90 Miles From Tyranny

Friday, January 7, 2022

This Is How AOC THINKS Florida Conservatives Think Of Her And Her Boyfriend:

Pretty women out walking with gorillas down my street
From my window, I'm staring while my coffee goes cold
Look over there (where?)
There, there's a lady that I used to know
She's married now or engaged or something, so I'm told

Is she really going out with him?
Is she really gonna take him home tonight?
Is she really going out with him?
'Cause if my eyes don't deceive me, there's something going wrong around here

This Is How Florida Conservatives REALLY Think About Her And Her Boyfriend:

I was justified when I was five
Raising Cain, I spit in your eye
Times are changing, now the poor get fat
But the fever's gonna catch you when the bitch gets back

Bitch bitch, bitch is back
Bitch bitch, bitch is back
Bitch bitch, bitch is back
Bitch bitch, bitch is back

Food and Drug Administration Guidance Drives Racial Rationing of COVID Drugs

State triage policies cite FDA guidance to justify allocating care based on race

In New York, racial minorities are automatically eligible for scarce COVID-19 therapeutics, regardless of age or underlying conditions. In Utah, "Latinx ethnicity" counts for more points than "congestive heart failure" in a patient’s "COVID-19 risk score"—the state’s framework for allocating monoclonal antibodies. And in Minnesota, health officials have devised their own "ethical framework" that prioritizes black 18-year-olds over white 64-year-olds—even though the latter are at much higher risk of severe disease.

These schemes have sparked widespread condemnation of the state governments implementing them. But the idea to use race to determine drug eligibility wasn’t hatched in local health departments; it came directly from the federal Food and Drug Administration.

When the FDA issued its emergency use authorizations for monoclonal antibodies and oral antivirals, it authorized them only for "high risk" patients—and issued guidance on what factors put patients at risk. One of those factors was race.

The FDA "fact sheet" for Sotrovimab, the only monoclonal antibody effective against the Omicron variant, states that "race or ethnicity" can "place individual patients at high risk for progression to severe COVID-19." The fact sheet for Paxlovid, Pfizer’s new antiviral pill, uses the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s definition of "high risk," which states that "systemic health and social inequities" have put minorities "at increased risk of getting sick and dying from COVID-19."

The guidance sheets are nonbinding and do not require clinicians to racially allocate the drugs. But states have nonetheless relied on them to justify race-based triage.

"The FDA has acknowledged that in addition to certain underlying health conditions, race and ethnicity ‘may also place individual patients at high risk for progression to severe COVID-19,’" Minnesota’s plan reads. "FDA's acknowledgment means that race and ethnicity alone, apart from other underlying health conditions, may be considered in determining eligibility for [monoclonal antibodies]."

Utah’s plan contains similar language. In a section on the "Ethical Justification for Using Race/Ethnicity in Patient Selection," it notes that the FDA "specifically states that race and ethnicity may be considered when identifying patients most likely to benefit from this lifesaving treatment."

The FDA declined to comment on either state’s plan, saying only that "there are no limitations on the authorizations that would restrict their use in individuals based on race."

The triage plans are part of a broader push to rectify racial health disparities through race-conscious means. In March of last year, for example, two doctors at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston outlined an "antiracist agenda for medicine" that involved "offering preferential care based on race." And last year, Vermont and New Hampshire both gave racial minorities priority access to the COVID-19 vaccine, resulting in at least one formal civil rights complaint against New Hampshire.

The trend has alarmed Roger Severino, the former civil rights director at the Department of Health and Human Services, who called racial preferences in medicine a "corrosive and grossly unfair" practice.

"Our civil rights laws are not suspended during a public health emergency," Severino said. "We should never deny someone life-saving health care because of the color of their skin."

The triage plans show how federal guidelines can encourage this sort of race discrimination. They also suggest that the FDA is making political judgments, not just scientific ones.

"They’re injecting politics into science," said a former senior HHS official. "That’s something the Trump administration was pilloried for allegedly doing."

One clear sign of that politicization, several legal and medical experts said, is the guidance’s double standard between race and sex. Men in the United States have proven to be about 60 percent more likely than women to die of the disease, according to research from the Brookings Institution, and within some age brackets the mortality gap is even larger.

But the FDA doesn’t list sex as a risk factor anywhere in its guidance. And while the Utah scheme does take it into account, the New York and Minnesota schemes do not. Nor do they or the FDA give any weight to...

Quick Hits Of Wisdom, Knowledge And Snark #164

The Four Horsemen of the Left's Artificial Apocalypse

Let me state firmly my belief that we are on the precipice of a dramatic shift in human relations. The institutions, authorities, and cultural puppet masters that have hoarded power for centuries are screaming out today because they're breaking...and panicking. What have the last twenty-five years of technological innovations shown people? Among other things, the vast smorgasbord of free information that has exploded forth during this Digital Age big bang has put all the traditional "gatekeepers" on their back feet. The evening news broadcasts, the late-night comedy shows, and the White House Press Corps no longer maintain an exclusive monopoly over what is newsworthy. With ordinary people on social media proving themselves just as talented as most celebrity entertainers, Hollywood and the music industry no longer maintain an exclusive monopoly over what shapes our culture. And with the rise of Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies, we are fast approaching a time when central banks (and their client governments) no longer maintain a monopoly over fiat currencies that allow politicians and bankers to tax, punish, spend, and control citizens' wealth and livelihoods from the shadows of elite and insular economic clubs.

What these trends above represent is a fundamental transformation for human existence but not one toward international socialism, powerful oligarchies, or citizen subsistence. It is rather the rise of individual freedom at the expense and exclusion of government regulation and authority. These last twenty-five years of technological development have made it possible for humans to trade goods and services, knowledge, security, spiritual connection, and entertainment without consulting politicians, bureaucrats, pop stars, or corporate boards of directors. When you see this reality for what it truly is — nothing short of a technologically enabled revolution for human freedom and independence — it becomes obvious why those with power today have embraced authoritarianism and totalitarianism wherever we look. They have everything to lose and nothing to gain from our rising liberation. Their tyranny is their only salvation. In other words, the powers that be are all deeply afraid.

In response to their fear, everything the global elite do today is about pushing back against this organic revolution by consolidating power and wealth into as few hands as possible while trying to take over the technologies that have paved the way for greater individual freedom. These initiatives are collectivist (leftist) and globalist (oligarchical) in nature, and they all pursue the same aim: to weaken...

Tucker Carlson tells Cruz he’s “not buying it”

After encountering a huge backlash from conservatives for describing the events of January 6th 2021 as a “violent terrorist attack,” Senator Ted Cruz apologised and admitted that his language was “dumb” and “sloppy”.

Cruz appeared on Tucker Carlson’s evening show Thursday, apparently at his own request, and attempted to back track on what he said, claiming that he’d been referring to attacks on police.

Carlson said to Cruz “There are a lot of dumb people in the Congress. You are not one of them. I think you’re smarter than I am. And you never use words carelessly. And yet you called this a terror attack when by no definition was it a terror attack. That’s a lie. You told that lie on purpose, and I’m wondering why you did.”

Cruz responded “When you aired your episode last night, I sent you a text shortly thereafter and said listen, I would like to go on because the way I phrased things yesterday, it was sloppy, and it was frankly dumb.”

Carlson interjected, urging “Look, I’ve known you a long time. Since before you went to the Senate, you’re a Supreme court contender. You take words as seriously as any man who’s ever served in the Senate. And every word you repeated that phrase. I do not believe that you use that accidentally. I just don’t.”

Cruz again described his language as “a poor choice of words,” claiming that “as a result of my sloppy phrasing, it’s caused a lot of people to misunderstand what I meant.”

“Let me tell you what I meant,” The Senator continued, explaining “What I was referring to are the limited number of people who engaged in violent attacks against police officers. I think you and I both agree that if you assault a police officer, you should go to jail.”

“That’s who I was talking about. And the reason the phrasing was sloppy is I have talked dozens if not hundreds of times, I’ve drawn a distinction. I wasn’t saying that the thousands of peaceful protestors supporting Donald Trump are somehow terrorists. I wasn’t saying the millions of patriots across the country, supporting president Trump are terrorists,” Cruz declared, adding “And that’s what a lot of people have misunderstood that.”

Carlson continued to say he doesn’t believe Cruz. “Hold on a second,” the host shot back, noting “What you just said doesn’t make sense. So if somebody assaults a cop, he should be charged and go to jail. I couldn’t agree more. We have said that for years, but that person’s still not a terrorist. How many people have been charged with terrorism on January 6?”

Carlson continued, “Like why’d you use that word? You’re playing into the other side’s characterization, that… allows them to define an entire population as foreiegn combatants. And you know that so why’d you do it?”

Cruz responded, “The reason I’ve used that word for a decade, I have referred to people who violently assault police officers as terrorists. I’ve done so over and over and over again. If you look at all the assaults we’ve seen across the country, I’ve called that terrorism over and over again.”

The Senator continued, “That being said, Tucker, I agree with you. It was a mistake to say that yesterday. And the reason is what you just said, which is we’ve now had a year of Democrats in the media, twisting words, and trying to say that all of us are terrorists trying to say you’re a terrorist, I’m a terrorist.”

“And so look, I don’t like people who assault cops and, and, and I stand up and defend cops,” Cruz carried on, adding “The reason I use that word is that’s the word I’ve always used for people that violently attack cops. But in this context, I get why people were angry because we’ve had a year of the corrupt corporate media and Democrats claiming anyone who objected to the election fraud.”

“I guess I just don’t believe you,” Carlson said. “And I mean that with respect because I have such respect for your acuity and your precision.”

Cruz also tweeted the interview out, saying his words were dumb:

Before You Click On The "Read More" Link,

Please Only Do So If You Are Over 21 Years Old.

If You are Easily Upset, Triggered Or Offended, This Is Not The Place For You.

Please Leave Silently Into The Night......

You have come across a mystery box. But what is inside?

It could be literally anything from the serene to the horrific,

from the beautiful to the repugnant,

from the mysterious to the familiar.

If you decide to open it, you could be disappointed,

you could be inspired, you could be appalled.

This is not for the faint of heart or the easily offended.

You have been warned.

The Jan. 6 DISTRACTION: Glenn & President Trump on Overcoming America’s REAL Challenges

Girls With Guns

Before we existed the cloning began

The cloning of man and woman

When we're gone they'll live on, cloned endlessly
It's mandatory in heaven

But they won't remember or ever be tender
No loving, no caring, no program for pairing
No V.D., no cancer, on T.V's the answer
No father, no mother, she's just like the other