You’re a Scientist? So What?

Scientists helped ruin millions of children's educations and helped spur a sharp increase in depression, drug use, and suicide among young people. So, by all means, question the science!

by Dennis Prager for American Greatness

A caller to my radio show this week, a physician, took strong issue with me regarding COVID-19 therapeutics. He accused me of not believing in science. His last words before we had to go to a commercial break were, “I’m a scientist.” 

Given that I am not a scientist, he assumed that comment would persuade me—or at least persuade many listeners—that I was not qualified to disagree with him.

If that was his assumption, he was wrong.

“I don’t care,” I responded. “It’s irrelevant. Scientists have given science a bad name.”

I would not have said that as recently as three years ago. 

But in recent years, and especially in the past two years, some basic suppositions of mine have changed.

I no longer assume when I read a statement by a scientist that the statement is based on science. In fact, I believe I am more committed to scientific truth than many scientists are.

The American Medical Association advocates the removal of sex designation from birth certificates. If many doctors or other scientists have issued a dissent, I am not aware of it. 

“Assigning sex using binary variables in the public portion of the birth certificate fails to recognize the medical spectrum of gender identity.” Those are the words of the author of the AMA report, Willie Underwood III, M.D.

Sarah Mae Smith, M.D., an AMA delegate from California, speaking on behalf of the Women Physicians Section, said, “We need to recognize gender is not a binary but a spectrum.”

When the American Medical Association and a plethora of physicians tell us that human beings, unlike every other animal above some reptilian species, are “not binary,” i.e., neither male nor female, the assertion “I am a scientist” becomes meaningless.

In mid-2020, at the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, when the medical community was demanding physical distancing, mask-wearing, and the lockdown of businesses and schools, more than a thousand health care professionals announced that the protests against racism then taking place—events with no social distancing, often no masks, plenty of yelling, and people “coughing uncontrollably” (New York Times description)—were medically necessary. 

Jennifer Nuzzo, a Johns Hopkins epidemiologist, tweeted, “We should always evaluate the risks and benefits of efforts to control the virus. In this moment the public health risks of not protesting to demand an end to systemic racism greatly exceed the harms of the virus.”

Over 1,000 health care professionals signed an “open letter advocating for an anti-racist public health response to demonstrations against systemic injustice occurring during the COVID-19 pandemic.”

The letter said, among other things, “Do not disband protests under the guise of maintaining public health for COVID-19 restrictions” and labeled “pervasive racism . . . the paramount public health problem.” That’s a left-wing cant, not science.

Now you can better appreciate why “I am a scientist” no longer means what it once did. 

How about the cruelty of not allowing the dying to be visited by loved ones—even if they wore a hospital mask, even if they agreed to wear a hazmat suit? Did that enhance your view of scientists’ medical judgment?

Then there was the American medical community’s opposition to therapeutics, dismissing hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin (both used with zinc) as frauds despite the testimony of numerous physicians that they saved COVID-19 patients’ lives when used appropriately. State medical boards around the country threatened to revoke the medical license of any physician who prescribed these drugs to treat COVID-19—despite these drugs being among the safest prescription drugs available.

As early as July 2020, Harvey Risch, M.D., Ph.D., professor of epidemiology at the Yale School of Public Health, wrote in Newsweek: “I myself know of two doctors who have saved the lives of hundreds of patients with these medications, but are now fighting state medical boards to save their licenses and reputations. The cases against them are completely without scientific merit.”

As a result of the American medical community’s opposition to therapeutics, Risch wrote, “tens of thousands of patients with COVID-19 are dying unnecessarily.”

Doctors throughout America were essentially telling COVID-19 patients, “Go home, get rest, and wait to see if your COVID-19 gets worse. If you can’t breathe, come to the hospital where we can put you on a ventilator.” Ventilators, it quickly became clear, were a virtual death sentence for COVID-19 patients. And then they died alone.

Another example of the decline of seriousness about science among scientists was National Institutes of Health Director Francis Collins urging his colleagues to boycott any “high-level” scientific conference that doesn’t have women and underrepresented minorities in marquee speaking slots.

And another: Heather Mac Donald reported that in 2020, “The NIH announced a new round of ‘Research Supplements to Promote Diversity in Health-Related Research.’ Academic science labs could get additional federal money if they hire ‘diverse’ researchers; no mention was made of relevant scientific qualifications”(emphasis added).

How many scientists protested the shutting down of schools for nearly two years? Some did, like those who signed the Great Barrington Declaration, but for the most part the scientific community was silent. In other words, scientists helped ruin millions of American children’s educations, not to mention abetted the unprecedented increase in depression, drug use, and suicide among young people.

These are only a few reasons not to take “I am a scientist” as seriously as we once did.  

But there may be two consolations: One is that the same rule now applies to “I am a professor,” “I am a teacher,” “I am a rabbi,” “I am a priest,” “I am a pastor,” “I am a journalist,” and “I am a doctor.”

The other is that there are exceptions. Thank God. 

X22, Christian Patriot News, and more- July 13

 

Evening. Here's tonight's news:

The Last Barrel Standing, Part 2: The Catalytic State

 

After reading an article on the aftermath effects of the French elections yesterday I told myself I really have to sit and concentrate on getting part two of my opinion series of The Last Barrel Standing done. Most who follow worldly events have come to the conclusion that corporations are gaining a foothold on global governance of the world. What's not firmly into place is how it started and how they are doing it exactly. Most have the opinions, like I once did, that it's the likes of Black Rock, Fidelity and the Vanguards of the world taking control. They play a big piece in the overall picture but they are not the actual governance behind it all, though it is the financial power behind them that ends up requiring governments to engage as technocratic risk mangers that propagates the loss of democratic controls.

Let's take a look at the article on the French election as an example of how it plays out. Notice that these are CEO's and corporations talking:

While some companies seek to build bridges with opposition parties, others are counting on their public support eroding away as the voters who elected them come to the conclusion that their most radical promises cannot be implemented.

“I told the prime minister, we are in a outlandish situation … But the French will realize the futility of what they’re being told,” the chairman of another French industrial company told Reuters. 

In other words it doesn't matter who the citizens elect you will just plain settle for what you are told to do, you'll settle for what's offered you, no more, no less. Exactly how is it that it ended up in a position facing technocratic rule over democratic? It's call the rise of financialization, the financing of political projects to achieve public policy purposes while keeping them off balance sheets. Who masterminded the endeavor? The European Union. Which has taken them from being supply side players among the European countries to being the major global player behind finance and energy driven policies. In essence they have become organized political actors not directly connected to states but are pursuing goals that effect vital state interest both internally and globally. Their loosely knitted treaties, agreements not signed by all countries in the union has led to a quasi like constitution that largely goes ignored. As a result of that erroneous behavior the EU has delegated itself a state actor within the global political policy agenda, they've succeed quite well at aligning non state actors into a multi level collaboration of public-private finance, investments that is largely hidden due to business confidentiality that has led to what has become know as the emergence of a hidden investment state within the EU. They've done this through increase private investment through public guarantees using development banks as guarantors of the private investment funds.

Back in the 1990's the EU was a regulatory commission regulating commerce through the EU countries. They, at the time, received one percent of revenues from each country to regulate commerce, the products of goods and services imported and exported. One thing high on that list was the importation of energy and the high cost associated with it via a lack of resources and competition. They put together a plan for a green energy transition but no one seemed interested, back then there wasn't an interest in the climate agenda, if there even was one. It wasn't until after the 2007-08 housing collapse and commerce slowed globally that they put forth their plan again for a global transition of energy supplies. This time it caught on, and the 4th industrial revolution energy style was on. The EU had spent considerable time investing in green technology and development. Being ahead of the game that enabled them to advance their products and services to other countries in what became know as global partnerships. Representatives from various different fields of energy technology were sent to other countries to make assessments and plans to implement green energy initiatives based on a countries particular resources and infrastructure. They partnered with different countries further developing green energy designs for buildings, housing and manufacturing. The various firms collaborated on three different geographic locations to rehab various building into models of what green new technology could achieve. Various firms patented their technologies, some shared in patent technology upon final completion and success proven.

The EU craved out a whole new industry for themselves peddling the services, goods and technology behind the green energy movement. But unlike the traditional capitalist financing systems they used the hedge of public funds against private investing. This, in essence, allowed them to become a Catalytic State behind the green energy movement. A guarantor of funds behind private, confidential investments. Since we are talking about funds that normally would go to countries in crisis this allowed them the position to "put the squeeze" on some countries to participate. Development grants and loans are aligned to the green energy movement.

Often times provisions of partnership agreements include clauses of equity and inclusion, redistributed energy resources that benefit humanity as a whole. If this was really about carbon reduction or green energy than why would a development bank or government funded agencies back thirty billion dollars to build oil refineries in Africa? It's not really about equity, inclusion or green energy it's about the least regulatory and cheapest way to realign energy resources across the world. The latter was funded by USAID so the US could be a larger player in redistribution of oil across the globe. It would be pretty hard to be a competitive player if your regulatory and labor cost are some of the highest in the world.

You have to admit it was pretty crafty how the EU went about restructuring their energy needs to acquire them from the lowest bidder. To craft a whole new line of products, goods and services you could sell on the market back by public funds. Use those same funds to coerce other countries to participate and entice investors with guaranteed public backing. If the lights go out no one is held accountable. The investment structure is hidden and investors are confidential. Development funds and aid have a long history of fiscal irresponsibility that often times are never held accountable. Now we are engaged in a scheme that can impose policies that could destabilize countries and the taxpayers who provided the funds will be held liable for the failures. The European Union needs to change it's name to European Catallaxy because that's what they've become, a catalysts behind forced political ideology, you engage or you get left behind.

The ‘Chekhov’s Gun’ of Political Intimidation

Having brought onto stage the weapon of political intimidation, the Left intends to use it at every turn. Groups like 
Shutdown D.C. and Ruth Sent Us are just the latest examples.

by Kyle Shideler for American Greatness

"If you say in the first chapter that there is a rifle hanging on the wall, in the second or third chapter, it absolutely must go off. If it's not going to be fired, it shouldn't be hanging there."

An attempt to accost Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh at Morton’s Steakhouse, a popular D.C. hangout, made national news last week. The move represented a mobile continuation of the tactic of targeting conservative justices outside their homes.

The targeting of Kavanaugh was led by antifa-aligned protest group Shutdown D.C., which has drawn attention in recent years for advocating the targeted protesting of political opponents. The group has since escalated by tweeting out a bounty for information about the location of conservative justices and posting flyers similarly offering money in exchange for facilitating harassment.

In response to the ongoing targeted abuse of judges, the head of security for the Supreme Court wrote a letter to Virginia and Maryland governors urging them to take action using existing state and local laws. Governors Larry Hogan and Glenn Youngkin (both Republicans) had previously written a joint letter to Biden Attorney General Merrick Garland asking the Department of Justice to enforce federal laws prohibiting the targeted intimidation of judges. Youngkin had also asked local county government officials to provide additional security for the homes of justices, but was given short shrift by the overwhelmingly Democratic county board of supervisors.

Meanwhile, Shutdown D.C. continues to operate openly and unapologetically.

For its part, the Biden Administration has all but openly endorsed the tactics of personally targeting opponents, hiding behind claims that actions by groups like Shutdown D.C. represent genuine “democracy” in action, rather than intimidation by a tiny subset of professional activists.

Originally created out of a coalition of environmentalist groups in preparation for a planned “Climate Shutdown” on September 20, 2019, Shutdown D.C. became one of the leading elements of a planned “uprising” (their words) in the event of a Trump election victory in 2020. The plan included occupying federal buildings and targeting key House and Senate members. They even discussed sabotaging communications equipment in a training call with infamous anarchist organizer Lisa Fithian, who noted, “In a situation of a coup or an insurrection or an uprising, whoever’s got the guns, often can win. We should be clear. Trump’s gotta go.”

Shutdown D.C. played a key role in developing target lists for harassment, carefully mapped to sophisticated ArcGIS software. One of their targets was Senator Josh Hawley (R-Mo.). On January 4, Shutdown D.C. illegally protestedoutside Hawley’s Virginia home, terrifying his wife Erin and family. Shutdown D.C. organizer Patrick Young was eventually charged with illegal trespass, pled no contest, and charges were dropped after Young promised to maintain distance from the senator’s family.

Since Biden took power, the lead organizers of Shutdown D.C. have attempted to shift their public image from street revolutionaries to clean-cut public relations gurus. Shutdown D.C’s organizers formed Movement Catalyst, which they describe as an “experienced and interdisciplinary team of strategists, organizers, and researchers, who will launch strategic projects to meet the moment, partner with organizations looking to expand their ability to have an impact, and anchor movement infrastructure.”

Movement Catalyst offers its partners the group’s target mapping system, “digital tools like mass texting and email software” along with “a PA system, megaphones, art supplies, vests, costumes, and other equipment . . .”

Shutdown D.C. and Movement Catalyst are not the only groups originally founded for a different purpose that now act as the tip of the spear in the Left’s post-Dobbs fight. The group Ruth Sent Us has been instrumental in the doxxing and targeting justices, as well as protesting and disrupting churches. But similarly, that group was not originally established for the abortion fight, but was formed following a 2018 call by U.S. Representative Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) to target Trump Administration officials with its lead organizer calling for officials to be “ambushed.” Ruth Sent Us leaders openly and explicitly endorse antifa principles, maintaining that their political opponents are Nazis who must be physically silenced, not fellow citizens who might be persuaded.

Rather than representing the will of a majority outraged by a Supreme Court decision, groups like Shutdown D.C. and Ruth Sent Us are better seen as radical mercenaries-for-hire paid to create the appearance of broad civil outrage. It’s unsurprising with disapproval numbers hovering around 60 percent, the Biden Administration prefers to define democracy as the stage-crafted outrage of the professional radicals.

But having normalized a system of harassment and coercion in response to its feverish Trump Derangement Syndrome, elements of the Left are increasingly willing to apply this tool any time they suffer a policy setback. Having brought onto stage the weapon of political intimidation, the Left intends to use it at every turn.

Unless the American public demands that such tactics be reined in and insists on punishing politically those who benefit from them, there will be no limit to who or what might be targeted.

Liz Cheney Epitomizes Never Trumpers’ Betrayal Of Our Nation

Like the rest of the Never Trumpers, Rep. Liz Cheney’s campaign is about destroying the GOP, not ‘saving’ it.

by Jonathan S. Tobin for The Federalist

Liz Cheney may be enjoying being treated like a heroine by the leftist corporate media that demonized her father and family for decades, but she hasn’t completely lost touch with reality.

The Never Trump turncoat not only became a key leader of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s McCarthyite show trial of Donald Trump under the guise of investigating the Jan. 6, 2021 Capitol Riot, but has also been masquerading as that sham’s ranking member. But she’s aware that being the principal star of the Democrat’s prime time television show has made her the object of near universal hostility from Republican voters. That’s doubly true in her family’s home state of Wyoming, where her defeat in the upcoming August primary has more or less been ensured by Trump’s popularity and conservatives’ hostility to those who seem to think demonizing GOP voters is a viable political strategy.

With polls showing her as far as 30 points behind primary challenger Harriet Hageman, Cheney knows that she’s going to need something of a miracle in order to hold onto the congressional seat she first parachuted into on the basis of her famous family name in 2016. That’s why she’s done the logical thing to save her political hide and is appealing to members of the party that she effectively joined last year to carry on her vendetta against Trump. With a considerable campaign war chest (largely raised from Democrats and ancien regime Republicans), her campaign is principally concerned with an effort to convince Wyoming Democrats to change their registration and vote for her in the August primary.

In doing so, she’s essentially given up on the dubious effort to convince Republicans that her participation in the Jan. 6 Committee inquisition is a matter of saving the honor of the GOP. Few if any actual Republican voters ever bought that line. Most understand that her decisions have everything to do with the ongoing pique of the GOP establishment about losing control of a party that they once ruled, while giving little thought to the desires or interests of their voters.

Given that Wyoming Democrats are a small minority, with not a single statewide candidate getting more than 30 percent of the vote in the last three election cycles, it’s far from clear whether the strategy has any chance of success. But it’s one that others in her small camp of fellow ex-conservative Trump haters are adopting.

Utah’s Never Trump-Democrat Alliance

In Utah, Evan McMullin, who ran for president in 2016 as the supposedly true conservative alternative to Donald Trump and actually managed to get 21 percent of the vote in his home state, is seeking to unseat incumbent Republican Sen. Mike Lee. In contrast to Cheney, who, when not otherwise occupied with demonizing Trump and those who voted for him, still maintains that she supports basic conservative stands on issues like illegal immigration, McMullin has long since abandoned the pretense that he shares many of the beliefs of most GOP voters.

That made it easy for Utah Democrats to endorse his independent candidacy rather than running one of their own in an almost certainly doomed effort to unseat Lee. That sets up a race in which McMullin has a chance to beat one of the most principled Senate conservatives, with a Deseret News poll taken last month showing him trailing Lee by only 41-35 percent. With Utah Sen. Mitt Romney maintaining the sort of neutrality in the contest that illustrates his conservative apostasy more than anything else, it’s entirely possible that a Never Trump-Democrat alliance might actually succeed in the quirky Utah political environment.

Democrats Divide and Conquer

All this points to smart politics being practiced by Democrats. They understand that they can do more to advance their agenda by seeking to divide and conquer Republicans by backing Never Trumpers. It also shows that the whole Never Trump idea has been more of a political scam than anything else. After Trump took office, he began to show that the not unreasonable skepticism about his willingness to actually implement conservative policies was actually unfounded.

The notion that the people who continue to pretend that Trump and his supporters have somehow betrayed conservatives are those who stand for the true values of the Republican Party never made much sense. But after four years in which Trump kept his promises on a variety of issues — from appointing pro-life conservatives to the U.S. Supreme Court, to deregulation, prioritizing the battle against illegal immigration, and even moving the U.S. embassy to Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem — it’s clear that those who fly under the Never Trump banner no longer truly support conservative ideas.

Indeed, in the wake of the court’s overturning of Roe v. Wade, it is simply impossible to claim that those seeking to tear down the GOP in order to supposedly save it are doing anything but acting as auxiliaries to the left.

Love him or hate him, Trump was, perhaps improbably to some, the most successful conservative president since the modern movement was born in the 1950s. Unlike the much more beloved President Ronald Reagan, Trump actually helped turn the liberal train around rather than merely trying to thwart its progress.

That means that in its current form, Never Trumpism is a unique variant of political opportunism geared at securing its adherents lucrative positions at legacy media companies and/or political offices where they can carry the water for Democrats, albeit under a false flag of independence.

Never Trumpism Is a Complete Betrayal of Our National Interest

At a time when the woke assault on traditional values and the Democrats’ quest for untrammeled power to remake the country in the image of their neo-Marxist goals, Never Trumpism isn’t so much a reflection of distaste with an unorthodox politician but a complete betrayal of conservatism and the national interest.

By seeking to be rewarded for her help for the Democrats from their voters, Cheney epitomizes both that betrayal as well as how profitable such a stand can potentially be. After she loses her primary, it is entirely likely that Cheney will continue to seek Democrat donations for a likely challenge to Trump — or other actual conservatives should he decide not to run for president in 2024 — while also likely becoming a talking head on CNN and MSNBC and thus keeping her career failing upward. But no one should be under the impression that that is anything more than an elaborate grift whose only end will be to satisfy her desire for attention and a financially secure platform from which to continue working against rather than for conservative policies and principles.

Ron Johnson Details 'Enormous Coverup' Going on by Admin Over Hunter Biden

Nick Arama reporting for RedState 

Over the last many days, we’ve reported on some of the more concerning things in the 4Chan dump of data purportedly from Hunter Biden’s iPhone backup related to the Bidens’ relationships with China and Russia, and the openness with which these things were discussed among the family.

Here was one comment from Hunter Biden to Hallie Biden, his dead brother’s wife, with whom he was having a relationship.

[V]ery alone in dealing with rebuilding an income that can support the enormous alimony and my kids costs and myself, dealing with the aftermath of the abduction and likely assassination (that’s what the NYT’s suspects) of my business partner the richest man in the world and the arrest and conviction of my client the chief of intelligence of the people’s republic of China by the US government, the retaliation of the Chinese in the ouster and arrest of US suspected CIA operatives inside China, my suspected involvement in brokering a deal with Vladimir Putin directly for the largest sale of oil gas assets inside Russia to China, a tax bill that Eric left hanging over my business and…And Dads running for president.

You have him talking about his relationship with Ye Jianming and a company connected to the Chinese government, the connection to Patrick Ho — whom he calls China’s “chief of intelligence,” and his “suspected involvement” of dealing with Putin directly on behalf of China. How many alarm bells do we have to ring before this gets the attention and the real investigation that this deserves?

RedState has been reporting on this for the past three years, with a ton of stories detailing the connections. With the 4Chan dump, there’s renewed attention, but much of this information has been out there for years, including “10 percent for the big guy,” who Tony Bobulinski, a former Hunter Biden business associate, reported in October 2020 was Joe Biden. Yet, the White House continues to avoid the question and Joe Biden continues to say he had no conversations with his son about his business. This, of course, was a lie, as I reported, in June when a new voicemail emerged that busted Joe from own his mouth.

(READ: Jennifer Van Laar and Scott Hounsell’s 7-part series on Hunter Biden’s business)

Now, it isn’t like the Republicans aren’t trying, but it’s challenging when you’re not the party in power and when the Biden team appears to be running a cover-up on the issue.

Rep. James Comer (R-KY) — the ranking member of the House Oversight Committee — explained they have a ton of Suspicious Activity Reports — 150 reports — regarding Hunter Biden and Jim Biden transactions, but now, the Biden Administration has changed the Treasury rules to make it harder for Congress to get those reports and thus, harder to uncover the problems. He said that would likely put them at the top of the list for reports. Comer previously said the Treasury Department was trying to thwart the GOP effort and had falsely represented that they’d turned over the requested documents to Congress.

Rep. Ron Johnson (R-WI) laid out some of the issues — including the question of Hunter Biden’s payments to Eastern European prostitutes who may have been allegedly part of a trafficking ring, and that Joe Biden may have funneled the money to Hunter that helped pay for some of those transactions. Johnson also laid out how Biden had canceled a DOJ initiative to investigate the Chinese theft of our intellectual property in the university system. Johnson said this was putting in danger our national security.

(READ: New Senate Report Confirms Hunter Biden’s Biz ties to CCP, Raises Troubling Ties to Kremlin)

Johnson used the term “enormous coverup” and detailed how Congress wasn’t getting the answers from the DOJ when they asked about what was going on here in terms of any sort of investigation, that the FBI had the laptop with what Johnson said was a lot of criminal activity, and Johnson expressed concern that if there was a plea agreement with Hunter Biden, it might also involve a sealing of the records which would prevent people from finding out more or addressing all of the problems.

There are now also reports about FBI contacts on Hunter Biden’s phone — perhaps Ron Johnson might want to ask the FBI about that. Because if true, why are they on there, and what was being discussed?

This stinks to high heaven and it’s one more reason that we need to vote out the Democrats in November if we’re ever going to get some action on the matter.

Analysis: The Global Uprisings that are Rejecting the Build Back Better Agenda

Appearing on GBNews with Dan Wootton, UK commentator Neil Oliver discusses and connects the Sri Lanka protests, the uprising in the Netherlands, and the aligned protests in Poland, Italy, Germany and much of the European continent.

As Oliver notes the pretorian guards for western politicians, aka the ‘western media’, are doing everything they can to ignore the global scale of the popular uprisings that are directly connected to the globalist agenda of the World Economic Forum and their Build Back Better orders to the western politicians.  The media ignore the issue until it reaches a point like Sri Lanka where it can no longer be ignored.  WATCH:

The Canadian trucker protests were targeted by Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau in an effort to quickly stop the spread of any opposition to the globalist agenda. However, in the Netherlands the Dutch farmers have several distinct advantages in their ability to impact the life of ordinary Dutch people, as they refuse to become victims to the new global feudalism.

Like Sri Lanka, the Netherlands is a case study in raw people power, where the government is represented by a select few people.  The only thing keeping the Dutch from storming the politicians’ palaces and government buildings is a preference for polite society.  If that preference changes, and it might as people get more desperate, well, katy-bar the door.

Sri Lanka (top)

The Netherlands (bottom)

Both uprisings are connected to the exact same dynamic.

For Biden, Polls Are Probably Worse Than They Seem

Things are unlikely to get better

by David Harsanyi for The Federalist

President Biden has a miserable 33 percent job-approval rating, according to the New York Times/Siena College poll, making him one of the least popular first-term presidents in history. Sixty-four percent of Democrats say they want another candidate in the 2024 presidential race.

No modern president, as far as I can tell, has faced higher dissatisfaction in his own party during his first term. Only 13 percent of voters say the United States is on the right track, the lowest number since they began asking this question during the great recession.

Not long ago, left-wing pundits couldn’t stop talking about Donald Trump’s poll numbers — “Donald Trump is remarkably unpopular,” “The unprecedented unpopularity of Donald Trump,” “Trump is officially the most unpopular president since modern polling began in the 1930s. It will forever be his legacy,” and so on. A president with that kind of piddling support, they would argue, had no business initiating policy changes. Nowadays, Democrats want their historically unpopular president to sign “transformative” legislation using reconciliation and unilaterally restructure American governance. The only consistent characteristic of modern liberalism is the unyielding belief that politics should be played by two sets of rules.

Still, I don’t put too much reliance on national polls. Yes, unpopularity matters. It hurts Democrats. It also further debunks the notion that the Democratic Party’s agenda items are vastly more popular, and Republicans who stand in their way are undermining “democracy.”

Republicans, though, should remember that job approval rating is measured in a bubble. The New York Times/Siena College poll finds Biden winning a match-up against Donald Trump 44-41. The real presidential election is largely a binary choice for those who vote, and many of those dissatisfied with Biden may never vote for a Republican.

Then again, this seems to be the only takeaway for Democrats like Joe Scarborough. “So Biden’s going into halftime shooting 33% from the field and he is STILL beating Trump University,” tweets Morning Joe. All these unforeseen and unfair events have befallen the poor Biden, they argue, and yet, he still leads Trump (conveniently forgetting that he also had to deal with a once-in-a-century worldwide pandemic and ensuing economic fallout from lockdowns.)

It’s certainly entertaining watching partisans feign excitement over their mollycoddled candidate holding a 44-41 lead in a national poll against a guy who is accused of sedition on virtually every news channel daily. What do these numbers look like when Trump (or someone like Ron DeSantis) is reminding voters what gas prices and their 401(k)s looked like before Covid?

Indeed, the left is again convincing themselves that winning a national poll means something. (Siena, incidentally, had Clinton up 17 points in its final 2016 poll.) There is no popular vote. Biden must win states. And the president is underwater in almost every one of them, on almost every issue, in almost every poll. I’m no prognosticator or election expert — Biden might well win reelection — but none of that could possibly be heartening news for Democrats.

I’m just unsure how it gets any better for Biden. Democrats on social media do a lot of self-soothing, convincing themselves that events will become more hospitable for the president. Perhaps, if Biden stopped undermining the economy and energy production, they may, to some extent. Economic indicators, however, aren’t projecting a big turnaround. Even if they did, Biden’s claim to moderation, largely a function of his age, has already been obliterated. Two-thirds of independents don’t approve of his performance. At the same time, Biden’s progressive rhetoric is also transparently unprincipled. Neither Biden, nor any president, really has the power to mollify progressives. Not until the Constitution is rendered inoperative.

With all that said, the prevailing concern about Biden among voters in the New York Times/Siena College poll isn’t ideological, it’s his age — by which we can deduce they mean his competence. In the 2020 race, Biden’s fragile state was largely concealed from the public by the campaign and press. These days, on the rare occasions the president wanders into an unscripted interaction, he is incoherent. The chances of the president’s cognitive state improving, I’m afraid, are nil. That’s not how nature works.

How Jill Biden Describes Each Ethnicity

Babylon Bee🐝

Jill Biden recently referred to Latino people as "Breakfast Tacos," eschewing the more politically correct term, "Brxxkfst Txcxs." Despite her faux pas, this isn't the first time she's used colorful language to describe some ethnicities. Here are most of the other times:

---

"Italians are a basket of free breadsticks at Olive Garden."

"The Irish are a variety pack of 12 different beers."

"White people are a rainbow of different mayonnaises."

"The Chinese are like a delightful assortment of fortune cookies."

"Pakistanis are like a bountiful selection of different Slurpees at 7-Eleven."

"Black people are clean and articulate."

"Scottish people are a boiled sheep's stomach filled with heart, liver, and lungs. Yum!"

"The English are a cheeky bunch of fish heads sticking out of a diverse pie."

"The Greeks are beautiful, spinning cones of gyro meat, twirling, twirling, twirling towards freedom."

"The French are a wonderfully woven tapestry of various baguettes."

"Canadians are a diverse group of very polite maple syrups."

"Indians are a large menu of different curry that smells weird but tastes really good and a little too spicy and then you regret eating the next day."

"Japanese people are like one big melting pot of fried rice. Or is that the Chinese? I get my yellows mixed up sometimes."

"Saudi Arabians are like one giant kabob with different diverse kinds of meat wedged on there."

---

Wow! She sure loves all the different ethnicities. We love you, Dr. Jill!