responsible for the Bubonic Plague, or the Black Plague.

  • Despite popular belief the black plague is only the second largest epidemic by death rate.
  • HIV/AID is one of the largest epidemics ongoing that does not have a vaccine.
  • More often than not, epidemics begin in animals that are then transmitted to humans.

OVERVIEW:  10 Worst Epidemics In History

1. Plague of Justinian (Years: 541-542); Number of deaths: 100 million

2. Black Plague (Years: 1346-1350); Number of deaths: 50 million

3. HIV/AIDS (Years: 1960-present); Number of deaths: 39 million

4. Spanish Flu (Years: 1918-1920); Number of deaths: 20 million

5. Modern Plague (Years: 1894-1903); Number of deaths: 10 million

6. Asian Flu (Years: 1957-1958); Number of deaths: 2 million

7. The Sixth Cholera Pandemic (Years: 1899-1923; Number of deaths: 1.5 million

8. Russian Flu (Years: 1889-1890); Number of deaths: 1 million

9. Hong Kong Flu Years: 1968-1969; Number of deaths: 1 million

10. The Fifth Cholera Pandemic (Years: 1881-1896); Number of deaths: 981,899

Throughout history, epidemics have been responsible for hundreds of thousands of lives lost. The reason epidemics have claimed so many lives is that they are usually highly communicable diseases which reach large populations in very short times. The number of cases of the disease quickly exceeds what would normally be expected within the population. These diseases could be viral, bacterial, or other health events (like obesity). Some epidemics have been so great that they left a permanent impact on the population at the time. Some of the worst of these can be found below.

Epidemics With The Highest Number Of Deaths

Plague Of Justinian (Byzantine Empire, 541 - 750) 

The Plague of Justinian hit humanity between 541 and 542 AD. It was responsible for the highest number of lives lost in an epidemic in history. Estimates believe 100 million people died during this time, which was half the world population. This plague was able to spread so quickly because it was carried on the backs of rodents, whose fleas were infected with the bacteria. These rats traveled all over the world on trading ships and helped spread the infection from China to Northern Africa and all over the Mediterranean. The Plague of Justinian is attributed with having weakened the Byzantine Empire in several ways. The military lost power and was no longer able to fend off intruders. Farmers became sick, and agricultural production declined. With a smaller agricultural base, income taxes fell. Thousands of people died daily at the height of the destructive plague.

Black Plague (Mostly Europe, 1346 To 1350) 

The Black Plague claimed the lives of 50 million people from 1346 to 1350. The outbreak began in Asia and, once again, was carried throughout the world by rats covered with infected fleas. After its arrival in Europe, it spread death and destruction. Europe lost 60% of its population to the Black Death. Symptoms of this disease began with swelling of the lymph nodes, either in the groin, armpit, or neck. After 6 to 10 days of infection and sickness, 80% of infected people die. The virus was spread via blood and airborne particles. This epidemic changed the course of European history. The lack of understanding of the origin of the disease led the Christian population to blame the Jewish community of poisoning the water wells; as a result of this accusation, thousands of Jews were killed. Others believed it was punishment dealt from Heaven for leading sinful lives. The world saw agricultural shortages as in the Plague of Justinian, and malnutrition and hunger were rampant. After the ending of the Black Death, the decline in population resulted in increased wages and cheap land. The available area was used for animal husbandry and meat consumption throughout the region increased. 

HIV/AIDS (Worldwide, 1960- Present)

The HIV/AIDS epidemic began in 1960 and continues to the present day, although the scariest moments happened during the 1980s when the world became informed of its existence. So far, this virus has caused the death of 39 million people. By the 1980s, HIV was believed to infect somebody on every continent. Rare lung infections, rapidly advancing cancers, and unexplained immune deficiencies were rampant among gay men, and at the time, doctors believed it was caused by same-sex activity. A large number of Haitians were also carriers of the virus, which were not named until 1982. Cases were identified in Europe and Africa. In 1983, it was discovered that transmission occurred via heterosexual activities as well. Medicine for treatment was not available until 1987. Today, about 37 million people are living with HIV. For those individuals with access to antiretroviral medication, life expectancy has been extended. Currently, this virus is particularly aggressive in Sub-Saharan Africa, where at least 68% of all global HIV/AIDS infections are found. The reasons for this are many but stem from poor economic conditions and little to no sex education.

Other Epidemics

Other epidemics that have resulted in numerous deaths include the: 1918 Flu (20 million deaths); Modern Plague, 1894-1903 (10 million); Asian Flu, 1957-1958 (2 million); Sixth Cholera Pandemic, 1899-1923 (1.5 million); Russian Flu, 1889-1890 (1 million); Hong Kong Flu, 1968-1969 (1 million); and the Fifth Cholera Pandemic, 1881-1896 (981,899).

Future Epidemics

The next global epidemic is the fear of many public health professionals. Given the ease of mobility and absolute globalization of today, a rapidly spreading disease that could wipe out the population is easy to imagine. The likelihood that this epidemic would come from animals is very high. New infectious pathogens are being discovered every day. Large farms pose the greatest danger because of the constant contact between animals and people; the potential of cross-contagion is increased. It is important that governments and public health officials maintain a strong, vigilant network to prevent widespread diseases in the future.,%20%2020%2C000%2C000%20%206%20more%20rows%20

Saturday, April 17, 2021

If Democrats Pack the Court

By The Editorial Board | The Wall Street Journal

Senator Ed Markey (D-MA), left, and U.S. Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY), right, introduce the Judiciary Act of 2021 aimed at expanding the Supreme Court from nine to thirteen justices, outside the court in Washington, on April 15. - PHOTO: JAMES LAWLER DUGGAN/REUTERS

After they add Justices, the GOP could strip their jurisdiction.

 The media mostly treated President Biden’s announcement of his 36-member commission on the Supreme Court last week as a deft deflection of court packing. Well, not so fast. The Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee and other Democrats introduced a bill this week to expand the Supreme Court to 13 Justices from nine.

Message: The Democratic left is serious about this, and the Biden commission better not dismiss it. Oh, and pay attention, Justices. Congress will remake the Court if you issue rulings that offend progressives.

Republicans are rightly calling this out for the political intimidation it is. But here’s another message for the GOP and the commission to consider: If Democrats do turn the Court into another legislature by packing it, the GOP has the power to limit or strip its jurisdiction.


If that sounds radical, consider what Democrats are proposing. Merely because GOP appointees now hold a 6-3 majority on the High Court, progressives want to blow it up on a partisan Congressional vote. Adding Justices in this way would undermine the Court’s legitimacy with the American public, with perhaps lasting harm, as Justice Stephen Breyer warned in a timely speech last week.

Many Republicans respond by saying they’ll return the disfavor when they next have power and add more Justices. But this concedes the progressive view that the Court is merely another policy-making body. It would turn the Court into a de facto House of Lords, albeit with power, which would put an end to its traditional judicial role of applying the law to cases and controversies.

There’s a better response: Limit the Supreme Court’s ability to function as a super legislature. Congress can do this by limiting the appellate jurisdiction of the Court. This would limit a packed Court’s power by returning it to the original role of the judiciary under the Constitution’s separation of powers.

The Constitution explicitly gives Congress the power to determine the appellate jurisdiction of the federal courts in Article III, Section 2. The Supreme Court recognized this Congressional authority in the 1869 case, Ex Parte McCardle . Justice Antonin Scalia invoked McCardle’s view of jurisdiction in his 2006 dissent in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld and was joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito.

Much would depend on how Congress chose to define jurisdiction to limit judicial policy-making on an expanded Court. One idea would strip jurisdiction over cases seeking to find rights not expressly mentioned in the Constitution. Progressives regularly ask the Justices to recognize new rights that are protected by the doctrine of “substantive due process,” as the right to abortion was. Congress could bar the Justices from hearing cases asking them to use that analysis to invent new rights such as a right to suicide or to a guaranteed income.

Another possibility would be cases that seek to restrict political free speech by regulating campaign contributions. A Court packed by Democrats would surely seek to overturn Citizens United v. FEC (2010), and a Republican Congress could deny the Court’s ability to hear such cases.

Stripping the discretion of courts over immigration decisions would return final authority to the federal agencies created by Congress. This would clear away the judicial interference that has bedeviled immigration policy and contributed to the mess on the Mexico-U.S. border.

Congress could also remove the Court’s ability to hear cases under the 1971 Bivens precedent that recognized implied cause of action in the absence of Congressional authorization. This gave the federal courts more power over federal and state policies, and Justice Thomas has said Bivens was wrongly decided.

Cases challenging the detention of enemy combatants could also get the heave-ho, as per Justice Scalia’s opinion in Hamdan. So could cases seeking national injunctions, which proliferated during the Trump Presidency. And don’t forget cases that challenge such fundamentally political decisions as Congressional redistricting or the Census.


We can think of others, but you get the idea. If Democrats want to turn the Court into a super legislature, then they would run the risk of having a future Congress circumscribe the Court’s writ to narrower and traditional judicial purposes.

It’s true that a packed Court could react to this by using its power to invalidate these jurisdictional limits. But if the Court did so, it would invite other retaliation by Congress using its power of the purse. Perhaps Congress would cease to fund law clerks and Court staff.

We want to be clear that we favor none of this, at least not now. But this scenario is a warning to the Biden court commission to be careful what you recommend. The political intrusion into the judiciary isn’t likely to end with the addition of two or four more Justices. Democrats are playing a dangerous game by toying with the judiciary, and the courts and the country would be the losers.

Friday, April 16, 2021

Today's Pandemic Tyranny Predicted by Harry Vox in a 2014 video.

Investigative journalist Harry Vox unknowingly predicted the future, almost exactly what is going on today -- pandemic tyranny to control America!

Featured in this 2014 video is a chilling Rockefeller Foundation report.


A Letter from a Black American Man Born and Reared in Georgia to Will Smith


Will Smith Photo Credit: TechCrunch Disrupt

Mr. Smith, I am retired Lieutenant Colonel and former Congressman Allen B. West. It has come to my attention that you have decided to move your upcoming movie “Emancipation” away from my home birth state of Georgia.

Just so you know, I am the third of four generations of Black men who served these United States of America in uniform, all of us combat veterans, dating back to my dad in World War II. 

I have enjoyed several of your movies. I believe you are a man of good intent. I want to believe that you did not make the decision to deprive citizens of the state of Georgia the opportunity to earn a living in the movie industry out of spite or a callous attempt to curry favor in the delusional world of cancel culture. Because I want to believe the best of you, I have to believe you have not actually read the new Georgia voting law. And, I truly believe your perception that it suppresses votes of Blacks and other minorities is just a misinformed reaction to the lies being promulgated. 

If you have indeed read this law, I truly want to understand what caused you to take this drastic and damaging action? An action that clearly sends a message to your many fans that this law is anti-American, anti-Democracy, unjust, unfair, etc. None of which, in my objective assessment, are true. 

I have read this legislation. It’s my responsibility to do so, to understand it fully. That said, I don’t see what you see or what you’ve been told. And, as a Black man, I support ensuring election integrity in our system of representative democracy. After all, I deployed to several combat zones to ensure people in foreign lands had that very privilege.

I hope you will afford me the same respect and dignity I extend to you. I hope you do not believe for a minute that I would wish to disenfranchise anyone, nor that I would want to put an undue burden on anyone’s right to vote. As a combat veteran of the United States Army, I swore a sacred oath to defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic. 

As the Chairman of the largest state Republican Party in the nation, I think my analysis of this issue and support for election integrity begs your attention.

This said, afford me the opportunity to speak with you. American to American. Let’s have an actual open discussion about the merits of this case. Let’s look at the issue of constitutionality in our electoral system and shine the light on how this or similar legislation actually makes it hard for legitimate voters to vote. We can look at what measures are in place to ensure legitimate voters can easily have identification. We can, if you choose, have a simple, straightforward discussion about how the poorest among us can use the existing identification they have and how they can easily secure identification if they wish to exercise their right to vote. We can actually look at how many people could possibly be denied the right to vote by being required to show they are legitimate voters. And consider, everyone, including minorities, must present a picture ID to travel anywhere in these United States of America. We must protect our system so that illegal voters do not skew our system. 

We must safeguard the very thing, the right to vote, that was granted to Blacks, and women, as Constitutional amendments. Sadly, Joe Biden believes that “no amendment is absolute.” I tend to believe that even you would join me as being disturbed by that absurd assertion. Clearly, you can see that a warranted distrust of our voting system is causing a festering distrust and division among our citizens. Reasonable people of good faith can look at a problem, see each other’s concerns and points of view, and come to a meeting of the minds. This is how true unity is achieved. It isn’t achieved by rhetoric, rash judgments, hard hearts, stubborn minds, and an unwillingness to talk. Nor is it achieved by the fascistic means of cancel culture, boycotts, and censorship.

The Black men in my family did not act in wars, we fought in them: World War II, Vietnam, Desert Storm, Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere. I am not a racist, extremist, or white supremacist. I am a servant to God and country, and I am prepared to speak with you at any time and at any place. 

Steadfast and Loyal,

Lt. Col. (Ret) Allen B. West
Member, 112th US Congress
Chairman, Republican Party of Texas

Wednesday, April 14, 2021

The mindless mask regime might be here to stay, unless YOU resist it

By David Marcus | New York Post

The mask fanatics -- some of whom hold advanced degrees that make them no wiser as human beings -- can't be reasoned with. STR/AFP via Getty Images

The masks might be forever. We have to come to terms with the fact that a large chunk of the US population will be wearing masks in public for years, maybe even decades to come.

Even if we unquestionably achieve herd immunity, even if 100 percent of the population is vaccinated, even if COVID cases nationwide drop to zero and even if the coronavirus by some miracle learns to communicate in a human language and tells us, forthrightly, “Well, you beat me,” some Americans, especially those in blue metropolises, will continue to cover their faces — and shame you for not going along.

It’s a massively depressing thought.

For more than a year, public-health authorities have urged us to put up with temporary inconveniences, always with the soothing promise that it will be only a little while longer. But recently, NPR cheerfully reported about the growing number of people who see masks as a source of Permanent and Absolute Safety.

Flu and other respiratory illnesses are down this year owing to our ubiquitous face coverings, our state-run news agency tells us, so maybe we should just keep wearing them. Meanwhile, the rapper and Honeywell have introduced a super-duper smart mask that runs $300. The “Xupermask” allows the wearer to chat on the phone or listen to some dulcet music while signaling her virtue.

None of this should give anyone the slightest bit of confidence that the days of ubiquitous mask wearing will soon be behind us.

Yes, masks reduce the transmission of airborne illnesses. You know what else reduces transmission? Staying in a protective plastic bubble in your living room and never venturing into the dirty, filthy, infectious outdoors. And even if it makes sense to wear a mask in tight indoor quarters, it is utterly unscientific and, yes, moronic to wear them outside, and yet blue-state denizens insist.

Sigh. The mask fanatics — some of whom hold advanced degrees that make them no wiser as human beings — can’t be reasoned with.

The awkward moments with double-masked parents at kids’ birthday parties, the ridiculous restaurant rituals, the seething public glares from masked to maskless on our streets — all will continue. They will say it’s but a small price to pay for Health Most Holy and Sacred Safety. Huge swaths of Americans will literally be lost to our sight and recognition.

It’s a sinister phenomenon that runs radically counter to our cultural history.

Many cultures embrace face covering. Western culture, however, isn’t among them. Western culture revels in the human face and form. That is why “Westernization” is so often associated with immodesty in the East (often unfairly, for celebrating the face needn’t entail baring the backside or plunging d├ęcolletage).

A future in which millions hide behind protective masks as they wander around is a steep departure from the Western ideal, rooted in both the Greco-Roman celebration of the human form and the Genesis teaching that God formed man and woman in his image.

The typical conservative reaction — to blame government — doesn’t quite apply here. It’s mainly cultural forces that promote masking in needless places. And private actors have lined up eagerly, with Big Tech actively suppressing science that questions the efficacy of mask-wearing.

Yet we still can resist the phenomenon. We can fight against this faceless future with our own refusals. We can proudly display our lipstick, smile at a passerby and even be understood clearly when we speak. Put simply, we can go back to a normal past, when people’s faces brightened our day instead of terrifying us.

Of course, there is some marginal safety upside to wearing a mask; there always has been. But in the more sensible recent past, most people realized that such small protection wasn’t worth hiding our faces night and day.

We should treat with compassion our fellow citizens who sheepishly embrace the forever-mask regime — but not too much compassion. Those of us who value things like basic human interaction shouldn’t feel shy about mocking those who cling to the facial security blankets or who don high-tech, celebrity-endorsed visage eviscerators. It’s OK to acknowledge that a world without faces isn’t one we want to inhabit.

So let’s bare our faces to the nice, fresh air, pucker and smirk at every available opportunity. Don’t be daunted by the masked masses. Plenty of us want to see your face.

Twitter: @BlueBoxDave

Daunte Wright Warrant; Antifa Joins 3rd Night Of Rioting In Brooklyn Center


Rioters in Brooklyn Center, MN using umbrellas to fend off less-than-lethal munitions in the manner that Antifa does. Tuesday, April 13, 2021, in Brooklyn Center, Minn. (AP Photo/John Minchillo)

Daunte Wright choked a woman and threatened to shoot her if she did not hand over $820 she had stuffed in her bra, court papers obtained by allege.

That is the case that led to a warrant for his arrest at the time he was shot and killed by police officer Kimberly Potter in Minnesota on Sunday, leading to days of unrest.

And online speculation that he did not know there was a warrant out for his arrest is false, has learned. A letter returned to the court for having a wrong address was giving notice of a court date in August and had nothing to do with the warrant.



Daunte Wright had a warrant out for his arrest for attempted aggravated robbery charges after 'choking and holding a woman at gunpoint for $820 in 2019,' court papers reveal

By MARTIN GOULD FOR DAILYMAIL.COM and RUTH STYLES IN BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA, FOR DAILYMAIL.COM can reveal that Daunte Wright (pictured in his booking photo) 20, had a warrant out for his arrest on attempted aggravated robbery charges after allegedly holding a woman at gunpoint for $820 in December 2019

·      Daunte Wright was shot dead by Brooklyn Center Police Officer Kimberly Potter Sunday after he was pulled over for 'expired license plate tags'

· can reveal that Wright, 20, had a warrant out for his arrest for attempted aggravated robbery charges at the time

·        Charging papers allege Wright and a second man, Emajay Driver, attended a party in December 2019 at the home of two women in Osseo, Minnesota

·        The women allowed the pair to crash after they said they didn't have a ride home

·        The next morning, after one of the women went to withdraw $820 in rent money, Wright allegedly held her at gunpoint and demanded she give him the cash

·        His bail was originally set at $100k with orders that he should not contact the victim or any witnesses, refrain from drugs and alcohol and not have any weapon

·        It was revoked in July last year due to his 'failure to not possess a firearm or ammunition' and not keeping in touch with his probation officer  

· has also learned that online speculation that Wright did not know there was a warrant out for his arrest is false

Daunte Wright choked a woman and threatened to shoot her if she did not hand over $820 she had stuffed in her bra, court papers obtained by allege.

That is the case that led to a warrant for his arrest at the time he was shot and killed by police officer Kimberly Potter in Minnesota on Sunday, leading to days of unrest.

Wright was fatally shot by Brooklyn Center Police Officer Kimberly Potter (pictured) on Sunday after he was pulled over for what police said were expired license plate tags

And online speculation that he did not know there was a warrant out for his arrest is false, has learned. A letter returned to the court for having a wrong address was giving notice of a court date in August and had nothing to do with the warrant.

Wright, 20, was shot dead in Brooklyn Center, Minnesota on Sunday by Potter, 48, a 26-year veteran in the Brooklyn Center Police Department.

Police body cam footage of the fatal incident showed three officers approaching Daunte Wright's car in Brooklyn Center on Sunday after he had been pulled over for the traffic stop

She says she mistakenly grabbed her gun instead of her taser. After the gun fired, she is heard on body camera saying: 'Holy s**t I shot him.' Potter and Brooklyn Center police chief Tim Gannon both resigned on Tuesday.

Potter could be heard shouting 'Taser!' several times in the moments before she fired her gun. Immediately after, she can be heard saying: 'I shot him'. It appears she dropped her gun in the aftermath 

Wright was allegedly pulled over for having expired license plate tags, although he called his mother and told her it was for having an air freshener hanging on his rear-view mirror. While checking his details, Potter and other officers learned of the warrant.

When they tried to handcuff him, Wright got back into his car and at that point Potter shot him in the chest after warning fellow officers to get out of the way by shouting, 'Taser, taser, taser.'

Wright was due to face trial on a charge of attempted aggravated robbery - with a possible maximum sentence of 20 years in prison. 

Charging papers say he and a second man, Emajay Driver went to a home shared by two women in Osseo, Minnesota 'to party' in December 2019. At the time, Wright was 19 and Driver was 18.

The women asked them to leave around 2.30 am on December 1, but they said they didn't have a ride and the women - who are not identified in the court documents - allowed them to sleep on the floor.

In the morning, one of the women went to the bank to get her $820 rent money which she gave to the other woman and then left for work. As Wright, Driver and the second woman were leaving, Wright allegedly tried to hold up the woman.

'The three of them were walking to the door to exit the apartment and defendant Wright turned around and blocked the door preventing victim from leaving,' says the report, written by Osseo Police Officer Shane Mikkelson.


CNN Director ADMITS Network Engaged in ‘Propaganda’ to Remove Trump from Presidency


CLICK HERE TO VIEW THE VIDEO:  CNN Exposed by Project Veritas

Tuesday, April 13, 2021

States fight federalism with constitutional carry

By William Haupt III | The Center Square contributor 

Gov. Bill Lee, flanked by House Majority Leader William Lamberth, signs legislation into law Thursday, April 8, 2021, allowing for carrying a handgun without a permit in Tennessee. - Twitter / Gov. Bill Lee

“Where you have the most armed citizens in America, you have the lowest violent crime rate. Where you have the worst gun control, you have the highest crime rate.”

– Ted Nugent

The carrying of concealed firearms in America dates back to the first English settlements. In 1622, “300 short pistols” were delivered to Jamestown Colony. The carrying of concealed firearms was accepted practice in the colonies. Most all 18th century civilians carried weapons on their person. Both men and women utilized creatively styled “pouches” for concealing the "pistols" they carried.

The frontiersmen began the tradition of “holstering” weapons for easy access. The colorful fables of outlaws, bandits, and frontier gunmen fill the archives of the American west. Ranchers, tradesmen, farmers and laborers had a necessity to have access to their guns. They were tools for them. Shop keepers, merchants and professional businessmen concealed their pistols or relied on long rifles.

It was not until the late 18th century that states started limiting the carrying of pistols. In the West towns of Tombstone, Arizona, Santa Fe, New Mexico, Cody, Wyoming, and cattle towns, such as Dodge City, Abilene, and Deadwood, there were ordinances to “check” all handguns in at the local sheriff’s office if they wanted to enter the town.

“Never run a bluff with a six-gun.” – Bat Masterson (Getty Image)

By 1865 after the U.S. Civil War, laws were passed to keep former slaves from acquiring firearms. It was not until Prohibition, between 1920 and 1934, we witnessed a vast increase in federal and state gun control laws. Since the mid-1900s, very few states permitted open carry without a permit.

In 1903, the Vermont Supreme Court ruled in favor of the state in State v. Rosenthal, that a Rutland ordinance requiring people to obtain permission to carry weapons “violated the Constitution and the state laws." Thusly, Vermont became the first permit-less carry state in this nation. A century later, Alaska became the second state to legalize what it called “Vermont carry.” And in April 2010 when Arizona passed a law called “constitutional carry,” it became the catchphrase for all state gun laws.

In 2008, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in District of Columbia v. Heller that the Second Amendment confers the right for all citizens to own guns. But Heller didn’t address whether that right stops at your front door. So “carrying firearms in public” became the focus of debate for gun control advocates at the state level. This has been both a blessing and a curse for those hoping to dismantle the Second Amendment.

When President Barrack Obama paid little attention to the Heller decision and continued to try and pass strict gun control laws, the states reacted. Since the Court ruled in favor of states controlling the carrying of handguns, states seeking protection from federal overreach started reviewing and rewriting their handgun laws. And today, “constitutional carry” is a rallying cry for gun owners around the U.S.

“My gun control policy is, if there's a gun around, I want to be in control of it.”

– Clint Eastwood

The left has led the charge to destroy the Second Amendment since FDR was in office. The further they move toward socialism, the more obsessed they have become with gun control. Since the 2012 Sandy Hook massacre in Connecticut, they have gone ballistic. A total of 13 Democratic-controlled states have passed restrictive gun laws for gun owners while 14 Republican-controlled states have passed permit-less carry, or “constitutional carry” laws, allowing every citizen to carry a hand gun.

A new study from Penn Medicine revealed that gun-related homicide rates in states with strict gun laws have increased since citizens in those states are likely to obtain illegal guns. They found that stricter gun laws might decrease firearm fatalities, but there is no evidence they affect the rate of homicides. The Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence ranked Illinois No. 8 in America for the most strict gun control laws. Yet Chicago crime statistics show shootings and murders up 50% in 2020.

According to a recent Pew Research Center poll, protection tops the list of reasons for owning a firearm. Furthermore, 74% of gun owners believe that owning a firearm is tied to their sense of personal freedom. So why then do progressives continue to assault our Second amendment rights, when the primary reason for owning a firearm is for self-defense? When data has proven stricter gun laws on law-abiding citizens does not cut crime; why is the left so obsessed with gun control?

Vladimir Lenin once said, his vision of the ideal socialist utopia was a society where only the government owned guns. Since the left’s ideal society is one controlled by the government, like Lenin did, they must take away America’s guns to do this.

“Licensing and registration is the perfect way to disarm the bourgeoisie.”

– Vladimir Lenin

Barack Obama’s aggressive push to federalize America and his refusal to acknowledge the Heller ruling led to a 10th Amendment Renaissance in the states. Democrats lost 13 governorships and 816 state legislative seats as the states fought Obama with a vengeance. State legislatures acted quickly to pass laws protecting fee speech rights and gun ownership. The term constitutional carry entered state vocabularies as they passed laws to allow citizens to carry guns without a permit.

The NRA and other gun rights groups argue that the Second Amendment intended to give all citizens a right to own firearms, and to “carry” them. When Obama ignored the Heller decision, these groups appealed to state legislatures to enforce it for them. Since 2008, state handgun laws have changed dramatically. And today, almost every state has enacted legislation to permit carrying of concealed firearms. Many, however, require carriers to obtain a license, along with proof of firearms training.

Barack Obama said, “Elections have consequences.” After the last election, the constitutional carry movement gained momentum. Today, 31 states have passed open carry legislation and many have bills in their legislatures. Tennessee became the 31st state this month. Last year, anti-gun freaks convinced three GOP lawmakers to kill this exact same bill in committee.

"Gun control is like trying to reduce drunk driving by making it tougher for the sober people to drive cars."

– Rand Lennox

In the presidential election of 2016, the media and pollsters crowned Hillary Clinton queen before the polls opened Election Day. Although there had been a “red wave” in states across our nation since the election of Barack Obama, they naively believed their own fabled headlines. They were dumbfounded when Donald Trump was elected. America has proven when people get fed up with federalism, they will fight back in their states to protect their liberties until the next general election.

The progressive socialists’ attempts to dilute the Second Amendment will cost them dearly. Americans know, “to stop a bad guy with a gun, it takes a good guy with a gun.” Nothing is more important to any American than the First and the Second Amendments. Since you cannot protect the first without the second, they will protect the Second Amendment first.

“Americans have the will to resist because you have weapons. If you don't have a gun, freedom of speech has no power.”

– Yoshimi Ishikawa

Monday, April 12, 2021

Forced Masking Is Behavioral Science, Not Medical, And They’ve Been Playing Us The Whole Time

By Scott Morefield |

Source: Erin Scott/Pool via AP

Most people probably think of epidemiologists as simply doctors who specialize in contagious illness, but that would be only part of the story. Indeed, rather than studying and finding cures for diseases, arguably the most important component of the field is increasingly being viewed as something else entirely - the molding of public behavior. This explains why so many who go into epidemiology hold undergraduate degrees in public health, which focuses on the social and behavioral sciences, instead of the more hard-core sciency stuff studied by their medical doctor peers, like biology or biochemistry. 

So when epidemiologists like Dr. Anthony Fauci make pronouncements from on-high, one must always be aware of the motive behind their messaging - to get YOU to do what THEY tell you to do, purportedly in an effort to “stop the spread” of whatever contagion they are fighting. Except, if you do a deep dive into the nature of most of the world’s response to today’s particular disease du jour, COVID-19, you’ll see that little of it ever had to do with actual science or data. Instead, the bulk of it has focused on implementing and forcing the public to comply with certain non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs), like lockdowns and masking, settled upon early on in the pandemic.

While discussing his epic bestseller “Faucian Bargain: The Most Powerful and Dangerous Bureaucrat in American History” with Fox News host Tucker Carlson, radio host Steve Deace described perhaps the most critical 11 days in recent U.S. history: 

 “On February 28 of last year, Fauci wrote in the New England Journal of Medicine that when he analyzed the data for COVID-19, he thought it would be just about as bad as a pandemic-level flu,” said Deace. “And then 11 days later, he went to Congress and told everybody that this was gonna be Captain Trips [the name for the ultra-deadly antigen that exterminates 99.4% of the human population in Stephen King’s “The Stand”], and that’s what shut the country down.”

Citing the known case and infection fatality rates - at around 1.8 percent and .18 percent respectively - Deace described Fauci’s “original cautious and modest expectations” as having turned out to be true. “So why did he abandon those for the fear porn we’ve seen the past year?” he asked. “We must get answers to questions like that … What changed those 11 days, because it changed the fate of America.”

At one point during those 11 days, on March 8, Fauci also gave his now-infamous interview to “60 Minutes” in which he declared that the general public should not “be walking around with a mask.” The next month, of course, the CDC did a complete 180-degree reversal, and Fauci later attributed his earlier stand, which was based on sound science and is still provably correct a year later, to a ‘noble lie’ of sorts, that he was merely saving PPE for healthcare workers. Riiight. As if there wasn’t enough T-shirt material, bandanas, and neck gaiters to go around, or something. The ‘good’ doctor also hilariously claimed that the possibility of asymptomatic spread wasn’t “clear” in March, even though the news-following public, including myself, was well aware of the claim as early as January 2020.

No, the man knew the science then, he stated it, and he was right … then. But, again, something changed. Something happened during February and April/May 2020 that made Anthony Fauci and virtually the entire medical establishment reverse course on how to instruct the public to deal with COVID-19. It wasn’t asymptomatic spread. It wasn’t ‘droplets.’ So what was it? Not being privy to any of their discussions, I don’t know for sure. But I can render an educated guess, and mine has a lot to do with the last section of this NPR article from April 3, 2020, one of the first major pieces to tout mask use as a way to fight COVID-19:

“And for the others around you, it's a warning. ‘It says: Watch out. There's a public health crisis right now, there's a virus going around, we need to be on top guard,’ says [Dr. Michael] Klompas. "I think it can actually be a reinforcer, a reminder of the state of crisis that we face in society."

Another example comes from this May Health Affairs article about mask use during the 1918 Spanish flu pandemic: “The lessons from the 1918 influenza epidemic for local, state, and federal health officials are clear: Masks must be constructed and worn correctly, wearing masks in public must be part of a comprehensive social distancing strategy, masks are essential for certain care-taking occupations, and the psychological benefits of seeing everyone wearing masks helps raise awareness about disease transmission.”

By May and most certainly June and beyond, masks had become a tool for compliance, a totem to help ‘force’ the public to stay afraid and do the things the medical establishment felt would fight the spread of the pandemic. To them, it likely mattered little to nothing whether the masks actually did anything in and of themselves to accomplish this. Sure, they seized on some bogus one-off hairdresser ‘study’ and some perceived, cherry-picked correlation in Kansas counties to give a sciency tint to the madness, but the strategy after that was obviously to press on and ignore or dismiss any data to the contrary. Suddenly, in the span of a few weeks, decades of science was tossed aside and “masks work!” became ‘settled science’ that wasn’t to be questioned.

This could explain much of the mixed messaging given over time by the CDC and WHO. In June, when a WHO official said the much-ballyhooed asymptomatic virus spread was “very rare,” she was quickly made to backtrack and withdraw her statement. I submit that this wasn’t because she was inaccurate, but because the powers-that-be quickly perceived that this information would be a severe blow to those who wanted widespread forced public masking to continue.

More recently, the CDC can’t get its own messaging straight. Should vaccinated people travel or should they not? Can they transmit the virus? Hints and statements that they can’t are quickly suppressed, and my guess, again, is that the shuffling here has far more to do with their cult-like devotion to masks than anything else. If vaccinated people can travel and aren’t transmitting, why should they continue to wear masks? The only conceivable answer is that none of this has ever been about science, only behavior modification. 

Viewing it through this lens, you can see the drama play out in stunning detail in the exchanges last month between Sen. Rand Paul, who aptly pointed out the “viral theater” of requiring the vaccinated to continue to mask up, and Fauci, who gets visibly frustrated and increasingly illogical trying to keep the lid on the deception. Weeks later, when asked by MSNBC why states that have lifted mask mandates, like Texas and Mississippi, aren’t spiking like New York, Michigan, and other places, Fauci admits, “I’m not really quite sure.”  

Indeed, from the ridiculous ‘masked walk of shame’ from the doors of a restaurant past unmasked patrons talking and dining, to the vaccinated being expected to continue masking up indefinitely, to the viral theater of leaders and media figures donning masks for the cameras only to remove them when they think nobody is looking, to the forced muzzling of children despite the fact that they aren’t statistically at risk and aren’t a major transmission source, all the way to a New Hampshire track coach literally being fired for refusing to force his athletes to wear masks WHILE THEY ARE RUNNING, real science and data have long ago taken a back seat to COVID theater.

Bottom line: Medical science is one thing, behavioral science is quite another. And our overlords, led by epidemiologists like Dr. Anthony Fauci, have been deeply involved in behavioral ‘science’ for more than a year. Such an approach, however, cannot long coexist with our Constitution or any freedom-loving democracy. It may be a ‘noble lie,’ but it’s still a lie that’s being used to manipulate the public on a massive, destructive scale.

(Many thanks to former lobbyist and political consultant Nate Gorman of The Gorman Group for opening my eyes to this paradigm.)

I’m still on Twitter, but I’m also working on building alternate platforms (as we all should). To that end, please consider following me on Parler and Gab and friending me on MeWe (I will accept all contact requests). Also please be sure to follow my COVID ‘Team Reality’ Twitter list, 170+ doctors, medical professionals, analysts, data hounds, media, and politicians unafraid to tell the truth about COVID-19.



Liberal Pollster Shreds the Current COVID Panic Narrative

By Matt Vespa |

Source: AP Photo/Tsafrir Abayov

The fourth wave is going to kill us all. We have variants. We have cases reportedly surging. We have vaccines, but even if you get the shot you have to remain inside and remain in total fear…until we get the Soviet-style passport system going. This is our medical expert community, which is really a bunch of bureaucrats peddling their own agenda. Here's the deal, fellas—you can’t keep this game up for a virus with a 90+ percent survivability rate. You can’t especially with three vaccines that are preventing further spread. The states that remain under the lockdown regime were seeing a spike and New York City, the mecca of the US-based COVID outbreak, is seeing the decline in every metric gauging the spread of this virus. This isn’t from me. FiveThirtyEight Nate Silver has been dropping some facts that are undercutting the panic narrative. Was there a slight surge in the Northeast? Yeah—as he noted, it’s plateaued. Michigan is seeing something serious brewing, but that's not a “wave.” The data simply doesn't spell alarm.

Also, the cases seen in New York aren’t nearly as bad as they were a year ago. Hospitalization rates aren’t nearly where they were a year ago. We can thank NBC News for that update. They interviewed doctors who said that the cases they’re seeing are centered on younger people who weren’t able to get vaccinated in the first phases, and the cases are mild. It may not be a picnic for those who contracted the virus, but they can recover from home and gain natural immunity after ten days. This all helps us trend towards herd immunity, which are two words we’re never ever going to hear from Fauci or his band of panic peddlers. 

There is no fourth wave, folks. Oh yeah, Fauci even said so. We have to stop listening to these people whose inability to come to a conclusion about anything…is doing more harm than good. It’s been like this for quite some time. 

I’m still waiting for the “impending doom” the CDC warned about.

Sunday, April 11, 2021

Why Biden is Erasing America

 By Kevin McCullough|

Image via Pxhere.

Not even a full four months into office and President* Biden is desperately attempting to erase America.

Source: AP Photo/Andrew Harnik

This isn’t like his former boss’ “fundamental transformation” style of change. No President* Biden is racing at blinding speed to destroy every vestige of our representative republic.

Which in itself is a bit brilliant because those who aren’t paying attention believe he is incapable of doing anything faster than eating his lunch time jello.

He’s attempting to undo American accountability in elections through his support of HR1. He’s attempting to undo our economic foundations with massive printing (read that: devaluing) of our currency. He’s attempting to destroy free enterprise and job growth with coming massive tax increases. He’s attempting to take away individual liberties with proposed mask mandates, and desired lockdowns. He supports any attempt to end the Senate filibuster—in order to push through horrific laws by the thinnest margins ever attempted. He’s attempting to overwhelm our security at our borders by encouraging 100’s of 1000’s of unverifiable persons of unknown origins to cross our borders without scrutiny nor penalty. He wants the police weakened. He is pledging to take guns away from law abiding owners. And he wants to pervert the justice system so dramatically that the Constitution becomes unrecognizable.

Friday was his latest strategic ploy. By signing what seems as though might be his 500th executive order, he officially commenced a process to attempt to “reform the Supreme Court.”

His basis for why?

Because the judicial system is “out of whack.”

Which I can only presume is very technical language for, “my executive orders appear to be headed for trouble once they are challenged.”

This is a legitimate worry to someone who is illegitimately writing laws as a dictator and expecting the plebs to kneel in obedience. One of his predecessor’s most pronounced accomplishments was placing hundreds of originalist jurists at every level of the federal courts.

Shockingly President* Biden’s former boss had left hundreds of vacancies open, and President Trump plugged the holes in a little over three years.

The left witnessed how quickly the progressive agenda can be stopped in a healthy constitutional republic. It’s why they exploited the CoVid19 crisis to change election standards by any means necessary in swing states. And it’s why they are calling every election reform attempting to bring transparency and integrity back to the process as “racist.”

They literally have nothing else.

They didn’t win the state assemblies in 2020. They lost seats in the House of Representatives. They lost Gubernatorial seats. And they only gained the Senate by relying on the same faulty election system in the State of Georgia that had corrupted the Presidential race only a handful of weeks earlier.

President* Biden and the puppet master who controls him knows it is a short runway to 2022. America has too many checks and balances in the way she was created. Therefore erasing America, by erasing that transparency, accountability, and integrity is the only option to create the top down government controlled dream they’ve always thirsted for.

Short of a violent overthrow, the removal of the checks and balances is the fastest way forward. And unlike Cuba & Venezuela—Americans own in excess of 300,000,000 firearms.

He may talk slow, genuinely appear confused and dazed, but beneath the Mr. Magoo act is a machine keenly aimed at and doing away with everything we hold dear.

It is time that Americans who truly cherish the God-given freedoms we’ve always enjoyed engage. Get active. Refuse to roll over. Defend the integrity of the good.

I pray daily that we still have enough will power to turn the tide.

But no one can say they weren’t warned.

They are attempting it in plain sight.

Every single day!