Category: Politics

TDS at NPR

In its latest Trump Derangement Syndrome episode, NPR attempts to point out all the things Trump has done wrong this week with respect to the cornonavirus pandemic. Unfortunately for NPR, it just comes off like a whiny child trying to justify their temper tantrum. It’s so obviously a politicized attack on Trump by the liberal arm of the media that I’m not even going to comment on the specifically stupid things that the author has to say. Figure it out for yourself (yes, it’s that bad).

Setting The Record Straight In Another Week Of Trump And Coronavirus

It’s getting harder and harder to take NPR seriously. I hope they one day return to their former standing as a reputable and unbiased news source.

Can you say “Trump Derangement Syndrome”?

Not letting any chance to bash the President go unnoticed, Democratic State Rep. Tavia Galonski [Ohio] has decided that Trump should be tried for “crimes against humanity” for merely suggesting that hydroxychloroquine might be of possible help in fighting the coronavirus pandemic:

Dem lawmaker wants Trump prosecuted at international court for ‘crimes against humanity’

Politicizing a pandemic – now that’s a “crime against humanity”.

The seizure of private property “for the good of the people”

Here’s how the downward spiral begins: The government claims the right to effectively seize private property for the benefit of some to the detriment of others:

Coronavirus bill to ‘cancel rent’ gains support in hard-hit NYC

Once this ball’s rolling, what will stop it? Why not seize people’s bank accounts for those who have no money? Have a spare room? Not any more – you must let this homeless person live with you rent-free. Have food in the refrigerator? There are hungry people on the street; why should you have something to eat when they don’t?

I know it sounds harsh, but the reality is that we help no one by seizing private property for use by another. In addition, it violates core concepts of liberty (true liberty is dependent on personal property rights) that are essential to our free-market economy.

If the government wants to pay the rent of the people impacted by government-mandated shutdowns, so be it. But they should tax the people – all if them, not just landlords – to pay this bill so that the people can decide when they’ve had enough. Effectively taxing the landlords, who as a block have little voting impact and whose industry is highly regulated in NYC, is tantamount to a tyranny by the majority.

Editor’s  note: The sad reality is that if NYC didn’t already have extensive rent control this situation would self-correct. Think about it: NYC landlords under some rent control ordinances are perversely incentivized to evict people (it can reset the rent to market rates). But what if the rents were not government-controlled? What would landlords do then? Evicting a tenant under these extreme conditions might leave the landlord with no tenant at all. Which is better: a partial payment or no payment? I would think that eviction-caused vacancies would increase availability and thus lower rents. Now landlords would have to fight to keep otherwise good renters temporarily burdened under these extraordinary circumstances. This would lead to just and justified negotiations over rent between landlords and otherwise good tenants, by mutual consent to mutual advantage. No government intervention necessary.

The weaponized whistle-blower

It seems that the failed impeachment attempt against President Trump wasn’t completely for naught; it taught the opposition that whistle-blower complaints can be weaponized – even after-the-fact. Here’s the latest example:

HHS doctor says he was removed from post after disagreeing with WH over coronavirus response

The key quotes from this article? Here’s a doozy:

Moving forward, Bright said he planned to file a whistleblower complaint with the HHS Inspector General. He said the Trump administration has politized BARDA’s work and “has pressured me and other conscientious scientists to fund companies with political connections as well as efforts that lack scientific merit.“ [emphasis mine]

So says you, Dr. Bright. I’d like to remind you that it is the administration’s work you perform, not your own. You provide advise and counsel, but so do many others. Your arguments will not always win; to put it bluntly, you will not always be right. However, ultimately it is the administration’s decisions you are tasked with accomplishing – not your own. As a result I would argue that it is you, Dr. Bright, who are politicizing the situation, not the administration.

The truth begins to come to light when we analyze Dr. Bright’s statements. For instance, an example cited in the article related to what Dr. Bright appears to claim as “…efforts that lack scientific merit…” is the administrations statement that:

“Specifically, and contrary to misguided directives, I limited the broad use of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine, promoted by the administration as a panacea, but which clearly lack scientific merit.”

For instance, how exactly did Dr. Bright limit “…he broad use of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine…” ? Wasn’t it Dr. Bright that pushed the FDA to approve the use of these drugs in fighting the coronoavirus pandemic, as noted in this March 28 2020 letter from the FDA in response to his request. Here’s an excerpt from that letter to shed a little light onto the situation:

This letter is in response to your request that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issue an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for emergency use of oral formulations of chloroquine phosphate and hydroxychloroquine sulfate for the treatment of 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) when administered by a healthcare provider (HCP)1 pursuant to a valid prescription of a licensed practitioner as described in the Scope of Authorization (section II) of this letter. The authorized chloroquine phosphate and hydroxychloroquine sulfate are limited to product supplied from the Strategic National Stockpile (SNS) to public health authorities2, pursuant to Section 564 of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (the Act) (21 U.S.C. 360bbb-3).

Frankly, I see no limit here; he’s appeared to have asked only for the standard practice of it being administered by prescription through a licensed practitioner (I don’t recall the administration ever asking for it to be administered willy-nilly; do you?). Note, too, that the authorization is only for these drugs “…supplied from the Strategic National Stockpile (SNS)…”. How does this force Dr. Bright “…and other conscientious scientists…” to fund companies with political connections? No other companies are involved; only the Strategic National Stockpile.

Frankly, I hope people are smart enough to realize what this truly is: the political weaponization of whistleblower complaints for political and financial gain. The mere fact that the whistleblower complaint is being threatened after his transfer to another position destroys – for me – the credibility of his claim.

Swing state shenanigans?

OK, so I’m not upset with this consultant’s statement against Trump. He’s free to say any (idiotic) thing he wants to in America (unless, of course, the liberals object).

What I am upset about is that this (no bid!) contract is for the tracing of people’s movements in the wake of COVID-19. Why in the world would you give personal information on ALL voters to a business operated by a Democratic political consultant??

Whitmer backtracks after COVID-19 contract awarded to Dem consultant who said Trump should ‘get coronavirus ASAP’

At least they are now “backtracking” the awarded contract. But what if the damage is already done? What if, even if they will not be paid per the contract, the data on voters (Democrat and Republican) has already changed hands? How is that fair to the Republican voters in Michigan? And ow can we be certain that this was not the objective all along, given Michigan’s potential to be as a swing state in 2020?

The “appearance of impropriety”, real or not, is sufficient in this case to question Governor Whitmer’s actions. Her motives should be investigated to the furthest extent possible.

China is not a friend

An interesting report on China hoarding PPE (personal protective equipment), such as N95 masks:

Trump admin weighs legal action over alleged Chinese hoarding of PPE

The article argues that China has done this to corner the PPE market for economic and political advantage, but I think China’s motives might be far more sinister. What better way to acquire the needed PPE early in the pandemic for the protection of ones own people than by withholding information from the rest of the world as to the virulence and lethality of the Wuhan coronavirus? An what better way to strong-arm countries into silence than threatening to withhold needed medications that are now manufactured primarily in China?

When will we stop ignoring that China is a communist country whose interests do not align with our own? When will we stop being seduced by their low-cost (and some would argue low-quality) products?

A primate shit-fight at the zoo

Pelosi claims Trump’s failures are the reason for the severity of the coronavirus  pandemic in America:

“As the president fiddles, people are dying. We just have to take every precaution,” she added.

Republicans, of course, blame Pelosi for delaying the corona virus bill:

Graham continued, “She is the one that held up the package in the Senate for days to get the Green New Deal put in a recovery package, so it’s the most shameful, disgusting thing I’ve heard yet, and it needs to stop.”

Meanwhile, Bill de Blasio, Mayor of New York City is ignoring that it was he who told New Yorker City’s inhabitants to “continue living as you have”, during which time his city becoming an epicenter of the corona virus pandemic:

On Jan. 24, de Blasio said New Yorkers should “continue living as you have”; on Feb. 14 he said, “this should not stop you from going about your life … from going out to Chinatown and going out to eat”; and on March 13, he reiterated “we wanted people to go on about their lives.”

Of course, de Blasio continues to blast the President…:

…for the president of the United States to suggest…this might just be a passing thing is just profoundly irresponsible and it’s going to come back to bite him.”

…while demanding others ignore his own past statements and actions on the corona virus:

“The bottom line is none of us have time to look backwards. I’m trying to figure out how we get through next Sunday, and what we do the week after that.”

Frankly, the extent of the corona virus pandemic and its impact on America must have Democrats jumping for joy; a booming economy is not a good climate for far-left progressive candidates. A faltering economy that leaves voters dependent on the government – now that’s a much more favorable environment.

I would not be surprised to find some arguing that the left’s actions to delay the recovery package (for a wish list that they knew they could not obtain), as well as delaying protective social distancing requirements in NYC, might have been designed to bring about such favorable conditions. I know, I know; conspiracy theory and all… but given the left’s actions so far to affect President Trump’s removal, coupled with their insistence that he be a one-term president, is such an idea so far fetched?

Read the articles linked above and make your own decision. I’m not here to think for you; I’m only here to point you towards resources that you might wish to consider.

And why shouldn’t they?

Texas company looking to dock stimulus money from paychecks, relieve their payroll: report

The purpose of the stimulus payouts is to relieve some of the financial burdens associated with workers who are laid off as a result of the corona virus, not to provide a windfall to those who are unaffected.  Why should American workers be rewarded for the corona virus pandemic?

If an American company has employees who are unaffected – and in particular, those who are being paid to stay at home and not work – why shouldn’t companies be able to recoup some of that loss by deducting any payments by the government made in lieu of wages? What if this made it possible for a company to keep more of their workers on the payroll longer – hopefully for the duration of the crisis?

In reality, the stimulus plan was an incorrect response to the pandemic crisis. Instead, the package should have been nothing more than a comprehensive, temporary extension/enhancement to the existing unemployment system. This would have made sure that only those whose jobs were truly affected by the corona virus crisis would receive financial assistance. Those who were unaffected should not be rewarded.