Although we’re well into our 70s, my wife and I still greatly enjoy riding our motorcycles. We’ve ridden long enough — and known enough other similarly dedicated riders — to appreciate the potential dangers. As the saying goes, when something goes wrong on a motorcycle, you’re “very close to the scene of the accident.” [P]utting the full authority of the state behind forced Covid vaccination represented a form of tyranny. While we understand, sadly, that no precaution can protect against the worst case scenario, we are sensible to the value of trying to protect ourselves against the lesser events. We never venture out of our driveway without the “second skin” provided by leather or Kevlar fabric — we’ve both seen what “road rash” can mean. And we always —always, always — wear full-face helmets. (READ MORE from James H. McGee: Is Walz Vanishing in Virginia?) I’m often appalled at what I see other riders wearing, the men in their T-shirts and shorts, the women sometimes in bikinis. However much they wish to project a “cool” image, to me that simply looks ridiculous. But I reserve my deepest ire for those I see riding without helmets, or wearing some of the ridiculous little devices designed not for protection, but simply to get around laws requiring helmets to be worn. I know a little bit about brain injuries, and I think that riders who fail to take even minimally reasonable precautions are simply idiots. You may then be surprised to discover that I am also adamantly opposed to helmet laws. As I said, those who fail to wear good helmets strike me as idiots, but I believe that the proper solution lies in persuasion, not in legislation. I’ve heard all the arguments, many times over. Someone who survives an accident with severe brain injuries becomes a burden on the health care system, both practically and financially. That burden on the taxpayer gives the state an obligation to protect them from themselves. The same argument can be heard about many other activities. Extreme sports, for example, such as mountain climbing, or even less extreme sports such as skateboarding or snowboarding, or skydiving. Skiing gets a pass, it seems, partly because it’s so widely popular, partly because it’s chic, still regarded as the province of the “beautiful people,” or at least the wannabes. Nonetheless, the skiing accident deaths of the famous, Sonny Bono, for example, or Natasha Richardson, sometimes provoke a spasm of calls for “enhanced safety requirements.” One need hardly add that the same goes for activities such as smoking; noxious, to be sure, deeply unhealthy, but still, one would think, a matter of personal choice, at least to the extent that one controls for the effects of second-hand smoke. Yet one now reads of measures proposed — and then rejected — in New Zealand, to effectively ban all cigarette purchases, starting with young adults and carrying forward, with a rolling requirement, until all cigarettes have been banned. A similar measure, even now, seems to have captured the support of the new Labor government in the U.K. Prohibition, then, is precisely the right word, even though it’s association with the notoriously failed alcohol prohibition in the 1920s makes America’s current crop of busybodies squeamish. That too was promoted as society looking out for those incapable of looking out for themselves. But the impulse isn’t simply about forbidding certain activities. Our recent experience with Covid serves as an object lesson in the active imposition of “health and safety” mandates. The most visible of these was masking, widely required despite the lack of evidence that it made a difference in the spread of the disease. The most notable of these active requirements, however, was vaccination. One doesn’t have to be an anti-vaccine fanatic — I’m not — to recognize that putting the full authority of the state behind forced Covid vaccination represented a form of tyranny, one scarcely justified by the unproven efficacy of the shots. The same with the lockdown regime, with all its destructive effects, above all on schoolchildren. The ever-insightful C.S. Lewis once observed, “Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies…. those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.” Busybodies and the State The curse of our times, and very much the curse of our current politics, lies in the rise of these moral busybodies, and, above all, of their insistence on capturing the powers of the state for the purpose of imposing their beliefs upon those around them, filled with the conviction that they act for the good of all, without allowing the rest of us to decide for ourselves. We see this from the climate change fanatics — can there be anything more terrifying than a world obedient to the fever dreams of Greta Thunberg and her ilk? We see it from those P.J. O’Rourke famously christened as “safety Nazis.” We saw it with Fauci and his many acolytes. Most recently, we’ve seen it in the sad tale of Peanut the Squirrel. Peanut, a pet squirrel and his companion, a pet raccoon, had become cherished internet figures. But then, acting on an improbable rumor that the raccoon might have been rabies infected, the New York State health authorities invaded their owners’ home, conducted a five hour search that would have done justice to a raid on a meth lab, and then ultimately took the animals away and killed them. (READ MORE: Hurricane Outrage: Where is Harris?) This is the health and safety busybody impulse elevated to sheer madness. But Peanut and his friend may not have died in vain. Their martyrdom has now captured the internet, and has even become an election theme. In the admittedly unlikely event that the Democrats get a political comeuppance on Tuesday in New York State, one might reasonably believe that the state-sanctioned murder of Peanut will have played a part. We’ve already seen widely-distributed internet memes featuring the Gadsden “Don’t tread on me” flag with the coiled snake replaced by the image of a squirrel. Rest in peace, Peanut — this morning I pray that your sacrifice will not have been in vain. James H. McGee retired in 2018 after nearly four decades as a national security and counter-terrorism professional, working primarily in the nuclear security field. Since retiring, he’s begun a second career as a thriller writer. His recent novel, Letter of Reprisal, tells the tale of a desperate mission to destroy a Chinese bioweapon facility hidden in the heart of the central African conflict region. A forthcoming sequel finds the Reprisal team fighting against terrorists who’ve infiltrated our southern border in a conspiracy that ranges across the globe. You can find Letter of Reprisal on Amazon in both Kindle and paperback editions, and on Kindle Unlimited.       The post Peanut the Squirrel and the Coercive State appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

The “garbage controversy” of this campaign’s final days embodies the difference between Republicans and Democrats. Far from a parallel, it highlights the separation between unscripted and scripted across an ideological chasm. Hidden beneath their relativism, Democrats, Left, and establishment media have exploited incidents to construct false narratives and advance extremist policies. They have vilified Trump from the beginning and have continued to do so, despite two assassination attempts on him. On Sunday October 27, Donald Trump held a sold out rally in New York’s Madison Square Garden.  It featured celebrities like Elon Musk, Hulk Hogan, Tucker Carlson, and RFK Jr.  However, it was a comparatively obscure standup comedian by the name of Tony Hinchcliffe who got the establishment media’s biggest coverage, when during his routine he called Puerto Rico a “floating island of garbage in the middle of the ocean.”  Trump and his campaign distanced themselves from the remarks; so too, numerous elected Republicans. (READ MORE from J.T. Young: Americans’ Justified Media Mistrust) Two days later, at the same time Kamala Harris was giving a “unity speech” on Washington’s Ellipse, President Biden spoke on a campaign call hosted by Voto Latino, “the nation’s premier Latinx voter registration organization.”  During his call, Biden said “the only garbage I see floating out there is his supporters.” Harris and other vulnerable Democrats sought to distance themselves from the President’s remarks — White House spokesperson, Karine Jean-Pierre, even tried to distance Biden from them. The establishment media would have us believe that the two sets of remarks cancel each other out, just the latest examples of a coarsening of America’s political debate.  However, even in the Left’s revisionary relativism, the two are far from equivalent. Hinchcliffe’s remarks were dumb.  Period.  And it was dumb to have a standup comic who works on the edge at a political rally. Standup comics riff, following their feel of their material’s flow.  Trump’s campaign should have seen the potential for danger and chosen better and Trump should have stepped hard on the comments. That Hinchcliffe’s comments, out of all the others uttered by others, were seized on is also not a surprise.  Democrats, the Left, and the establishment media were looking for something to seize on.  After all, they are losing and are desperately looking for something, anything, to change this race’s trajectory. Trump’s team shouldn’t have made it easy for them. Yet, in the end, this was a standup comic. In contrast to Republicans’ standup comic, the Democrats’ malefactor is the President of the United States.  Biden is a professional politician and has been for over half a century. He is America’s highest elected official. Biden had 48 hours to prepare his remarks, and he clearly prepared off Hinchcliffe’s “garbage” line.  Biden’s remarks called “his supporters” — not Trump himself — “garbage.” That is half of America.  An America Biden was elected to represent. Nor was Biden’s remark an isolated one.  He had said about Trump “we gotta lock him up” not long before. There is no equivalence here. What there is, is a pattern — a Democrat, Left, and establishment media pattern — that has been followed throughout this campaign, and accelerated lately.  It is one of calling Trump a fascist and likening him to Hitler.  Far from unscripted, it clearly is their script. Kamala Harris has said it — and she has doubled down on it.  Numerous elected Democrats have echoed it. They have vilified Trump from the beginning and have continued to do so, despite two assassination attempts on him. Nor do the precedents for Biden’s “garbage” comment end there. They go back years. They go back to Hillary Clinton’s line about “basket of deplorables” in 2016. They go back to Barack Obama’s comments about “cling[ing] to guns, religion, or antipathy toward people who aren’t like them” years before that. Democrat Intolerance for the ‘Other’ There is an inescapable Democrat antipathy toward people who aren’t like them,” who do not think like them, and who will not support — or at least acquiesce — to them and their policies. It is equally impossible to not see the parallels to their Cancel Culture in broader society. Democrats, the Left, and the establishment media simply see their opponents this way. The elitism is equally unmistakable, because they clearly look down on them: “garbage” and “deplorables.” This pattern also extends beyond politics to policies. Democrats and the Left have habitually exploited incidents, constructed a narrative from it, excluded other interpretations, and pursued policies to address their narrative.  Defund the Police, Sanctuary Cities, a radical DEI agenda, an extremist environmental onslaught — all just some among many examples. (READ MORE: Americans’ Justified Media Mistrust) Far from a distraction, the campaign’s “garbage controversy” is a revelation. It illustrates clear distinctions: unscripted versus scripted, unrepresentative versus elected representatives, unintended versus premeditated. For Democrats, Biden’s comment was more faux pas than fault: his sin being one of candor. It extends throughout the Democrats, the Left, and the establishment media: seizing on an anomalous incident that Americans don’t condone, to enforce their narrative and impose pervasive policies that Americans oppose. J.T. Young is the author of the upcoming book,Unprecedented Assault: How Big Government Unleashed America’s Socialist Left from RealClear Publishing and has over three decades’ experience working in Congress, Department of Treasury, and OMB, and representing a Fortune 20 company. The post What the ‘Garbage Controvery’ Says About Democrats appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

Former president Donald Trump says Elon Musk may serve as the “Secretary of Cost-Cutting,” and Musk foresees a Department of Government Efficiency under his command. The SpaceX boss might dial it back to a previous attempt during the Carter Era. Like government employees in general, SES bosses enjoy an array of special protections against dismissal. The victor over Gerald Ford in 1976, Carter tackled inefficiency in the federal bureaucracy with the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978. According to Office of Personnel Management, the “keystone” of the Act was the Senior Executive Service, (SES) established to “ensure that the executive management of the Government of the United States is responsive to the needs, policies, and goals of the Nation and otherwise is of the highest quality.” SES leaders “possess well-honed executive skills and share a broad perspective on government and a public service commitment that is grounded in the Constitution.” The SES bosses also “serve in the key positions just below the top Presidential appointees. SES members are the major link between these appointees and the rest of the Federal workforce. They operate and oversee nearly every government activity in approximately 75 Federal agencies.” Taxpayers had a right to wonder how it worked out. “When Jimmy Carter set up the Senior Executive Service nearly three years ago, it was touted as the ideal place for the government’s top managers, an elite niche where Uncle Sam’s best and brightest would toil at greater risk but with the promise of greater rewards,” wrote Karlyn Barker of the Washington Post in October, 1981, “but it hasn’t worked out that way.” Many SES members complained about pay, promotions, and the bonus system. On the other hand, Barker provided little assessment of SES job performance that would merit higher pay. The SES represented less than one percent of the federal workforce but between 2008 and 2011 SES bosses received more than $340 million in bonuses, on top of annual salaries that ranged from $119,000 to $179,000. The bonuses were not subject to budget cuts and SES influence continued to surge. According to a 2015 report, the SES boasted 217 members in the army, 318 in the Navy, 179 in the Air Force, 473 in the Department of Defense, 594 at Homeland Security, and a full 786 at the Department of Justice. “All other” federal agencies accounted for 1,785 SES members, with a grand total of 7,791. In his 2015 executive order, “Strengthening the Senior Executive Service,” President Obama set out to “facilitate career executive continuity between administrations.” By May 31, 2016, agencies with 20 or more SES positions were to develop a plan “to increase the number of SES members who are rotating to improve talent development, mission delivery, and collaboration.” And so on, all without any long-term assessment of job performance. For all but the willfully blind, the SES had become another bureaucracy, but hardly the only evidence of government waste, fraud, and abuse. John C. Beale, once the highest-paid employee at the Environmental Protection Agency, told his bosses he was a CIA spy working in London, India, and Pakistan when he was actually holed up at his vacation home. Beale pulled off this ruse for 20 years, performing little if any work. The fraudster continued to draw his government paycheck and retention bonuses even after he retired. SES Employees Are Still Government Workers Like government employees in general, SES bosses enjoy an array of special protections against dismissal. Elon Musk would have a hard time firing them, but the SpaceX mogul may not get the chance. Donald Trump would have to win the election, hardly a done deal, and there’s more to consider. The SES operates in 75 government departments including the Department of Homeland Security, which now controls the United States Secret Service, before 2003 part of the Treasury Department.  As it turns out, the SES also deploys personnel in the Secret Service, responsible for protection of the president, and since the assassination of Robert F. Kennedy in 1968, presidential candidates as well. At a July 13 rally in Butler, Pennsylvania, the Secret Service failed to prevent a 20-year-old with no tactical experience from scaling a rooftop and unleashing eight shots, one wounding former president Trump, and other shots killing one attendee and wounding two others. Not much SES efficiency was on display, but government agencies have succeeded in making the election season more exciting. READ MORE from Lloyd Billingsley: California’s Identity Problem California vs. the Space Force Lloyd Billingsley is a policy fellow at the Independent Institute in Oakland, Calif. The post Government Efficiency Is a Tall Order for Musk appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

In late October, 37 nations met in the Russian city of Kazan, capital of the Tartarstan Republic, on the banks of the Volga River. Russian president Vladimir Putin hosted this summit of BRICS, an alliance established in 2009 originally including Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa — but now numbering ten nations including  those who have joined or been invited to do so. This has added Iran, Egypt, Ethiopia, and the U.A.E.; Saudi Arabia has hesitated to ratify its membership. BRICS represents another anti-Western block similar to China’s vaunted Belt and Road Initiative announced in 2013 to create a command and control system run by Beijing.  We can expect to hear more from BRICS as the member nations seek a countervailing force against the West. The purpose of BRICS is to collaborate on economic and diplomatic affairs; circumnavigate sanctions imposed by the West; reduce the influence of the U.S. dollar and set up an alternative payments system; and end the dominance of certain Western institutions. With the exception of Russia, the BRICS countries generally constitute part of what is known as the Global South. (READ MORE from Frank Schell: From Harris, America Needs Action, Not Pablum)  BRICS is borne of resentment by emerging economies of their former colonial rulers and Western dominance of the prevailing rules for trade and investment designed after the end of World War II. Further, BRICS nations are disenchanted with Western dominance of the clubby G7, IMF with its stringent medicine, World Bank, and G20 —  believing that the needs of developing economies are not being sufficiently recognized by these multilateral bodies.  The ten countries (including Saudi Arabia) represent one-fourth of world GDP, 40 percent of world trade, 40 percent of crude oil production and exportation, and half of the world’s population, according to the Boston Consulting Group.  While united in their view of challenging the West, they are by no means overtly supportive of Russia’s war on Ukraine. There is much media hype about BRICS, particularly the summit in Kazan which allowed President Putin to demonstrate his appeal and stature among several dozen countries, proving that he may be persona non grata in the West, but not in much of the rest of the world. Questions continue to swirl around the value added of BRICS, and whether it can disrupt Western economic influence? The answers are nuanced, but in general BRICS has potential for diplomatic leverage in world forums, and it could, if it chose to do so, embargo some strategic minerals for the technology and defense industries of the West. However, the financial leverage of BRICS is uncertain at best — and various members of BRICS are dependent upon trade and investment with the West. Further, to have credibility BRICS would need a lender of last resort to intervene should there be a liquidity crisis. Some Western central banks, however, do have currency swap lines with the People’s Bank of China to support trade and to constitute a stabilizing force.  First, there is no question that BRICS members can assist each other to evade Western sanctions. India, for example, ranks second in the world after China in oil importation, with imported oil constituting nearly 90 percent of its total requirements in 2023. Currently, India imports about one-third of its oil from Russia by one estimate, and India has enjoyed discounts for these purchases. But India, like other countries, can buy discounted Russian oil without being a member of BRICS, so there is no value added of this loose alliance in terms of evading oil sanctions. Second, there is the question of political risk, generally defined as the availability of foreign exchange and the potential for decrees, fiats, confiscation of private property and direct investments, and civil commotion. To the West, BRICS hardly enhances the attractiveness of participating countries with regard to their cross-border risk profile, which is unchanged by membership.  Nonetheless, the BRICS nations are free to invest and trade among themselves, assuming that product quality, price, and after sales service are competitive with the West. For many BRICS countries, this competitive equivalence would constitute a leap of faith.  Third, there is the initiative to undermine the U.S. dollar, which represents almost 90 percent of transactions denominated in foreign exchange (FX) and nearly 60 percent of global FX reserves, according to the Atlantic Council. Few currencies are in a position to challenge the U.S. dollar, with the possible exception of the Chinese Yuan over the long term. Not only that, the U.S has substantial influence over the Society for Worldwide Financial Transactions (SWIFT), which is headquartered near Brussels. SWIFT constitutes the backbone of international currency transfers — settlements can be easily impeded through sanctions.  The value of BRICS currencies is set by a central bank, or linked to a single or group of hard currencies. The BRICS currencies are generally not traded much outside the countries of issuance, and accordingly there is no free market reference for their value. Western exporters are not about to accept these so-called soft currencies in payment of trade, and they will continue to require the U.S., Canadian, or Australian dollar, pound sterling, the Euro, Swiss Franc, or Yen. Moreover, BRICS countries will continue to welcome hard currencies in incoming direct investment for obvious reasons.  (READ MORE: India’s Modi Wins a Third Term — But No Majority) In “Fed Notes” published last year, the Board of Governors Federal Reserve affirms the stable dominance of the U.S. dollar over the past 20 years in terms of trade, capital flows, and currency reserves — the U.S. dollar continues to be an attractive store of value.  The Fed is quick to note that the dollar has declined from 71 percent to 58 percent of reserves since 2000, with the Euro now at 21 percent and attractive to Europeans and to China, with some smaller hard currencies added to official holdings. However, since world trade has nearly quadrupled since 2000 according to the German data firm, Statistica, at 58 percent the dollar has commanding scale.  Nonetheless, in its “Notes,” the Fed points out several long-term factors that could diminish the role of the U.S. currency — but with little impact by BRICS.  Indeed, the use of sanctions exposes countries with U.S. holdings to asset freezes, for example. However, if our European allies and Japan cooperate, as they have with regard to Russia, our adversaries will have limited alternatives to Western currencies. Further, increased European integration could limit the use of the dollar. Thus far we have seen currency integration and some effort toward political integration, but banking is still predominantly national in Europe. Moreover, the ascent of China could be a long-term factor. However, reserve currency status requires scale of capital, free trade and capital accounts, credibility, and adherence to the rule of law, without fear of central bank or treasury intrusion — China does not qualify by these accepted criteria.  Fourth, the Fed Notes acknowledge the rise of cryptocurrencies, although world monetary authorities have expressed skepticism for years. (READ MORE: Facebook’s Cryptofantasy Is a Crypto Setback and Facebook’s Cryptofantasy).  We can expect to hear more from BRICS as the member nations seek a countervailing force against the West.  While we will see more diplomatic initiatives and possibly pressure from BRICS in the United Nations and other forums, the economic and financial effects of this loose alliance are likely to be modest.  Frank Schell is a business strategy consultant and former senior vice president of the First National Bank of Chicago. He was a Lecturer at the Harris School of Public Policy, University of Chicago and is a contributor of opinion pieces to various journals.   The post Separating Fact From Hype About BRICS appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

Dr. Hazel Parcels protocol 32 oz of DISTILLED Water1 tsp Baking Soda1 tsp Celtic Sea SaltDrink 1 cup every 2 hours It puts OXYGEN back in the body that is taken out by all radiation caused by WiFi and the frequencies we are bombarded by. Kills Parasites. pic.twitter.com/MGuDLWRtxZ — Duchess Delusional (@MegMissedMark) November 3, 2024

Attempted Theft of The 2024 Election Now In Progress, Warns Trump! Must Watch/Share Live Sunday Edition of the Alex Jones Show It Is Critical That The Deep State’s Plan To Throw The Election Into Disarray Is Exposed. Watch & Share This Link NOW! https://t.co/WxOlOHHenB — Alex Jones Network (@AJNlive) November 3, 2024

Hey @johnpodesta — can you please explain why the police sketch of these two men wanted for the abduction of Madeleine McCann look identical to you and your Satanic pedophile brother, Tony Podesta, who has a “torture chamber” according to your own e-mails? https://t.co/94JhExflcT pic.twitter.com/gRFUPS6pQt — LIZ CROKIN (@LizCrokin) November 3, 2024

by Mac Slavo, SHTF Plan: Lead exposure is a serious health concern, especially for children, whose developing brains are drastically affected by the heavy metal. However, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is going a step too far in regulating the heavy metal on private property. According to new rules released by Biden’s EPA — homes, apartment buildings, […]

from Sputnik News: MOSCOW (Sputnik) – BRICS countries have already drafted preliminary recommendations for alternative payment mechanisms that allow for developing safe and reliable systems, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said on Saturday. “This was on the agenda of both our summit in Kazan and the meetings of our finance ministers and central bank heads […]

from vivafrei: TRUTH LIVES on at https://sgtreport.tv/