Author: Papa Giorgio

State Sized Chunks Land for a Zero-Carbon Economy

Published by Papa Giorgio

Why were federal tax subsidies extended for wind and solar by Congress? Again. For the umpteenth time! We are against subsidies because they distort markets. Those politicians who support these market-distorting policies should at least be forced to answer the question: “How much is enough?” Taxpayers have been subsidizing wind and solar corporations for more than 40 years! These companies have gotten fat and happy on your money, and Congress keeps giving them more of it. This video is based on a Texas Public Policy Foundation report that explains why it’s long past time to stop wind and solar from stuffing their bank accounts with your tax dollars.

  • To give you a sense of scale, to replace the energy from one average natural gas well, which sits on about four acres of land, would require 2,500 acres of wind turbines. That is a massive amount of land. You would have to cover this entire nation with wind turbines in an attempt to replace the electricity that we generate from coal, natural gas, and nuclear power, and even that would not get the job done. (CFACT)

This is from a recent BLOOMBERG article:

At his international climate summit in April, President Joe Biden vowed to cut U.S. greenhouse gas emissions in half by 2030. The goal will require sweeping changes in the power generation, transportation and manufacturing sectors. It will also require a lot of land.

Wind farms, solar installations and other forms of clean power tend to take up more space on a per-watt basis than their fossil-fuel-burning brethren. A 200-megawatt wind farm, for instance, might require spreading turbines over 13 square miles (36 square kilometres). A natural-gas power plant with that same generating capacity could fit onto a single city block.

Achieving Biden’s goal will require aggressively building more wind and solar farms, in many cases combined with giant batteries. To fulfill his vision of an emission-free grid by 2035, the U.S. needs to increase its carbon-free capacity by at least 150%. Expanding wind and solar by 10% annually until 2030 would require a chunk of land equal to the state of South Dakota, according to Princeton University estimates and an analysis by Bloomberg News. By 2050, when Biden wants the entire economy to be carbon free, the U.S. would need up to four additional South Dakotas to develop enough clean power to run all the electric vehicles, factories and more.

Earth Day 2021 is April 22nd. Therefore, eco-activist groups will be preaching the gospel of wind & solar power and the importance of biodiversity. What those trying to “save the planet” fail to understand (or more likely ignore) is that these two priorities are in direct conflict. Wind & solar require far more land than nuclear, natural gas and coal power. They are also far more destructive to regions of high biodiversity as well as large birds, bats and endangered species. As we celebrate Earth Day, let’s consider the significant environmental consequences of attempting to provide electricity through low density, unreliable sunshine and breezes.

Vice President Joe Biden aims to be the most progressive president on the issue of climate change. The man who spent most of 2020 hiding in the basement believes the future of energy is renewable energy like wind and solar. Biden should go back to the basement, watch Michael Moore’s “Planet of the Humans,” and rethink his advocacy for renewable energy. Wind and solar are not the answer, and the idea of converting our fossil fuel-based economy into renewables could be a devastating take-down to society.

Are we heading toward an all-renewable energy future, spearheaded by wind and solar? Or are those energy sources wholly inadequate for the task? Mark Mills, Senior Fellow at the Manhattan Institute and author of The Cloud Revolution, compares the energy dream to the energy reality.

Remember when Google joined the common sense era?

FLASHBACK

We came to the conclusion that even if Google and others had led the way toward a wholesale adoption of renewable energy, that switch would not have resulted in significant reductions of carbon dioxide emissions. Trying to combat climate change exclusively with today’s renewable energy technologies simply won’t work; we need a fundamentally different approach.

[…..]

“Even if one were to electrify all of transport, industry, heating and so on, so much renewable generation and balancing/storage equipment would be needed to power it that astronomical new requirements for steel, concrete, copper, glass, carbon fibre, neodymium, shipping and haulage etc etc would appear. All these things are made using mammoth amounts of energy: far from achieving massive energy savings, which most plans for a renewables future rely on implicitly, we would wind up needing far more energy, which would mean even more vast renewables farms – and even more materials and energy to make and maintain them and so on. The scale of the building would be like nothing ever attempted by the human race.”

Google Joins the Common Sense Crew On Renewable Energies ~ Finally! (RPT)

  • What It Would Really Take to Reverse Climate Change: Today’s renewable energy technologies won’t save us. So what will? (SPETRUM)
  • Shocker: Top Google Engineers Say Renewable Energy ‘Simply won’t work’ (WATTS UP WITH THAT)
  • Polluting the Beauty and Cleanliness Of Our World With Renewable Energy (RPT)
  • Wind and Solar More Harmful To Environment Than Helpful (RPT)

Elon Musk Sits Down with Babylon Bee

Published by Papa Giorgio

(RIGHT SCOOP hat-tip) The Babylon Bee managed to get an extensive, hour-and-a-half-long interview with Elon Musk where they discuss wokeness, Elizabeth Warren, taxing the rich, the Metaverse, which superhero Elon would be, and how the left is killing comedy. And much more, including apparently if Musk actually accepted Jesus as his Lord and Savior.

You can watch the full interview below. Don’t be turned off by the fact that it’s so long. It’s really quite interesting once you start watching it and it’s hard to stop.

Public Schools Are Grooming Children… Sexually

Published by Papa Giorgio

In October, a shocking report claimed that teachers at a Salinas, California, middle school secretly recruited students into a pro-LGBT club disguised as a “gender equality club” without their parents knowing.

Men Are Better at Women’s Sports… Admit It Ladies

Published by Papa Giorgio

LEGAL INSURRECTION quoting the Daily Mail:

Fury as transgender UPenn swimmer, 22, who used to compete as a man smashes TWO US women’s records in weekend competition and finishes one race 38 seconds ahead of her nearest rival

A trans swimmer and senior at the University of Pennsylvania, who previously spent three years competing as a man, smashed two US records while competing at a weekend contest, sparking fresh claims of unfairness.

On Sunday, Lia Thomas, 22, [born Will Thomas] put in an astounding performance at the Zippy Invitational Event in Akron, Ohio, that saw her finish the 1,650 yard freestyle 38 seconds ahead of her teammate Anna Sofia Kalandaze.

Thomas’s winning time was 15:59:71, with her UPenn teammate Anna Kalandaze coming second with a time of 16:37:44.

Thomas’s win was a record for the Zippy Meet, and the pool where the event took place. But she also managed to smash two US women’s swimming records during earlier races at the same event.

The first US record was broken on Friday, December 3, when Thomas won the 500-yard freestyle with a time of 4:34:06. She raced to victory 14 seconds ahead of Kalandaze – the swimmer she beat by 38 seconds on Sunday.

And then on Saturday, she won the 200 yard freestyle in 1:41:93 – seven seconds ahead of her nearest rival, giving her the fastest female US time ever for that race too.

[….]

[….]

[….]

Here is the 38 second win:

The inserted video into the TV is via PATRIOT RESISTANCE:

….CONTINUING WITH LEGAL INSURRECTION….

…There’s an episode of Seinfeld where Kramer starts taking a Karate class and everyone is impressed with how seriously he takes it until it’s discovered that the only reason he is dominating in the class is because his classmates are children. I realize it’s not exactly the same thing, but is it really that far off?


Here is that segment from Tucker via LEGAL:

Kara Dansky of the Women’s Human Rights Campaign discusses the state of women’s right on ‘Tucker Carlson Tonight’

 

Refusing The language of Neo-Racists/Neo-Segregationists

Published by Papa Giorgio
  • “If you’re going to call what’s essentially neo-racism and neo-segregation “anti-racism,” I’m not going to go along with the lie of that. I’m just not.” – Bari Weiss

Excerpted from:

Journalist or Heretic? | Bari Weiss | The Jordan B. Peterson Podcast – S4: E29

Theology Defined via The Moody Handbook of Theology

Published by Papa Giorgio

INTRODUCTION TO BIBLICAL THEOLOGY

DEFINITION

The term biblical theology can be used in different ways. Although the usage adopted in this volume focuses on a special method of theological study, it should be understood that the term is widely used to refer to a movement that is basically antagonistic to evangelical faith. This negative usage is here considered and discarded before the legitimate meaning of biblical theology is discussed.

First of all, then, this expression is used to describe the biblical theology movement. This was an outgrowth of liberalism and neo-orthodoxy. It began with the publication of Walther Eichrodt’s first volume of Old Testament theology in 1933 and ended with the publication of von Rad’s second volume of Old Testament theology in 1960. Brevard Childs suggests the movement experienced its demise in May 1963 with the publication of John A. T. Robinson’s Honest To God.

The movement initially was a reaction to liberalism and sought a return to an exegetical study of the Scriptures, particularly emphasizing a study of biblical words. Kittel’s monumental ten-volume Theological Dictionary of the New Testament is an outgrowth of that. As a movement, however, it never separated itself from its liberal underpinnings; it retained the historical-critical methodology. For example, in studying the gospels, adherents of the biblical theology movement applied the historical-critical methodology in attempting to discover which of the words attributed to Christ were actually spoken by Him.

While the movement recognized the weak message of liberalism of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, it retained the liberal presuppositions concerning the Bible. Adherents held to the neo-orthodox view of revelation, taught evolution as a theory of origins, and emphasized the human aspect of the Bible rather than the divine. As a result, the movement was self-defeating. It was impossible to do a serious, exegetical study of the Scriptures while at the same time denying the authority of the Scriptures.

A second way in which the term biblical theology is used is for that methodology that takes its material in an historically oriented manner from the Old and New Testaments and arrives at a theology. It is exegetical in nature, drawing its material from the Bible as opposed to a philosophical understanding of theology; it stresses the historical circumstances in which doctrines were propounded; it examines the theology within a given period of history (as in Noahic or Abrahamic eras) or of an individual writer (as Pauline or Johannine writings).

Biblical theology in the above-defined sense may be called “that branch of theological science which deals systematically with the historically conditioned progress of the self-revelation of God as deposited in the Bible.”

Several elements are important to observe in this definition:

SYSTEMATIZATION

Biblical theology investigates the periods of history in which God has revealed Himself or the doctrinal emphases of the different biblical writers are set forth in a systematic fashion. Biblical theology, while presented in a systematized form, is distinct from systematic theology that assimilates truth from the entire Bible and from outside the Scriptures in systematizing biblical doctrine. Biblical theology is narrower. It concentrates on the emphasis of a given period of history as in the Old Testament or on the explicit teaching of a particular writer as in the New Testament.

HISTORY

Biblical theology pays attention to the important historical circumstances in which the biblical doctrines were given. What can be learned from the Old Testament era of revelation? What were the circumstances in the writing of Matthew or John? What were the circumstances of the addressees of the letter to the Hebrews? These are important questions that help resolve the doctrinal emphasis of a particular period or of a specific writer.

PROGRESS OF REVELATION

An orthodox doctrine that evangelicals have long held is the belief in progressive revelation; God did not reveal all truth about Himself at one time but revealed Himself “piecemeal,” portion by portion to different people throughout history (cf. Heb. 1:1). Biblical theology traces that progress of revelation, noting the revelation concerning Himself that God has given in a particular era or through a particular writer. Hence, God’s self-disclosure was not as advanced to Noah and Abraham as it was to Isaiah. An earlier book of the New Testament, such as James, reflects a more primitive view of the church than books written later, such as the pastoral epistles.

BIBLICAL IN NATURE

In contrast to systematic theology, which draws its information about God from any and every source, biblical theology has a narrower focus, drawing its information from the Bible (and from historical information that expands or clarifies the historical events of the Bible). Biblical theology thus is exegetical in nature, examining the doctrines in the various periods of history or examining the words and statements of a particular writer. This enables the student to determine the self-disclosure of God at a given period of history.

RELATION TO OTHER DISCIPLINES

EXEGETICAL STUDIES

Biblical theology has a direct relationship to exegesis (“to explain; to interpret”), inasmuch as biblical theology is the result of exegesis. Exegesis lies at the foundation of biblical theology. Exegesis calls for an analysis of the biblical text according to the literal-grammatical-historical methodology. (1) The passage under consideration should be studied according to the normal meaning of language. How is the word or statement normally understood? (2) The passage should be studied according to the rules of grammar; exegesis demands an examination of the nouns, verbs, prepositions, etc., for a proper understanding of the passage. (3) The passage should be studied in its historical context. What were the political, social, and particularly the cultural circumstances surrounding it? Biblical theology does not end with exegesis, but it must begin there. The theologian must be hermeneutically exacting in analyzing the text to properly understand what Matthew, Paul, or John wrote.

INTRODUCTORY STUDIES

Although it is not the purpose of biblical theology to provide a detailed discussion of introductory matters, some discussion is essential since interpretive solutions are sometimes directly related to introductory studies. Introduction determines issues like authorship, date, addressees, and occasion and purpose for writing. For example, the dating of the book of Hebrews is significant in that it relates to the extent of the suffering of the audience to whom the book is written. Persecution became severe after the burning of Rome in A.D. 64. Even more critical is the issue of the addressees in Hebrews. If the audience is understood to be unbelievers, the book will be studied in one fashion; if the audience is understood to be Hebrew Christians the book will be understood differently. By way of other examples, the audience of Matthew, Mark, and Luke also determines how these writers are evaluated. For example, Matthew’s theological viewpoint ought to be understood from the standpoint of having been written to a Jewish audience. The theological viewpoint of the writer is clearly related to introductory issues.

SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY STUDIES

There are both similarities and differences between biblical and systematic theology. Both are rooted in the analysis of Scripture, although systematic theology also seeks truth from sources outside the Bible. In noting the relationship of these two theologies, numerous distinctions can be observed. (1) Biblical theology is preliminary to systematic theology; exegesis leads to biblical theology which in turn leads to systematic theology. (2) Biblical theology seeks to determine what the biblical writers said concerning a theological issue, whereas systematic theology also explains why something is true, adding a philosophical viewpoint. (3) While biblical theology provides the viewpoint of the biblical writer, systematic theology gives a doctrinal discussion from a contemporary viewpoint. (4) Biblical theology analyzes the material of a particular writer or period of history, whereas systematic theology investigates all materials both biblical and extra-biblical that relate to a particular doctrinal matter.

(CLICK TO ENLARGE IN SEPARATE WINDOW, CLICK AGAIN TO ENLARGE MORE)

METHODOLOGY

Biblical theology of the Old Testament is best understood when examining the Old Testament for a “center” or unifying principle. Many different proposals have been suggested concerning a unifying theme of the Old Testament. Walter Kaiser has suggested “promise” as the unifying theme; Elmer Martens suggests “God’s design” as the focal point; whereas Eugene Merrill suggests “kingdom” as the underlying theme of the Old Testament. Whatever theme is emphasized, biblical theology of the Old Testament should be able to see the unfolding of that theme in the different periods of the Old Testament (progressive revelation). (See further discussion of methodology under “Introduction to Old Testament Theology,” chap. 2.

Since the writing of the New Testament books probably encompassed less than fifty years, biblical theology of the New Testament must concern itself with the viewpoint of the different New Testament authors. Thus, the biblical theology of the New Testament is studied according to Pauline theology, Petrine theology, Johannine theology, and so forth. This study evaluates what particular doctrines the writers of the New Testament emphasized and how they developed those doctrines. (See further discussion of methodology under “Introduction to New Testament Theology,” chap. 9

IMPORTANCE

SHOWS HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE

Biblical theology is important in that it prevents the study of doctrine apart from its historical context. In the study of systematic theology it is entirely possible to ignore the historical context of doctrinal truth; biblical theology serves to avert that problem by paying attention to the historical milieu in which the doctrine was given.

SHOWS EMPHASIS OF THE WRITER

Biblical theology reveals the doctrinal teaching of a particular writer or during an entire period. In that sense, biblical theology systematizes the Scriptures pertinent to a writer or period and determines the major teaching or doctrinal focus of the writer or period of time. It enables the student to determine what was emphasized during the Abrahamic era or what was emphasized by the apostle John, providing a different perspective from that normally attained through the study of systematic theology.

SHOWS HUMAN ELEMENT IN INSPIRATION

While it is true that the Bible is verbally inspired and inerrant, it is also true that the writers of Scripture each wrote according to their distinctive style. Biblical theology emphasizes the human factor in the writing of Scripture (but not to the exclusion of inspiration). Thus biblical theology is intent on discovering what John or Paul taught or what was emphasized during a period of Old Testament history. Biblical theology “points up the individual backgrounds, interest, and style of the authors. Biblical Theology emphasizes the part that the writers had in the composition of the Word of God, while, of course, building on the divine superintendence of the writings.”

Paul P. Enns, The Moody Handbook of Theology (Chicago, IL: Moody Press, 1989), xv–24.

44% Of All Covid Deaths –> 2-Weeks After vaccination

Published by Papa Giorgio

As an aside before the main post… while way to early to make a real connection due to the small numbers of people known, however… so far the only ppl with the new Omicron were fully vaccinated:

  • The preliminary report revealed all four [patients] had been previously vaccinated for COVID-19. (LETTER | GATEWAY PUNDIT)
  • Two omicron-infected people landed in Australia on Saturday night. The two individuals were fully vaccinated. (GATEWAY PUNDIT)

Even at that, they seem to be milder symptoms than that of Delta, which were milder than the alpha version (see more at RIGHT SCOOP).

We will see if this trend continues to be a “pandemic of the vaccinated” — what we do know is that Delta was less deadly than Alpha, and Omicron is like a cold.

Onto the main post via STEVE KIRSCH

  • 45% Of Deaths After COVID Vaccination Happen In The First 2 Weeks — It’s 59% at 4 weeks and 63% at 5 weeks. Doing some very conservative estimates on the number of Americans killed by the vaccine leads to the inevitable conclusion that the vaccines should be stopped.

My friend Albert Benavides (aka WelcomeTheEagle88) did a quick analysis for me on the deaths reported after vaccination in VAERS.

45% of all reported deaths happened within two weeks after vaccination.

Peter Schirmacher, one of the world’s top pathologists, said that 30% to 40% of people who died within 2 weeks after vaccination died were killed by the vaccine. His results were replicated by other German pathologists (since no US pathologist would dare accuse the vaccine of causing death or they would be immediately fired).

IF WE TAKE THE MOST CONSERVATIVE VIEW POSSIBLE,
THE VACCINE SHOULD BE IMMEDIATELY STOPPED

So taking a very conservative view that VAERS is 100% reported (so only a total of 8664 deaths), then 44% of 8664 = within 2 weeks = 3812 killed in the first two weeks. If just 30% was caused by the vaccines, then that is 1,143 people killed by the vaccine at a minimum. For 230M vaccinated, then that is 4.9 deaths per million minimum killed by the vaccine.

This means these vaccines are at least 5X deadlier than the smallpox vaccine which we pointed out is deemed to be too unsafe to use. Note that this estimate assumes that only the deaths in the first two weeks are caused by the vaccine and assumes after 2 weeks all the excess deaths we caused by something else.

Note: The actual number killed by the vaccines is at least 150K (estimated 8 different ways), but we’re trying to be as conservative as possible here giving any critics nothing to complain about.

HERE ARE THE STATS FROM ALBERT

Here are the % of total deaths for each week for the first 5 weeks:

  1. 33.6% meaning that in the first week, 33.6% of all the vaccine related deaths happened in the first week
  2. 10.97% in the second week, so now we’ve killed nearly 45% of all the deaths
  3. 8.4%
  4. 6.04%
  5. 4.19% by the fifth week out, 63% of all deaths have happened

Here’s a link to Albert’s report.

I’ve asked him to extend it out to 12 weeks and will update the file when I receive the extended report.

This is just what is being reported, or suspected. I believe the numbers would hold if all cases were realized to be due to vaccinations. Here is a response to a friend, but first what he was responding to and what others said:

  • Friday (or Thursday… I forget), one of our regular vendors dropped off some material and during our normal conversating he mentioned his nephew (a 40-year old healthy dude) died within days of getting his booster. He got his booster, almost immediately after starting feeling funny. After 2-days he went to the hospital, ended up in coma, and died. Just thought I would share. The entire family blames the booster…. I bet Pfizer won’t.

Found out he had a massive heart attack after complications stemming from the booster. Heart attacks [amonge other complications] are a main issue with these vaccines: “Renowned Cardiologist: Pfizer, Moderna Vaccines ‘Dramatically Increase’ Heart Attack Risk“

To which others responded:

  • (Cory) An exercise instructor friend of mine got the booster and within a day experienced respiratory and circulatory distress — and has been in the hospital most of a month and isn’t really improving. Perhaps coincidental. Perhaps something else…?
  • (Becca) My grandma (vaccinated) got covid from the vaccinated and is fighting for her life…
  • (GM) My father in law had a stroke about 15 days after his booster. I’m positive that was the cause

Here is my friend’s (JB) observation:

  • I got my booster I had no issues neither did my wife or father. But we are all different and our body’s are different. Regardless of the cause it is sad whenever we lose someone. And blaming something or Someone doesn’t help with closure and could end up harming them more. Sorry for your friends lose

I respond to JB:

But the mothers who lost their children in utero because of the shots, or the forced vax of children where for every one saved over a hundred will most likely die (as many reports already suggest that support the math), and the people who are not you, your wife, or father. in other words, your world and the many reports here (1000covidstories.com), or the whistle blower with evidence that well over 40,000 seniors within 2-weeks died of heart or blood clot issues within the Medicare system. Or the only two autopsies autopsies (one in Dr. Schirmacher performed autopsies on 40 people who had died within two weeks of receiving a Covid jab. Of those, 30%-40% could be directly attributed to the “vaccines.” The only other autopsy that made it to any medical journal was of an 80-year old man whom they say was directly related to the vaccine. (My section is linked here…. it is interrupted by the “INFO BREAK” (Autosies via RPT)

It is those bad consequences which Pfizer and Moderna knew of as well as the FDA…. which is why they want (one of the reasons they want) records sealed for 55-years.

I could go on, but I am watching the new Bond movie.

MORE EXAMPLES:

A 13-year-old Michigan boy died in his sleep three days after receiving the coronavirus vaccine in June and the Centers for Disease Control has opened an investigation into the death, a report said on Sunday.

Jacob Clynick — who was preparing to enter high school in the fall — received his second dose of the Pfizer vaccine at a Walgreens in Zilwaukee, Mich. on June 13, his aunt told the Detroit Free Press.

Jacob was healthy and had no underlying health conditions. In the two days following the second jab, the only side effects he had experienced were the same ones most others had to deal with: fatigue and fever.

On June 15, two nights after receiving the second dose, Jacob complained of a stomach ache before going to sleep and never woke up.

“He passed away in the middle of the night at home,” his aunt, Tammy Burages, said…..

(NEW YORK POST)

The post above this recounted short convo also lends to the issues with the vaccines… AS WELL AS THESE

Stillborn Births Skyrocket Among Vaccinated

Dr. Daniel Nagase, and Dr. Mel Bruchet, ring the alarm on the alarmingly high rates of disasters that governments and the MSM don’t want to share.

Doulas that work in women’s and children’s hospitals raised the voice about the alarming rate of stillbirths in British Columbia, Canada!

Join The True Defender Telegram Chanel Here: https://t.me/TheTrueDefender

The doulas had 13 stillbirths only in one day. There is another terrifying statistic from Waterloo, Ontario.

According to Dr. Nagase’s analysis, from January to July, there were 86 stillbirths, and the typical number of these cases is 5-6 per year. However, since the vaccine rollout, there have been 14 to 15 stillbirths per month in Waterloo.

Dr. Nagase shared that he has confirmed from the Waterloo, Ontario report that the stillbirths occurred only with vaccinated mothers…..

CDC Admits Tainted Statistics (Plus: Vaccine Updates)

Recently, Dr. Toby Rogers did a risk-benefit analysis showing we’ll kill 117 kids for every kid we save from COVID with the vaccines aged 5 to 11.

The ratio doesn’t really change if they change the dose, e.g., to a third of the adult dose. It means fewer kids saved and fewer kids killed, but Toby estimates the ratio would be about the same. Whether it is 117 or 10, it doesn’t matter. We will kill a lot more kids than we will ever save with these vaccines.

What Toby predicted is now coming true.

We can’t show it is 117 to 1, but we can show for sure we are killing more kids than we are saving because kids that would have never died before are now dying with COVID, only children with pretty severe health problems would die: we don’t know of a single kid, 5 to 11, who died from COVID who didn’t have some pretty serious health issues before they got COVID.

Those days are now gone. We’re now killing the healthy kids.

The vaccines rolled out for kids 5 to 11 starting on November 7. It is now just 12 days later and we are now killing perfectly healthy kids.

I just got this text: (to the right)

That’s hardly an isolated incident.

These deaths simply are never ever going to reported in the NY Times or on CNN. So you’re never going to hear about them except from alternate media sources like this substack article. So only around 20,000 people will ever see these deaths.

Here’s another example. Another canary in the coal mine.

First time in her 14-year career: seeing an 8 year old with myocarditis

I saw this Tweet from one of my followers. First time in her 14 year career she has ever seen an 8 year old child with myocarditis. Welcome to the “new normal.”

It’s happening for older kids too, not just the youngest. Here’s a video of Ernest Ramirez who lost his only child, his 16-year old son. I’ve talked to Ernest. His son had zero health issues. He got the first dose of Pfizer and just 5 days later his heart had doubled in size and he died of cardiac arrest while in the park. Dr. Peter McCullough, one of the nation’s most respected cardiologists reviewed the autopsy report and determined the vaccine killed the child. But the CDC simply ignores that because the medical examiner who did the autopsy (after a huge amount of pleading by the father) just said his son died of heart failure, not the vaccine.

Please click the image to watch the video, it’s only 2 minutes long:

NRA: America’s Longest-Standing Civil Rights Organization

Published by Papa Giorgio

African-American leaders speaking out against proposals to restrict gun rights at a Feb. 22, 2013 news conference in Washington, D.C. Among them: Harry Alford, president and chief executive officer of the D.C.-based National Black Chamber of Commerce.

Alford, who spoke in Milwaukee in 2008, said at one point:

“I want to thank the Lord for our Constitution. I also want to thank the NRA for its legacy. The National Rifle Association was started, founded by religious leaders who wanted to protect freed slaves from the Ku Klux Klan.”

Well known as a defender of the right to bear arms, the 5 million-member NRA does describe itself as “America’s Longest-Standing Civil Rights Organization.”

KILLING BLACK & WHITE REPUBLICANS

This made me think of a connection to the Democrat Party’s historical past. Here is my comment on that part of the group on Facebook:

You know, this reminds me of something from the Democrats past. What this is is a “hit card” that the violent arm [the KKK] of the Democrat Party use to carry around with them. They would use it as an identifier to kill or harass members of the “radical group” (Republicans who thought color did not matter) in order to affect voting outcomes. While we hear of the lynchings of black persons (who did make up a larger percentage of lynchings), there were quite a few white “radicals” lynched for supporting the black vote and arming ex-slaves. It is also ironic that the current Democrat melee is focused on racial differences.

I could go on, but I won’t.

Here is a short video discussing the matter:

  • “…virtually every significant racist in American political history was a Democrat.” — Bruce Bartlett, Wrong on Race: The Democratic Party’s Buried Past (New York, NY: Palgrave MacMillan, 2008), ix;
  • “…not every Democrat was a KKK’er, but every KKK’er was a Democrat.” — Ann Coulter, Mugged: Racial Demagoguery from the Seventies to Obama (New York, NY: Sentinel [Penguin], 2012), 19.

MORE GUN-CONTROL HISTORY

Today’s gun control advocates tend to paint themselves as concerned with the plight of minorities in America. What they don’t want you to know is that their movement originated as an initiative to deprive African-Americans of the means to defend themselves. In this episode of The DL, Dana Loesch is joined by NRA personalities and gun-rights advocates to delve into the deeply racist history of gun control and to explain how it continues to disproportionately affect minority communities.