Nurse mutiny during Covid in Houston has brought the health care system to breaking point

Nurse mutiny during Covid in Houston has brought the health care system to breaking point.

“The combined increase in volume from (COVID and) existing normal volume (and) nursing shortage has made this a terrible disaster at every ER and hospital in the city of Houston,” the physician wrote, according to the Chronicle.

Comment:

From what I hear, it isn't just nurses. There are a lot of other medical workers who left because they get better pay elsewhere. It isn't just Covid, in other words.

Mutiny During the Covid bounty

Civil disobedience can end vaccine tyranny?

Comment:

The hospitals rake in covid cash while they underpay hospital staff and demand the jab.

War crimes

Protester says mandated jab violated Nuremberg code.

Comment:

NIH says that the safety tests didn't pass muster, either.

How the commies do it

It is a bit frustrating to keep offering better arguments about the issues of the day than the commies, only to see them walk off as the winner. How do they do it? Little Jebbie Bush seeks to emulate them, but it would be better if somebody would actually defend what those who claim to be for long-standing traditions, are wont to do. Now that the "War on Terror" is over, and now the "War on Americans" has begun, it may behoove us to figure it out while we still have an opportunity.

Someone once said that politics is downstream from culture. Or is it the other way around? Whatever way it is, the commies have seized the culture. How does the word "culture" get defined in this context? It is the combination of the Judeo-Christian ethic and Capitalism. There are those who say that the commies are now running the Catholic Church. As for the rest of the non-Catholics, well, they just follow the secular side of things. As for economics, we have been slipping into socialism now for the last nearly 90 years. It seems to thrive upon loose money and big spending. One feeds upon the other. It fosters dependence upon the government, with the government taking over more and more control over our lives.

Even Hitler didn't try reformation of the Church. But the commies have tried to rub them out. Now they try to pretend to be Christian while they destroy it.

The foregoing is a tactic described by Gramscii, who said the way for communism to prevail was to claim the high ground of the culture. That exactly what they have done in just about all areas. Even areas that are putatively capitalist, they have managed to get control of the corporate boards. Nothing appears to have escaped their grasping hands. Big spending politicians and big corporations have a symbiotic relationship these days. Neither want any kind of accountability at all, and for all practical purposes, there isn't any anymore.

Even if politics is downstream from culture, communism still isn't a popular thing. In order to keep control over the population, they employ tactics to keep any opposition cowed. One of those has been called the politics of shut-uppery. The way shut-uppery is achieved is via the use of magic words, symbols, and phrases that leave the opposition speechless and powerless. For example, Barack Obama was called the "magic Negro". Nothing could be said against him, or the magic word "racist" would be unleashed. Commies love these magic words. Other examples are "science", "rule of law","nobody is above the law","democracy", and "freedom". The use of the magic words and phrases doesn't require sincerity. The whole point of it is to crush all dissent, and ultimately all opposition to their plans.

A lot of the foregoing may be summed up as Alinsky did in his Rules for Radicals. Those who follow politics will be familiar with Alinskite tactics described in his book, which is dedicated to Satan, by the way.

When these fail, more drastic action may be required. It seems that political violence is now being used to drag a once freedom-loving country into the poop hole of communism. Nobody would would freely choose a band of thugs threatening to kill you. In a normal society, the thugs would be jailed, but our society has fallen from the normal state in an increasing steep spiral downward to the "anthill" - thanks to our freedom-loving, law-abiding, reasonable and equitable so-called leaders.

Of course, when all else fails, elections can be stolen. If that fails too, then things could get really interesting. We may be headed quickly in that direction.

Commies can be beaten, but it take somebody who has the will to do it. Reagan did it. As Reagan said, the Soviet Union was the focus of evil in the modern world. Now the commies are striking closer to home. Is there going to be somebody who takes up the banner and frees us from this plague of human locusts? Somebody once said that for evil to succeed, all it takes is for good men to do nothing. Still waiting for somebody to show up.

Enduring Freedom

Enduring Freedom: Wikipedia entry

The Wikipedia entry says it was the name for the Global War on Terror. It lists all of the countries that participated, and lists it as a victory for the Taliban. It is hard to see that this "war" was anything like it was portrayed to be, starting with the name it was given-- "Enduring Freedom", and the "Global War on Terror". Obviously, the results are not positive, that much is quite true.

With respect to "Enduring Freedom", the "free world" is in perpetual lockdowns. If it was to fight for freedom, it certainly doesn't feel like we've won, but we've really lost big time.

It was only superficially a "war". That part was over rather quickly. The idea behind it was that somehow freedom was to be defended by teaching the Afghans how to play nice.

If the idea was to prevent future terror attacks, it cannot be seen as a success either. The Taliban is a lot stronger than it was when it started. They have more and better weapons. If they want to harbor another Osama bin Laden after executing another big attack on civilization, what would stop them this time?

The operation failed in Afghanistan, and in now being tried in American cities. There is to be no more war on crime, and the crooks are to be treated nice because that is all they've lacked in their past. No more cops to beat up on them. Instead, we are to beat up on the people who have played by the rules, who expected the rules to be followed by those who are in charge of the public trust. Instead, "leaders" wrecked everything HERE, and failed to build anything of value in Afghanistan. It was as if the whole idea was to invalidate American civilization in the first place. Throw in a little CRT on the side, and the picture should be complete.

The guys who said after 9-11-2001 that "we had it coming" are now the ones who running this self-immolation. America's response to being attacked was to act as if we did it to ourselves. Well, somebody did it alright. But if this most recent election was truly stolen, it wasn't the people who made this choice.

We need to find out who really won last November. Is this truly being chosen from among the people, or is something being imposed upon us against our will?

No accountability

No accountability

There will be endless numbers of post-mortems with respect to the Afghan debacle. Whatever the debacle is supposed to signify, it should have some accountability attached to it. If not, how can anything good come from it?

In this system, there is an opportunity to have accountability. That opportunity is not being realized. In fact, accountability is being stripped from the system. A system of merit is being replaced with a system that depends upon political power.

This kind of system has no accountability. Therefore, it will careen from one failure to another without any means of correction. Whatever you may think of the US involvement in Afghanistan, there is no getting away from the fact that it failed. Not only that, it has failed spectacularly.

There was a poll that said that Bush has the greatest responsibility for this failure. It may make sense in that he was the one who put US troops there in the first place. But what about the guy in charge when the debacle came? Does not Biden deserve some blame for the way this thing has played out? He did promise that there would be no 1975 Saigon type scenarios, but that is exactly what is playing out. Or if anything, it is worse than that.

Biden seemed to be taking responsibility, but that may be only superficial. A lot of empty words from an empty suit. A leader in any real sense would not have let this happen, nor would he let it continue. There could be large numbers of US citizens who will get caught up in this debacle. For that, he bears sole responsibility.

If his words really meant anything, he would resign. No president has overseen this level of failure, and no president is more responsible than he is for having caused it. He was warned about this. There is no excuse. But our system right now seems to have thrown out any sense of accountability. When that happens, much worse things will be on the horizon.

There has to be accountablilty for this debacle. He is the man on the scene. There is no escaping it, but it looks like that is exactly what he is trying to do.

Tweet of the decade

Tweet of the decade.

Missing suffix or something

America is backing up

Ill Duce says America's back

What went wrong with Afghanistan according to Bulwark, a neo-con publication

Neoconservatism on Wikipedia

A backgrounder on a couple of the top neo-cons:

Bill Kristol Wikipedia entry

Liz Cheney Wikipedia

Why Afghan army fell Bulwark dot com

Wikipedia

The Bulwark is a re-launch of the failed publication The Weekly Standard, which is a Bill Kristol project. The site is anti-Trump, but also is described as "conservative".

There are a few valid points perhaps, but what does Trump have to do with it? Nothing in this information do I find a reason for the behavior of the neo-cons towards Trump.

If the neo-cons had trouble with Trump, why not hold that in confidence in their discussions with him? Instead of that, the neo-cons here joined with the Democrats to try to force Trump out. This made the Afghan failure all the more inevitable.

For example, there were claims that there was no training of the Afghans before leaving. If that is true, why not bring that up in private discussions while Trump was in office? Why not keep the party together, as opposed to making a weak point that could be exploited, and is being exploited to this very day?

Bill Kristol and Liz Cheney have some explaining to do. But instead, there is nothing but blaming others, but never blaming themselves.

According to some of the information on Wikipedia, it looks like the Neo-cons are a bunch of loosely affiliated folks who migrate from Democrats to Republicans and back again. Not to be considered reliable, in my opinion.

Not the same nor better

With respect to the Kaarlo Tuomi post recently, it should be noted that back then, it was actually quite difficult to fool the FBI. Tuomi was trained as well as the Soviets could train him to be an American who could fit in. But all the training didn't get him far into the USA.

Therein lies the difference. These days, the border is unguarded. Anybody who wishes us ill can get in. But at the height of the Cold War, a highly trained agent couldn't get into the USA without being detected. This is a change, and it is not for the better.

Those who wish for open borders should reflect upon that. We are opening ourselves up to another 9-11 type event. Instead of chasing after malefactors abroad, this government we have today considers its own citizens to be a threat. But you have to ask yourselves this: a threat to what? Our own safety? If they cared so much about that, we'd have secure borders. These people do not tell us what they consider a threat, and why it is a threat. In my opinion, it is only a threat to themselves. This "threat" isn't illegal at all, it is our right.

Because they are not the state. If they went away, the state remains. If it were a Democracy, as these people claim, that change wouldn't have to be violent. Indeed, by making any threat to themselves as a threat to the state, they are making peaceful change impossible. If any occurs, it is either because they want it to be so, or they want to make it necessary in order to use force to impose their will.

Ivermectin success in India

Zero Hedge: Ivermectin blackout in India [ Link provided via Revolver ]

Of course it is true that Ivermectin works. If you truly examine what is happening here, then you'll understand it to be about politics, not about public health.

Big Pharma is making a killing off the government, the government is clamping down on civil rights with its censorship, and everybody in that loop is happy and rich. But what about the rest of us?

It is all a huge scam.

Ill Duce takes wrecking ball to 80 years of foreign policy

The debacle in Kabul was a Saigon redux, and motivated in the same anti-American commie plan. Consider what happened in the aftermath of Vietnam, and it is easy to see that the security network that cost so much in blood and treasure has been compromised. This works to the advantage of America's enemies.

NATO's credibility was on the line in Afghanistan. How does NATO fare after this debacle? Who has confidence in its abilities to defend itself with Ill Duce? Why should the NATO countries believe that their own security posture has been enhanced by this debacle? But it has been thrown away carelessly by Ill Duce, and the same cabal that did the same thing in Vietnam. This will strengthen communists in Europe. They were a pacifist force in the eighties, which Reagan successfully fought against to strengthen NATO causing the Iron Curtain to finally come down. But with Russia now emboldened, we may see the same defeatist pattern of the seventies to re-emerge in Europe.

The irony is that the current regime in Washington blamed the Trump for this debacle, but Trump strengthened NATO by getting them to shoulder more responsibility for their own defense. But can NATO take on Russia by itself? There are those who believe an attack from Russia is inevitable. How does this debacle help the alliance? Trump didn't abandon our allies the way the Ill Duce and his commie pals just did.

Trump was more supportive of the neo-con position that the neo-cons themselves. Now the neo-cons have been demolished by the one who they turned to in order to get rid of Trump. They might as well as slit their own throats.

Trump favored a strong America. How can the neo-cons and their commie friends now say otherwise? It was always a goal of the commies to destroy the NATO alliance, and they may have moved a big step in that direction by this latest debacle engineered by the left.

Debacle

 

There's no question that the fall of the US backed regime in Afghanistan is now officially a debacle. The White House is blaming Trump for this, but Trump didn't make these decisions for the last nearly 8 months.

These guys must be trying to relive the high that Bush got when 911 happened. At first they were saying "Bush let it happen". Once the approval numbers came out, and Bush was at 90% or thereabouts, they had to quiet down with that talk.

For the next nearly eight years, they subverted Bush so much that by the end of his presidency, his numbers had completely collapsed.

This stuff runs on politics. History didn't end when Bush left. But his work was at the mercy of others. Now Bush is going to have to pay the price for that. However, let's look more deeply into the chess board. Why did Biden act the way he did? He cannot credibly blame Trump for his own decisions. If he found fault with Trump's policy in Afghanistan, why didn't he change it? He had enough time. That was Biden's decision. He may be claiming that it was Trump's ideas, but if he was running the show himself, it was his own choices that led to this.

Biden and his handlers must believe that they can turn this to their advantage somehow. Otherwise, why do something that looks so bad? Even if he is able to shuffle some of the blame off on others, he still is accountable for what he did or didn't do himself. Trump has been gone for nearly 8 months now. You cannot blame him when he is not there.

The neo-cons come out of this badly, too. They've been undermining Trump all along. Trump was handling things just fine. Afghanistan wasn't in the hands of the Taliban when he left. If the neo-cons had been more helpful, Trump would still be there, and the Taliban would not have been. If Trump had been in the White House when this happened, then they could say that. But not now.

Nor can the neo-cons be happy about this. Unless the neo-cons really didn't care about keeping the Taliban out of power. But that is not how they have acted previously. It seemed like a pretty important deal to them at the time. So, in the light of this, are we to believe that Trump really caused this to happen, or was it Biden? Didn't Biden really double-cross the neo- cons?

And the neo-cons are going to have to join the commies so as to have the fallout not rain down upon themselves. That may "work" for them, but most people I would think, would see this for the total failure that it is. For that, the neo-cons deserve plenty of blame. They sided with the commies so as to get rid of Trump. Now they have egg on their faces, thanks to Biden. They might profit with their continuing support of this failure, or come to their senses and rejoin the sane world.

Ashcanistan

Does anybody remember why US forces were in that shithole to begin with? Osama bin Laden was there, and the country was protecting him. The USA wanted bin Laden because he was suspected in the 9-11 attack on World Trade Center and the Pentagon. The Taliban refused to turn him over, and the US invaded. Twenty years later, it is back to square one.

George "Dubya" Bush was president back then. It was his idea to do all that and look what it has resulted in. Huge expenditures of blood and treasure to accomplish nothing at all. What a failure he was.

Sure, it was Biden's fault, too. But Bush deserves some special criticism for sucking up to the commies all these years. Once they got a chance to tear down one thing that he did, they wasted no time. This is how the commies operate.

This is Bush's failure as well as Biden's. But Biden actually likes doing crap like this. It is what he was made for, to instill pain in the hearts of patriots. Bush actually did TRY to help this country. That is why the commies hated him so much. You'd think Bush would understand it that way, because if he did, he would support Trump. But no...

It is easy to say now, but I had my doubts about going into Ashcanistan back then. We should have gone after bigger game. Ashcanistan is no real threat to us, but there are those who are. I can't prove it, but my sentiment was that there shouldn't be any Moose-limbs anywhere after what they did. Now Biden has made sure that the same thing that happened before will happen again. Only this time, he will be leading the charge!

Those are harsh words, but harsh words are needed now. Being soft only encourages them. The commies love to humiliate and punish America. They are hoping and praying for another 9-11 event, and it just might happen. There were those at the time who said America had it coming. The commies had no sympathy for America on 9-11. They loved that it happened.

Commisars

The Bill of Rights has been repealed.

If you criticize the government response to covid, you are an extremist! Wow. For now on, everybody must comply with all directives issued from the commisars. All deviations from orthodoxy will be dealt with, you can be assured. Everybody will be dead, but at least they cared.

Airplanes ruled illegal.

Do these people understand basic physics? Planes cannot fly without energy. If the energy source can be named that will replace fossil fuels, please name it. These people seem to think that they can repeal the laws of physics as well.

Beam me up Scotty!