The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) is signed into law by President Bill Clinton. Clinton said he hoped the agreement would encourage other nations to work toward a broader world-trade pact.
“As I grow older, I pay less attention to what men say. I just watch what they do.”
Andrew Carnegie
“If men use their liberty in such a way as to surrender their liberty, are they thereafter any the less slaves? If people by a plebiscite elect a man despot over them, do they remain free because the despotism was of their own making?”
You can’t turn on your TV, flip open your tablet, or scroll your social media feed today without being bombarded by horrifying stories of over-worked nurses and doctors and throat-grabbing headlines about COVID-driven hospitalizations amid the casedemic.
If you are over the age of forty, you have been hearing, in one form or another, the argument that you must vote Republican to keep the Left from turning America into a socialist country. The pitch gets punched up with promises on certain issues, depending upon the audience, but the basic argument has never changed. The reason to vote for the Republicans is to prevent the Left from doing socialisms. About half the time, this is enough to win elections and keep the parties equal.
One of the most common pro-mask arguments I’ve heard over the course of the past year, both from “public health experts” and your average citizen, sounds similar to the following statement:
“If only everyone would just wear a mask, we would be able to crush the virus and end the pandemic.”
This line of reasoning is frequently espoused by lockdown governors and “public health experts.” You see, the problem isn’t them, it’s you, the citizen, we’re told. Wear a mask, peasant. You’re the problem! You’re the reason why the pandemic is still a problem in this country.
Deaths up? Why aren’t you wearing a mask. Cases up? Wear a mask. Hospitals crowded? The problem is that not enough people are wearing masks, they claim.
If there were a Mount Rushmore to memorialize the greatest scientists in US history, Richard Feynman’s face would almost certainly be on the monument.
He was only 24 years of age when he was recruited into a secret research group that eventually became part of the Manhattan Project, joining some of the other most prominent scientists of his age, like Robert Oppenheimer and Enrico Fermi.
Feynman went on to make unparalleled advances in the fields of particle physics and quantum mechanics. He conceived of nanotechnology as early as the 1950s, and quantum computing as early as 1982.
Feynman also won the Nobel Prize, plus countless other awards and medals; and he was ranked by leading scientists as one of the greatest physicists of all time– alongside Einstein, Isaac Newton, and Galileo.
If you’re worried about the capability of government to conduct surveillance of citizens engaged in political assembly and protest, or even just personal activity, then you should be aware the technological capability of government surveillance is about to expand exponentially.
The US Air Force’s Research Lab (yes, it has its own lab) has recently signed a contract to test new software of a company called SignalFrame, a Washington DC wireless tech company. The company’s new software is able to access smartphones, and from your phone jump off to access any other wireless or bluetooth device in the near vicinity. To quote from the article today in the Wall St. Journal, the smartphone is used “as a window onto usage of hundreds of millions of computers,s routers, fitness trackers, modern automobiles and other networked devices, known collectively as the ‘Internet of Things’.”
Your smartphone in effect becomes a government listening device that detects and accesses all nearby wireless or bluetooth devices, or anything that has a MAC address for that matter. How ‘near’ is nearby is not revealed by the company, or the Air Force, both of which refused to comment on the Wall St. Journal story. But with the expansion of 5G wireless, it should be assumed it’s more than just a couple steps from your smartphone.
In one corner, President Trump and his allies claim massive fraud cost him the 2020 election.
In the other, Democrats and sympathetic media allies argue that the vote was free and fair and that the charges of fraud amount to sour-grapes conspiracy mongering.
President Trump and first lady Melania Trump at a weekend rally in Valdosta, Ga., in advance of Georgia’s U.S. Senate runoffs on Jan. 5. (AP Photo/Ben Gray)
Many allegations advanced by the president, his surrogates and supporters have been challenged and some have been dismissed by courts or debunked.
Still, in numerous instances, media fact checkers have not been diligent. They have simply run the allegations past state authorities and other officials who would have orchestrated the alleged fraud or had an interest in minimizing irregularities.
NORTH POLE—Santa Claus’s nice list is said to be run on trustworthy software, safe and secure on an unhackable server under his workshop.
But some are questioning the legitimacy of the nice list after the tally suddenly spiked in the middle of the night, adding over 138,000 kids to the good side of the list.
Some Federal Reserve officials are calling for tougher banking regulations in order to prevent the Fed’s low interest rate policy from leading investors to take “excessive” risks that will create asset bubbles. The Fed is understandably worried that these bubbles will burst leading to another market meltdown. However, the boom-and-bust cycle will not end because regulators stop investors from taking “excessive” risks. Almost every bubble and economic downturn America has experienced over the past 107 years was caused by the Federal Reserve’s manipulation of the money supply. Continue reading “The Crack-Up is Coming”
Much as Chief Justice John Roberts would like to be the finger down the Deep State’s throat to trigger the up-chucking of Mr. Trump from the nation’s gullet, it looks like he won’t get his chance in the new 6-3 disposition of the US Supreme Court. So far, it is Justice Samuel Alito in the lead, preparing a landing zone for the President’s case against the state of Pennsylvania in its shabby-ass attempt to stuff its ballot boxes with iffy mail-in votes. I believe that case is going to be heard, and Justice Robert’s position will be moot.
An overlooked study published by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) suggests that cloth face coverings or masks are mostly ineffective in preventing the spread of the Chinese coronavirus as promoted by public health officials.
The CDC conducted the study, largely ignored by the media, in the U.S. in July and made its findings public in September. It compared 154 “case-patients,” those who tested positive for COVID-19 (coronavirus disease), and a control group of 160 “control-participants,” those who were symptomatic but tested negative.
CDC researchers examined participants who reported wearing a cloth face covering or mask at least 14 days before illness onset, which falls into the incubation period of 2–14 days estimated by the agency.
The researchers found that 71 percent of the case-patients contracted the virus despite reporting “always” wearing a cloth face covering or mask at least 14 days before illness onset, and 14 percent contracted the virus despite reporting “often” wearing one at least 14 days before illness onset.
That indicates 85 percent of the COVID-19 study participants contracted the virus even after either always (71 percent) or often (14 percent) wearing a face covering or mask, suggesting the masks are not entirely effective at preventing the spread of the coronavirus.
Attorney Alan Dershowitz said on Sunday that he believes the Supreme Court may get involved in adjudicating on whether state legislators have the power to pick alternate Electoral College electors who would vote for President Donald Trump if legislatures determine there was voter fraud, even after an initial slate of electors has cast its votes on Dec. 14.
Dershowitz made the remarks in an interview with Fox News in which he was first asked about what he thought of claims made by Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani, who said there was a pattern of fraudulent activity that swayed the election in favor of Democrat Joe Biden.
“There certainly is probably cause for investigating and looking further. Giuliani has made very serious accusations. The question is which institution is designed constitutionally to look into it? Is it the state legislature? Is it the courts? Is the clock running in such a way that there won’t be time to look into this?” Dershowitz replied.
His reference to time running out presumably refers to the Electoral College Dec. 14 meeting, at which electors cast their presidential votes.