Vaccine Good for ONLY Six Months or Less—Health or Money?

This is why Biden, Newsom, Fauci and the rest of the scam artists are telling us to wear a mask.  They know the vaccine is ONLY good for six months—if that long.  Worse, they continue to refuse to give us the risks, short term or long of the vaccine.  Watch for the schools to go back to “distance non-learning” and folks forced to show the worthless vaccine cars—even though that is illegal.

“The Pfizer / BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine’s protection against severe cases of the disease holds steady after six months, according to new data released by the companies. But its ability to protect people from developing any symptoms of the disease dropped over time, the analysis showed.

The data could add to the debate around if and when people may need booster doses of the vaccines, which the Biden administration, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and other experts have been deliberating on for the past few months. The issue became more pressing when cases of COVID-19 in the United States started to surge as the Delta variant spread.

Once we get rid of the so called Delta virus, expect a replacement virus, “even worse that the Delta” we will be told.  This is not about health, it is about total control

Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine’s protection against severe disease holds steady over six months

Efficacy dropped for symptomatic disease overall

By Nicole Wetsman, The Verge,   7/28/21   

The Pfizer / BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine’s protection against severe cases of the disease holds steady after six months, according to new data released by the companies. But its ability to protect people from developing any symptoms of the disease dropped over time, the analysis showed.

The data could add to the debate around if and when people may need booster doses of the vaccines, which the Biden administration, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and other experts have been deliberating on for the past few months. The issue became more pressing when cases of COVID-19 in the United States started to surge as the Delta variant spread.

Overall, the vaccine was 91 percent effective against symptomatic COVID-19 over six months. It was the most protective in the stretch starting seven days after the second dose and running for two months: in that window, it was 96 percent effective. Its efficacy then dropped around 6 percent every two months — to 90 percent between months two and four after vaccination, and to around 84 percent between months four and six after vaccination.

There wasn’t a similar drop in efficacy against severe cases of COVID-19 — defined as cases where blood oxygen levels drop below 93 percent and heart and respiratory rate are elevated. The vaccine’s efficacy against those severe cases stayed high at 97 percent for the entire six-month stretch after people got their shots.

The data was published as a preprint by Pfizer and has not been reviewed by outside scientists. It was released on the day of the company’s earnings call, where it also released internal data showing that a third dose of the vaccine could boost levels of antibodies against the Delta variant of the virus.

The findings came from the study that started last summer to test the safety and efficacy of the vaccine. The first set of findings from that study were the results the Food and Drug Administration used to authorize the shot. The companies continued to follow the more than42,000 participants in that study to check how the vaccine performed over time.

The analysis also found no new safety concerns in people who had been vaccinated for six months. The company will continue to follow participants for two years after they received the vaccines.

Biden Preparing to Flood U.S. With Refuges From Africa—With Ebola!

These three stories, separately have little meaning.  Combined it shows the next effort by Democrats to harm the health of the American people—by bringing sick foreigners into our nation.  Our immigration laws are clear—you must be healthy to come into our nation.

Biden has opened our borders to bring COVID-19 carrying illegal aliens into the country.

Now, he is bringing sick Africans into the U.S.  That explains why Fauci wants to start making Ebola vaccines—to handle the sick people Biden is bringing into the nation.

Ready for the Ebola virus crisis—will this “require” masks, lockdowns and social distancing—or maybe just stopping the planes coming into the United States.  It is obvious that Biden is incapable of making health decisions for our nation—he can’t make health decisions for himself.

Refugees Get Free Flights To United States

Delta and United Airlines Public Relations Team, by Staff Original Article

Posted by mark1234 — 7/27/2021 6:37:54 PM Post Reply

Delta and United Airlines have partnered with charity non profit group Miles 4 Migrants to give all needy African refugees a free flight to the united states.

Congress Approves 320 Million Ebola Spending Bill To Build New Ebola Treatment Centers For Refugees With Ebola

Congressional Registrar, by Staff Original Article

Posted by mark1234 — 7/27/2021 6:24:14 PM Post Reply

Congress Ebola budget bill would provide $320 million for the Hospital Preparedness Program (HPP) within the office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response (ASPR), exceeding the $292.8 million total proposed by the president. Within the total, the bill includes increases for the core HPP cooperative agreements, the National Emerging Special Pathogens Training and Education Center (NETEC), and to expand the number of Regional Ebola and Other Special Pathogen Treatment Centers (RESPTC). The spending bill would also increase funding for other preparedness programs, including the CDC’s Public Health Emergency Preparedness program, the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority, the Strategic National Stockpile, and pandemic flu efforts.

Dr. Fauci Starts Making Ebola Vaccines for Next Ebola Pandemic

Texas Bio Medical Research Center, by Staff Original Article

Posted by mark1234 — 7/27/2021 6:22:09 PM Post Reply

Dr. Fauci has begun to make ebola vaccines for the next Ebola Pandemic . Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, is promoting an ambitious and expensive plan to prepare for such nightmare scenarios. It would cost “a few billion dollars” a year, take five years for the first crop of results and engage a huge cadre of scientists, he said.

Hintz: Ventura County Pension System- We will Loan $10 Million to the Slave State of CHINA

As a 33 year resident of Ventura County, I am absolutely embarrassed that the County Pension Board took the advice of “Bain” and invested in slave companies in China.  Remember, Bain was once headed by Mitt Romney and financed the business ventures of Meg Whitman.

China puts Muslims in slave labor camps, concentration camps.  No free speech, government controls the Internet, it kills its citizens without trials.  This is a nation that took freedom from the people of Hong Kong—and the people of Ventura County are financing this corrupt, vicious, tyrannical State.

Thanks to the Ventura County elected Treasurer, Steven Hintz, for exposing them vile abuse of humans.  This is from his Facebook account of the situation.

Bain’s argument was that there is little risk that the PRC would nationalize the companies and disavow the loans, and that “things are looking better in PRC.” REALLY? For the people and businesses in Hong Kong? For the Uyghurs who are in slave labor camps? And anyway, who believes that any business in the PRC isn’t controlled by the CCP, which completely controls the PRC government?

Seriously, Bain trusts the Communist Chinese to be honest and act as capitalists?  Worse, the Pension Board for Ventura County needs to read about current day China.  This Board needs to be replaced.  A former leader of the Soviet Union once famously said, “We will kill you with the rope you sell us.”  Guess the Ventura County Pension Board is willing to kill us all.  Shame on them.

Ventura County Pension System:  We will Loan $10 Million to the Slave State of CHINA

Judge Hintz the elected Treasurer/Tax collector and a director on VCERA (Ventura County Pension board) posted this on Facebook; 

Treasurer Steven Hintz, Facebook, 7/25/21

Yesterday the board of directors of the Ventura County Employees Retirement Association (VCERA) approved a Bain Capital investment proposal to lend at least $10Million to so-called “private companies” in the People’s Republic of China. Only Supervisor Kelly Long and I voted against it.

Bain’s argument was that there is little risk that the PRC would nationalize the companies and disavow the loans, and that “things are looking better in PRC.” REALLY? For the people and businesses in Hong Kong? For the Uyghurs who are in slave labor camps? And anyway, who believes that any business in the PRC isn’t controlled by the CCP, which completely controls the PRC government?

The VCERA board claims it keeps politics out of its investing strategy. That claim is contradicted by its continuing interest in ESG investing. But helping out the PRC/CCP isn’t just a simple political decision . . . it has to do with moral principles. So it should not be a surprise that it was Bain Capital that pitched this idea with perfectly straight faces.

I campaigned hard for this job, partly on the slogan “It’s Your Money.” It isn’t just County employees’ money . . . it is taxpayer money. And it is going to support the PRC.

Gubernatorial hopeful Kevin Kiley swings through Fresno, pitches himself as antidote to Newsom

(Full Disclosure:  I am working for the election of Assemblyman Kevin Kiley for Governor)

Here is the problem.  When the Recall passes, we know a Republican will win.  They will have 13 months before an election for a full term.  How much can they get done in that time to earn re-election as Governor?  Only one candidate is prepared on Day One to be Governor.  Only one knows intimately the policies, issues and politics of California.  Only one knows the governmental agencies.  Kiley will not need a couple of months in office to learn the ropes and find the bathroom.

Only one candidate has been actively promoting the Recall from the start.  Some never participated in a single Recall event, nor gave a speech or interview promoting the Recall and fought Newsom.  These people parachuted into the race.

When AG Becerra hired Eric Holder, it was Kiley that took the lead against this bigot from the Obama Administration.  It was Kiley, and Gallagher, that sued to stop all mail ballots.  It was Kiley and Gallagher that successfully sued Guv Newsom.  Only Kiley wrote a book on why we needed the Recall.

If you have a chance—like at Saturday at 10:00am at the Culver City, City Hall in L.A. County or on August 3 in Redding to meet and hear Kiley, come see the next Governor.

Gubernatorial hopeful Kevin Kiley swings through Fresno, pitches himself as antidote to Newsom

Daniel Gligich, The Sun,  7/28/21   

California gubernatorial recall candidate Asm. Kevin Kiley stopped in Fresno on Tuesday to promote himself as the contrast the state needs from Gov. Gavin Newsom.

Kiley, a Republican state lawmaker from California’s 6th Assembly District located northeast of Sacramento, spoke to the Fresno County and City Republican Women organization in central Fresno.

Following the event, Kiley sat down with The Sun to discuss the recall, which is picking up steam according to a recent poll from the Los Angeles Times and Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies.

The poll found that 47 percent of likely voters will support the recall while 50 percent will back Newsom.

“This is what I said was going to happen, because what we’ve seen is that the closer people are paying attention, the more they’re tuning in, the more likely they are to support the recall,” Kiley said. “So it stands to reason that as we get closer to the election, as more people start tuning in, it’s going to tighten up, and I think we have a good chance of then getting over the line.”

The poll has Kiley in fourth place with 5 percent of the vote, behind Larry Elder (18 percent), John Cox (10 percent) and Kevin Faulconer (10 percent).

However, Kiley noted that the poll was conducted only 12 days after he announced his candidacy, giving him hope that he will continue to pick up support before the Sep. 14 election.

“We hadn’t spent any money yet on large-scale voter contact, and we’re already sort of separated from the rest of the pack at the top four,” Kiley said. “We think we definitely have the momentum, and I’m seeing it everywhere I go. We think we’re in a good position.”

With the crowded field that is vying for Newsom’s seat, Kiley is focused on placing himself as a direct opponent of the governor and not the other candidates.

“I’m drawing all of my contrast with Gavin Newsom because I view him as my opponent,” Kiley said. “The other folks on the ballot, I view them as being part of the same team because we all share an interest in removing him.”

The legislator did note that his hands-on experience in the legislature puts him in position to tackle the state’s issues immediately.

“I’ve been at the Capitol now as a member of the legislature for five years. I’ve been trying to fight the corruption,” Kiley said.

“I’ve been trying to fight to turn our state around, and in the last 16 months I’ve been trying to fight Newsom’s one man rule in every way I can in court, resolutions, the county level, by introducing a resolution to terminate the state of emergency. So I know what exactly the problems are and how to go about fixing them, and I’d be ready to go to start doing that on day one.”

Kiley criticized Newsom for his response during the COVID-19 pandemic, which he called “an approach of government control to a greater degree than any state in the country.”

On Monday, Newsom announced that all state employees must either receive the COVID-19 vaccine or undergo weekly testing. The California State University system followed that up on Tuesday with its own announcement requiring all faculty, staff and students to get vaccinated. Kiley said he disagreed with that decision and thinks the university should leave it to individual choice. 

“We’ve had the worst lockdowns of any state. We had the worst school closures in any state. Anything you look at, California has taken the approach of most government control, and as a result we’ve had the worst outcomes of any state in the country in terms of the economy, in terms of education and among the worst public health outcomes when you measure excess mortality,” Kiley said. 

“So the evidence is very clear that the governor’s approach has been a catastrophic failure, and yet here again he is with more government control as the solution. I think that we long ago became familiar enough with this virus to leave it to individual citizens to make their own decisions.” 

Kiley also addressed two major problems facing California: the water and homelessness crises. 

To help the state survive through the drought, Kiley said he – as an assemblyman – is going to introduce a constitutional amendment that will allocate a fixed portion of the general fund annually to water storage and water infrastructure projects. 

“We’ve long been promised this is going to happen, but very little has actually been built,” Kiley said. “That will provide us with the capacity to ride out the cycles of wetness and dryness that are endemic to California’s climate.” 

As governor, Kiley said he would undertake a systematic review of all regulations that have been issued from state agencies that interfere with productive water use.

“A lot of these things that are done supposedly in the name of the environment don’t do any good, and yet farmers – and as we’re seeing now even urban indoor users – are paying the price,” Kiley said.

On the homelessness crisis, Kiley criticized Newsom and the legislature for adding $12 billion to the budget for homelessness issues.

“We spend an extraordinary amount of money on homelessness,” Kiley said. I actually requested an audit of all the homelessness spending last year as a member of the legislature. There was a poll showing 90 percent of the public supported my audit. Try getting 90 percent of the public to agree on anything, and yet Gavin Newsom’s administration intervened to stop the audit.”

His plan is two-fold: ensure that there is enough shelter for every person living on the streets and then provide the necessary services to help them get on their feet, such as mental health counseling, substance abuse treatment and job training. 

“This isn’t brain surgery,” Kiley said. “We can look at what’s worked in other states, and we can actually start doing it here. Gavin Newsom’s approach just to throw in more money, maybe give someone a hotel, don’t give them the help they need – there’s no evidence that that works.”

LA Times: Maybe we shouldn’t follow California’s example on electric cars

We are in the midst of brownouts and blackouts.  Dams that provide hydroelectric power from Oregon are being demolished.  The State is closing Diablo Canyon nuclear facility—which provides 10% of our energy—with NO replacement energy.  Yet Sacramento is forcing us to buy electric vehicles—and at the same time control the distribution and use, plus cost, of the recharging stations.  Sacramento could force you to only drive 100 miles a week, at a high cost.

You know this is a bad policy when the sycophants at the El Segundo Times, formerly the L.A. Times, says electric buses are a bad buy.

“Two months ago, the New York Times and CNN raised warning flags on the environmental costs of transitioning to electric cars. Last week, the Los Angeles Times followed suit, although in this case it’s the California dog that doesn’t bark that should be of greatest interest to that question. Even without the obvious questions about energy for recharging, however, the LAT raises a series of environmental issues with the necessary mining to sustain production of EVs.

The platform is as notable as the reporting in this case:

The drama playing out in the deep sea is just one act in a fast unfolding, ethically challenging and economically complex debate that stretches around the world, from the cobalt mines of Congo to the corridors of the Biden White House to fragile desert habitats throughout the West where vast deposits of lithium lay beneath the ground.”

When will the environmental movement protest electric vehicles!

LA Times: Maybe we shouldn’t follow California’s example on electric cars

Ed Morrissey, HotAir,   7/26/21   

Two months ago, the New York Times and CNN raised warning flags on the environmental costs of transitioning to electric cars. Last week, the Los Angeles Times followed suit, although in this case it’s the California dog that doesn’t bark that should be of greatest interest to that question. Even without the obvious questions about energy for recharging, however, the LAT raises a series of environmental issues with the necessary mining to sustain production of EVs.

The platform is as notable as the reporting in this case:

The drama playing out in the deep sea is just one act in a fast unfolding, ethically challenging and economically complex debate that stretches around the world, from the cobalt mines of Congo to the corridors of the Biden White House to fragile desert habitats throughout the West where vast deposits of lithium lay beneath the ground.

The state of California is inexorably intertwined in this drama. Not just because extraction companies are aggressively surveying the state’s landscapes for opportunities to mine and process the materials. But because California is leading the drive toward electric cars.

No state has exported more policy innovations — including on climate, equality, the economy — than California, a trend accelerating under the Biden administration. The state relishes its role as the nation’s think tank, though the course it charts for the country has, at times, veered in unanticipated directions.

Ahem. Other parts of the country have their own thoughts on “Californication,” including my newly adopted state of Texas, which are nowhere near as positive as this suggests. That is, though, one reason why it matters that the LA Times makes this deep dive into the adverse environmental and national-security impacts of EVs. They are more inclined to cheer on such “policy innovations” rather than think deeply about their implications, and this bracing look at the environmental toll of necessary mining probably comes as a surprise to a significant amount of their readership.

The “point of pride” that the LAT describes next is somewhat debatable in context:

The success of electric cars is a point of pride for not just California, but the Biden administration, which is trying to meet the commitments in the Paris climate accord. But it is also a point of panic. The administration warns the transition threatens to leave the nation vulnerable to the whims of countries that control supply chains. President Biden in June ordered the Departments of Energy and the Interior to help industry bolster mining and processing of battery materials.

China controls most of the market for the raw-material refining needed for the batteries and dominates component manufacturing; industry analysts warn the monopolization presents not only an economic risk, but also a national security one.

The cost of finding new sources for raw materials and loosening China’s grip on the supply chains is large. That much is clear in Thacker Pass, a windswept pocket of northern Nevada where the Fort McDermitt Paiute and Shoshone Tribe has for centuries hunted sage grouse, collected plants for medicine, and gathered for ceremonies. It is also the largest reserve of lithium in the United States.

Neither CNN nor the NYT mentioned Thacker Pass by name, but their coverage appears to have focused on it as well. The native tribe leadership involved claims to have been somewhat misled by mining operations hoping to extract the mineral sources in the area. In one way, tribal secretary Daranda Hinkey may have been misled by the entire enviro movement:

Hinkey, 23, studied environmental policy at Southern Oregon University, examining transportation emissions and climate change and the green economy. “But we did not talk about things like this,” she said. “We never talked about, ‘Look at how much they are extracting.’ We talked about sustainability, but this does not seem sustainable.”

Surprise! “Sustainable” is in the eye of the mining beholder, and mining “victim” if you will. It’s the NIMBY impulse all over again: cheering “sustainability” feels very good, right up to the point where it requires exploitation of land you actually value. It’s a replay of the fight over offshore windmills in Maryland, Massachusetts, and other places where otherwise-liberal communities suddenly resent the intrusion of “sustainable” infrastructure.

In this case, however, Hinkey’s more correct than she knows, and not just because of the mining operations that will be required to transition all personal vehicles to the power grid. The LAT never gets around to addressing the obvious question: how does a state that cannot sustain power to homes expect to generate the necessary extra energy needed to recharge millions of vehicles every day? California can’t even meet the demand it has now, thanks to regulations barring or severely restricting the use of fossil fuels in the state for electricity production. The state now has regular rolling blackouts to keep from crashing its grid during high-demand periods and has to buy energy from neighboring states at higher rates to keep those as limited as possible.

How sustainable is that model? Why is California pushing policies that will vastly expand electricity demand while requiring environmentally destructive operations — especially in pursuit of “environmentalism”? For understandable reasons, the LAT doesn’t even raise that issue, avoiding it just as did CNN and the New York Times, and likely for the same reason. To raise the question in this case is to answer it, and to admit that the state has Californicated itself. The Biden administration may be intent on Californicating the rest of us, but perhaps the recognition of the environmental costs of extraction (not to mention disposal, which the LAT also avoids) might end up stalling the process long enough for wiser heads to prevail.

American Women’s Soccer Team Defeated After Opponents Play U.S. National Anthem During Game Forcing Them To Kneel The Whole Time

The world has finally found an way to easy beat the U.S. Women’s Olympic Soccer Team—which refuses to represent the United States.  All their opponents have to do is play the American National Anthem, and our players will drop to their knees.  Another way would be to play the Black National Anthem, the Team will drop to their knees and cry, pray that their sins against people of color, the tears will not allow them to see for a few minutes—enough time to score several goals against them.

“”It’s a genius strategy,” said one commentator as a singer on the sidelines began singing, “O say can you see, by the dawn’s early light” over the stadium’s sound system. Megan Rapinoe was going to intercept a pass but dutifully took a knee and was forced to turn over the ball to the other team, or however it is that soccer works. “Beautiful play there! It’s going to be tough to see the U.S. women recover from this one!”

“Oooh, and now the singer is going hard into the ‘home of the brave’ stanza, really forcing the U.S. women to stay kneeling. “Wicked brilliant!” (We are told “wicked brilliant” means “cool” or “dope” in British.)

BTW, every time you buy a Subway sandwich, you are financing hate against our nation.  Subway has Megan Rapinoe as their TV ad spokesperson. 

American Women’s Soccer Team Defeated After Opponents Play U.S. National Anthem During Game Forcing Them To Kneel The Whole Time

BabylonBee.com, 7/27/21 

TOKYO—The U.S. Women’s Soccer Team’s Olympic hopes are once again in jeopardy after opponents came up with a clever way to defeat them: playing the U.S. national anthem during every game so that the women have to kneel the entire time.

It’s a move many are calling the “greatest 4D chess move of all time.” Some are even saying it’s the most important strategy developed in soccer since the kick was invented. Many are hopeful it will even get Americans interested in watching soccer again.

“It’s a genius strategy,” said one commentator as a singer on the sidelines began singing, “O say can you see, by the dawn’s early light” over the stadium’s sound system. Megan Rapinoe was going to intercept a pass but dutifully took a knee and was forced to turn over the ball to the other team, or however it is that soccer works. “Beautiful play there! It’s going to be tough to see the U.S. women recover from this one!”

“Oooh, and now the singer is going hard into the ‘home of the brave’ stanza, really forcing the U.S. women to stay kneeling. “Wicked brilliant!” (We are told “wicked brilliant” means “cool” or “dope” in British.)

At the end of their first match in which the opposing team employed this tactic, the women lost 27-1, having scored one goal when Rapinoe stood up briefly when the singer ran out of breath.

This is a rendering of what this post might look like in Google's search results.<br/><br/>Read <a href="https://yoast.com/snippet-preview/#utm_source=wordpress-seo-metabox&utm_medium=inline-help&utm_campaign=snippet-preview">this post</a> for more info.
Pick the main keyword or keyphrase that this post/page is about.<br/><br/>Read <a href="https://yoast.com/focus-keyword/#utm_source=wordpress-seo-metabox&utm_medium=inline-help&utm_campaign=focus-keyword">this post</a> for more info.
The SEO title defaults to what is generated based on this sites title template for this posttype.
The meta description is often shown as the black text under the title in a search result. For this to work it has to contain the keyword that was searched for.<br/><br/>Read <a href="https://yoast.com/snippet-preview/#utm_source=wordpress-seo-metabox&utm_medium=inline-help&utm_campaign=focus-keyword">this post</a> for more info.
Snippet Preview%%title%% – California Political Review www.capoliticalreview.com/
Focus Keyword:
SEO Title:
Meta description:The meta description will be limited to 156 chars, chars left.

No tags added yet, click here or on the button below to add one!

American Women’s Soccer Team Defeated After Opponents Play U.S. National Anthem During Game Forcing Them To Kneel The Whole Time

BabylonBee.com, 7/27/21  https://babylonbee.com/news/american-womens-soccer-team-defeated-after-opponents-play-us-national-anthem-during-game-forcing-them-to-kneel-the-whole-time

TOKYO—The U.S. Women’s Soccer Team’s Olympic hopes are once again in jeopardy after opponents came up with a clever way to defeat them: playing the U.S. national anthem during every game so that the women have to kneel the entire time.

It’s a move many are calling the “greatest 4D chess move of all time.” Some are even saying it’s the most important strategy developed in soccer since the kick was invented. Many are hopeful it will even get Americans interested in watching soccer again.

“It’s a genius strategy,” said one commentator as a singer on the sidelines began singing, “O say can you see, by the dawn’s early light” over the stadium’s sound system. Megan Rapinoe was going to intercept a pass but dutifully took a knee and was forced to turn over the ball to the other team, or however it is that soccer works. “Beautiful play there! It’s going to be tough to see the U.S. women recover from this one!”

“Oooh, and now the singer is going hard into the ‘home of the brave’ stanza, really forcing the U.S. women to stay kneeling. “Wicked brilliant!” (We are told “wicked brilliant” means “cool” or “dope” in British.)

At the end of their first match in which the opposing team employed this tactic, the women lost 27-1, having scored one goal when Rapinoe stood up briefly when the singer ran out of breath.

Free School Meals for All Here to Stay in California

California government schools have “health clinics”.  Without telling the parents, government schools are providing either on or off campus mental health therapy, birth control advice, assistance and even trips to Planned Parenthood.  Though masks are unhealthy for young students, government is demanding the kids harm their health.  Now the State has taken over the feeding of our kids in school.

“With 1 in every 6 children facing hunger in the U.S., California is the first state to promise every public school student — all 6 million of them — free school meals.

The universal school meals program, which will launch in the 2022-2023 school year, is part of the landmark state budget agreement reached between Gov. Gavin Newsom and the Legislature last month. Days later, Maine became the second state to commit to offering a universal school meals program with the signing of its budget.

The program ensures that all students will be offered breakfast and lunch at their school, which state Sen. Nancy Skinner, D-Berkeley, said is “essential to learning.” Skinner has led the effort to establish a universal school meal program.

Breakfast and lunch, no parent decision allowed.  Children will eat what government wants them to have.  How soon before California government turns campuses gyms and cafeteria’s into dorms—and students stay on campus five days a week—it will be suggested by the totalitarians of Sacramento.

Free School Meals for All Here to Stay in California

Ali Tadayon, EdSource, KQED,   7/27/21  

With 1 in every 6 children facing hunger in the U.S., California is the first state to promise every public school student — all 6 million of them — free school meals.

The universal school meals program, which will launch in the 2022-2023 school year, is part of the landmark state budget agreement reached between Gov. Gavin Newsom and the Legislature last month. Days later, Maine became the second state to commit to offering a universal school meals program with the signing of its budget.

The program ensures that all students will be offered breakfast and lunch at their school, which state Sen. Nancy Skinner, D-Berkeley, said is “essential to learning.” Skinner has led the effort to establish a universal school meal program.

“We know that many California children are food insecure, and if you’re hungry you cannot learn well,” Skinner said. “The whole point of school is learning, and everything we can do to create an environment that allows children to thrive and learn is what we need to do.”

Sponsored

Skinner introduced a bill in March that would have established a universal school meal program.

After the program garnered bipartisan support and the California Department of Finance forecast unexpectedly large projected revenues, lawmakers opted to include it in the state budget rather than as a separate bill.

The final agreement between Newsom and the Legislature calls for $650 million through the Proposition 98 fund each year to reimburse school districts starting in 2022, as well as $54 million in the 2021-22 fiscal year to supplement state meal reimbursements. Proposition 98 is the formula that determines what portion of the general fund goes to community colleges and K-12 schools.

The state program is set to begin in the 2022-23 school year because the U.S. Department of Agriculture has already committed to paying for school meals for all students through the 2021-22 school year.

‘The whole point of school is learning, and everything we can do to create an environment that allows children to thrive and learn is what we need to do.’State Sen. Nancy Skinner, D-Berkeley

The USDA has reimbursed districts for providing free meals to all students since the start of the pandemic. Before the pandemic, districts were only reimbursed for feeding students who were enrolled in the National School Lunch Program. Advocates said being able to feed students without having to check whether they qualified for free lunches allowed districts to serve more families at a time when many faced hunger and hardship.

Waiving the eligibility requirements allowed the Oakland Unified School District, for example, to distribute as many as 18,000 grab-and-go meals a day during the pandemic, said OUSD spokesman John Sasaki.

“That just goes to show the need that was there,” Sasaki said.

Previously, as part of the National School Lunch Program application process, families had to disclose their household income, how many people lived in the household, their children’s immigration status or if their children were homeless or runaways. Some families feared giving out that information, and students may have felt embarrassed to receive a free meal while others paid for it.

Schools in New York City began serving free meals to all students in 2017 after finding that some students would rather go hungry than admit they didn’t have enough money to pay for lunch. The decision followed a national outcry over “lunch shaming” — publicly shaming students for unpaid school meal bills, or even school staff throwing away their lunches rather than allowing them to eat.

Advocates believed that though 3.9 million students — 63% of California’s student body — participated in the program, the need was actually much higher.

“It’s such good news that everybody gets food with no strings attached, but to be able to do it in a way that nobody is called out is the best thing about this,” Sasaki said. “We want to make sure kids are never given a hard time for being who they are or being in the situation they are in.”

Districts will still be asking families to fill out household income eligibility forms, however. That’s because the number of families in the district that make so little that they qualify for the federal free and reduced-price lunch program remains a key factor in the state’s Local Control Funding Formula. The formula gives additional state funds to districts based on the number of low-income students, English learners, foster children and homeless youth they serve.

Tony Wold, West Contra Costa Unified School District associate superintendent of business services, said the district was concerned that fewer families would fill out the household income eligibility forms because they didn’t have to in order to receive free meals. That could have potentially led to a reduction in supplemental funds for the cash-strapped district. To help solve the problem, the district had outreach workers call families directly, explaining why it was important for families to submit the information.

‘We want to make sure kids are never given a hard time for being who they are or being in the situation they are in.’Spokesman John Sasaki, Oakland Unified School District

The outreach workers’ “big lift” resulted in more families filling out the forms than the previous year, Wold said, which kept the district’s unduplicated pupils percentage constant. That statistic measures the share of a district’s students who are low-income, homeless, foster youth or English learners — all of which drive the Local Control Funding Formula.

Outreach workers at Oakland Unified emphasize to families who are skeptical about the forms that they determine how much money goes to the classroom, Sasaki said.

California School Boards Association spokesman Troy Flint said the organization anticipates it will be harder for districts to collect income eligibility forms with the new universal meals program. The association hopes the state will provide some support to schools’ “diligent and creative efforts” to collect the forms, though the group isn’t calling for any specific change.

“This administration has prioritized steering additional money toward high-need students, particularly into concentration grants, so there’s reason to believe they might be willing to work toward a modification here,” Flint said.

Med Schools Are Now Denying Biological Sex–MEN an Have Babies!!

This is impossible to imagine. 

A medical school in the UC system is telling students not to use the phrase “pregnant woman”

“During a recent endocrinology course at a top medical school in the University of California system, a professor stopped mid-lecture to apologize for something he’d said at the beginning of class.

“I don’t want you to think that I am in any way trying to imply anything, and if you can summon some generosity to forgive me, I would really appreciate it,” the physician says in a recording provided by a student in the class (whom I’ll call Lauren). “Again, I’m very sorry for that. It was certainly not my intention to offend anyone. The worst thing that I can do as a human being is be offensive.” 

His offense: using the term “pregnant women.” 

“I said ‘when a woman is pregnant,’ which implies that only women can get pregnant and I most sincerely apologize to all of you.”

Yes, this medical “professional”: is claiming that MEN can get pregnant.  In all of history there is not a single case of a man giving birth to a baby.  In other words, this profess is teaching that male and female do not exists.  Seriously do you want to send your husband to an OBGYN?  Would you trust a doctor who believes men can get pregnant?  We are killing the military, entertainment and sports have become political platforms, education no longer exists—now even the medical profession is denying basic facts.

Med Schools Are Now Denying Biological Sex

Professors are apologizing for saying ‘male’ and ‘female.’ Students are policing teachers. This is what it looks like when activism takes over medicine.

 Katie Herzog, BariWeiss,   7/27/21 

A human anatomy dummy stands next to a chemical/periodic table in classroom.(Patrick Downs/Los Angeles Times via Getty Images)

Today we bring you another installment of Katie Herzog’s ongoing series about the spread of woke ideology in the field of medicine. Her first story focused on the ideological purge at the top medical schools and teaching hospitals in the country. “Wokeness,” as one doctor put it, “feels like an existential threat.”

Katie’s latest reporting illustrates some of the most urgent elements of that threat. It focuses on how biological sex is being denied by professors fearful of being smeared by their students as transphobic. And it shows how the true victims of that denial are not sensitive medical students but patients, perhaps most importantly, transgender ones. 

Some of you may find Katie’s story shocking and disconcerting and perhaps even maddening. You might also ask yourself: How has it come to this? How has this radical ideology gone from the relatively obscure academic fringe to the mainstream in such a short time?

Those are among the questions that motivate this newsletter. We feel obligated to chronicle in detail and in primary accounts the takeover of our institutions by this ideology — and the consequences of it. 

So far, it has taken root in some of our leading medical schools. Some. Not all. But I’m left thinking: What state will American medicine — or any other American institution —  find itself in after being routed by this ideology?  

During a recent endocrinology course at a top medical school in the University of California system, a professor stopped mid-lecture to apologize for something he’d said at the beginning of class.

“I don’t want you to think that I am in any way trying to imply anything, and if you can summon some generosity to forgive me, I would really appreciate it,” the physician says in a recording provided by a student in the class (whom I’ll call Lauren). “Again, I’m very sorry for that. It was certainly not my intention to offend anyone. The worst thing that I can do as a human being is be offensive.” 

His offense: using the term “pregnant women.” 

“I said ‘when a woman is pregnant,’ which implies that only women can get pregnant and I most sincerely apologize to all of you.”

It wasn’t the first time Lauren had heard an instructor apologize for using language that, to most Americans, would seem utterly inoffensive. Words like “male” and “female.”

Why would medical school professors apologize for referring to a patient’s biological sex? Because, Lauren explains, in the context of her medical school “acknowledging biological sex can be considered transphobic.”

When sex is acknowledged by her instructors, it’s sometimes portrayed as a social construct, not a biological reality, she says. In a lecture on transgender health, an instructor declared: “Biological sex, sexual orientation, and gender are all constructs. These are all constructs that we have created.” 

In other words, some of the country’s top medical students are being taught that humans are not, like other mammals, a species comprising two sexes. The notion of sex, they are learning, is just a man-made creation. 

The idea that sex is a social construct may be interesting debate fodder in an anthropology class. But in medicine, the material reality of sex really matters, in part because the refusal to acknowledge sex can have devastating effects on patient outcomes. 

In 2019, the New England Journal of Medicine reported the case of a 32-year-old transgender man who went to an ER complaining of abdominal pain. While the patient disclosed he was transgender, his medical records did not. He was simply a man. The triage nurse determined that the patient, who was obese, was in pain because he’d stopped taking a medication meant to relieve hypertension. This was no emergency, she decided. She was wrong: The patient was, in fact, pregnant and in labor. By the time hospital staff realized that, it was too late. The baby was dead. And the patient, despite his own shock at being pregnant, was shattered.

Professors Running Scared of Students

To Dana Beyer, a trans activist in Maryland who is also a retired surgeon, such stories illustrate how vital it is that sex, not just gender identity — how someone perceives their gender — is taken into consideration in medicine. “The practice of medicine is based in scientific reality, which includes sex, but not gender,” Beyer says. “The more honest a patient is with their physician, the better the odds for a positive outcome.”

The denial of sex doesn’t help anyone, perhaps least of all transgender patients who require special treatment. But, Lauren says, instructors who discuss sex risk complaints from their students — which is why, she thinks, many don’t. “I think there’s a small percentage of instructors who are true believers. But most of them are probably just scared of their students,” she says. 

And for good reason. Her medical school hosts an online forum in which students correct their instructors for using terms like “male” and “female” or “breastfeed” instead of “chestfeed.” Students can lodge their complaints in real time during lectures. After one class, Lauren says, she heard that a professor was so upset by students calling her out for using “male” and “female” that she started crying. 

Then there are the petitions. At the beginning of the year, students circulated a number of petitions designed to, as Lauren puts it, “name and shame” instructors for “wrongspeak.” 

One was delivered after a lecture on chromosomal disorders in which the professor used the pronouns “she” and “her” as well as the terms “father” and “son,” all of which, according to the students, are “cisnormative.” After the petition was delivered, the instructor emailed the class, noting that while she had consulted with a member of the school’s LGBTQ Committee prior to the lecture, she was sorry for using such “binary” language. Another petition was delivered after an instructor referred to “a man changing into a woman,” which, according to the students, incorrectly assumed that the trans woman wasn’t always a woman. But, as Lauren points out, “if trans women were born women, why would they need to transition?”

This phenomenon — of students policing teachers; of students being treated as the authorities over and above their teachers — has had consequences.

“Since the petitions were sent out, instructors have been far more proactive about ‘correcting’ their slides in advance or sending out emails to the school listserv if any upcoming material has ‘outdated’ terminology,” Lauren tells me. “At first, compliance is demanded from outside, and eventually the instructors become trained to police their own language proactively.” 

In one point in the semester, a faculty member sent out a preemptive email warning students about forthcoming lectures containing language that doesn’t align with the school’s “approach to gender inclusivity and gender/sex antioppression.” That language included the term “premenopausal women.” In the future, the professor promised, this would be updated to “premenopausal people.”

Lauren also says young doctors are being taught to declare their pronouns upon meeting patients and ask for patients’ pronouns in return. This was echoed by a recent graduate of Mount Sinai Medical School in New York. “Everything was about pronouns,” the student said. The student objected to this, thinking most patients would be confused or offended by a doctor asking them what their pronouns were, but she never said so — at least not publicly. “It was impossible to push back without worrying about getting expelled,” she told me.  

This hypersensitivity is undermining medical training. And many of these students are likely not even aware that their education is being informed by ideology. 

“Take abdominal aortic aneurysms,” Lauren says. “These are four times as likely to occur in males than females, but this very significant difference wasn’t emphasized. I had to look it up, and I don’t have the time to look up the sex predominance for the hundreds of diseases I’m expected to know. I’m not even sure what I’m not being taught, and unless my classmates are as skeptical as I am, they probably aren’t aware either.” 

Other conditions that present differently and at different rates in males and females include hernias, rheumatoid arthritis, lupus, multiple sclerosis, and asthma, among many others. Males and females also have different normal ranges for kidney function, which impacts drug dosage. They have different symptoms during heart attacks: males complain of chest pain, while women experience fatigue, dizziness, and indigestion. In other words: biological sex is a hugely important factor in knowing what ails patients and how to properly treat them. 

Carole Hooven is the author of T: The Story of Testosterone, the Hormone that Dominates and Divides Us and a professor at Harvard who focuses on behavioral endocrinology. I discussed Lauren’s story with her and Hooven found it deeply troubling. “Today’s students will go on to hold professional positions that give them a great deal of power over others’ bodies and minds. These young people are our future doctors, educators, researchers, statisticians, psychologists. To ignore or downplay the reality of sex and sex-based differences is to perversely handicap our understanding and our ability to increase human health and thriving.”

A former dean of a leading medical school agrees: “I don’t know the extent to which the stories you relate are now widespread in medical education, but to the extent that they are — and I hear some of this is popping up at my own institution — they are a serious departure from the expectation that medical education and practice should be based on science and be free from imposition of ideology and ideology-based intimidation.”

He added: “How male and female members of our species develop, how they differ genetically, anatomically, physiologically, and with respect to diseases and their treatment are foundational to clinical medicine and research. Efforts to erase or diminish these foundations should be unacceptable to responsible professional leaders.” 

There is no doubt the rules are changing. According to the American Psychological Association, the terms “natal sex” and “birth sex,” for example, are now considered “disparaging”; the preferred term is “assigned sex at birth.” The National Institutes of Health, the CDC, and Harvard Medical School have all made efforts to divorce sex from medicine and emphasize gender identity. 

When Asking Questions Can Destroy Your Career

While it’s unclear if this trend will remain limited to some medical schools, what is perfectly clear is that activism, specifically around issues of sex, gender, and race, is impacting scientific research and progress. 

One of the most notorious examples is that of a physician and former associate professor at Brown University, Lisa Littman. 

Around 2014, Littman began to notice a sudden uptick in female adolescents in her social network who were coming out as transgender boys. Until recently, the incidence of gender dysphoria was thought to be rare, affecting an estimated one in 10,000 people in the U.S. While the exact number of trans-identifying adolescents (or adults, for that matter) is unknown, in the last decade or so, the number of youth seeking treatment for gender dysphoria has spiked by over 1,000 percent in the U.S.; in the U.K., it’s jumped by 4,000 percent. The largest youth gender clinic in Los Angeles reportedly saw 1,000 patients in 2019. That same clinic, in 2009, saw about 80. 

Curious about what was happening, Littman surveyed about 250 parents whose adolescent children had announced they were transgender — after never before exhibiting the symptoms of gender dysphoria. Over 80 percent of cases involved girls; many were part of friend groups in which half or more of the members had come out as trans. Littman coined the term “rapid-onset gender dysphoria” to describe this phenomenon. She posited that it might be a sort of social contagion, not unlike cutting or anorexia, both of which were endemic among teenage girls when I was in high school in the ’90s. 

In August 2018, Littman published her results in a paper called “Rapid-Onset Gender Dysphoria in Adolescents and Young Adults: A Study of Parental Reports” in the journal PLOS One. Littman, the journal, and Brown University were pummeled with accusations of transphobia in the press and on social media. In response, the journal announced an investigation into Littman’s work. Several hours later, Brown University issued a press release denouncing the professor’s paper.

CLICK ON HEADLINE TO READ COMPLETE STORY

Hundreds of San Fran bars to require vaccination or COVID test to sit inside

Great news for the San Fran police.  Thanks to a worthless decision by bar owners, drunk driving will go down in their town.  Of course the bar owners will now lose 30% or more of their business—and people will still be able to get a drink.  I night even go up to San Fran and take over a liquor license  of a friend of mine and advertise we do not discriminate—I will make a fortune while the bar owners barely stay open.

“The San Francisco Bar Owner Alliance, which represents more than 500 bar owners in the area, said it changed its position this week on requiring proof of vaccination or a negative test due to a recent uptick in cases “among our staff members, especially those who are fully vaccinated.”

“This decision is based solely on our need to protect our workers, customers and their families,” the group said in a statement. “However, we hope it might also influence some who have not yet received vaccinations to do so as soon as they are able.”

This is another reason San Fran is dying, another reason tourists will avoid San Fran like the plague.  It does have a plague, a government that is scaring businesses to turn away customers.

Hundreds of San Francisco bars to require vaccination or COVID test to sit inside

By Will Feuer, NY Post,  7/27/21 

Hundreds of bars in San Francisco will begin requiring proof of vaccination or a negative COVID-19 test result from patrons who want to eat or drink inside, an industry group announced.

The San Francisco Bar Owner Alliance, which represents more than 500 bar owners in the area, said it changed its position this week on requiring proof of vaccination or a negative test due to a recent uptick in cases “among our staff members, especially those who are fully vaccinated.”

“This decision is based solely on our need to protect our workers, customers and their families,” the group said in a statement. “However, we hope it might also influence some who have not yet received vaccinations to do so as soon as they are able.”

“We understand that the only way our society (and our businesses) can ever return to true normalcy is through higher rates of vaccinations among our residents, not just in San Francisco but across the United States of America,” it added.

The proof of vaccination cards or negative test results from within 72 hours will not be required from customers who choose to sit “outside in parklets or other spaces we offer.”

Each bar will determine on its own how best to implement the rules, the alliance said.

Ben Blieman, the group’s president, said 85 percent of bar owners in the city are in favor of requiring proof of vaccination for indoor customers, according to NBC Bay Area.

Customers who eat outside will not have to show proof of vaccination in San Francisco.AP

In a tweet, San Francisco Mayor London Breed hailed the announcement as “responsible.”

The spread of the highly contagious Delta variant of the coronavirus has prompted many cities and businesses to reassess the reopening of the economy.

In San Francisco, the seven-day average of daily new cases has surged in recent weeks back to 118, a level not seen since February.

Deaths caused by COVID-19 in the area have so far remained low, but epidemiologists and health officials have warned that those numbers might tick up in the coming weeks if unvaccinated people get infected and hospitalized.

There are good reasons to ignore the American Academy of Pediatrics

The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) has ended its relations hi with health care and medicine—instead has decided there are big bucks to be made by selling itself to the drug companies and the Democrat Party.

“Why is the AAP, which is the largest, most prestigious pediatric organization, making this recommendation?  Could it be because Pfizer, which is making bank on a vaccine that the American taxpayer helped fund, is one of its big supporters?

It certainly benefits Pfizer if the AAP is telling parents to vaccinate their kids or see their kid forever trapped in a mask like a burqaed Afghani girl under the Taliban.

The AAP also freely admits that it came up with this plan working with the hard-left, Critical Race Theory–supporting American Federation of Teachers.  Oh.

Note that yesterday, and we will have the story tomorrow in the California Political News and Views, that the vaccine is ONLY good for about six months..hence the need for a booster shot twice a year—from a company that made over $3 billion profit from its vaccine, yet REFUSES to tell the public the risks involved in the vaccine.  Now wonder Biden/Newsom and the rest are demanding we wear masks again (which are worthless) because they know the vaccine has little or no value and killed and permanently harmed many.  This is about money, not your health.

There are good reasons to ignore the American Academy of Pediatrics

By Andrea Widburg, American Thinker,  7/22/21   

We’ve learned that, when it comes to COVID, children seldom get it, they don’t spread it, and they (thankfully) even more seldom die from it.  We’ve also learned that masks are dangerous for children.  Nevertheless, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) is insisting that all children over two must wear masks in pre-school and school.  I suggest that there are good reasons to ignore the AAP.

When it comes to children, the last 18 months have taught us a few things about kids and COVID:

Children — unlike the Democrats in the Texas state Legislature — are not COVID-spreaders.  The same article reveals that they are not very susceptible to COVID, either.

Even if kids do get COVID, healthy children 12 and under are not dying from it.  A Johns Hopkins study made public in June revealed that, in the period preceding the study, “100% of pediatric COVID-19 deaths [in America] were in children with a pre-existing condition[.]”

The study says there may still be good reasons to vaccinate kids around nine years old (a small number get bad side-effects, especially minority kids), but fear of death wasn’t a reason.  There is a recent news story saying a five-year-old boy without underlying conditions died in Georgia.  That may be the case, but we may also learn that the boy had an underlying, unknown condition.  I’ve known a few families who tragically lost a child when something innocuous triggered an underlying condition.

The masks that children are forced to wear for several hours a day instantly create a pool of carbon dioxide that is dangerous for them to breathe.  In addition, while children are at limited risk from COVID, the masks become saturated with viruses and bacteria from genuinely dangerous diseases, such as tuberculosis, meningitis, food poisoning, Legionnaires’ disease, and sepsis, to name just a few.

Incidentally, aside from the thousands of deaths that might be associated with the vaccine, we still have no idea if this vaccine, which has only an emergency authorization, could render women sterile.  Giving it to a girl might mean she can never have children.  Might.  We just don’t know.

But still, the AAP wants masks:

The American Academy of Pediatrics on Monday recommended that all children over the age of 2 wear masks when returning to school this year, regardless of vaccination status.

The AAP said universal masking is necessary because much of the student population is not vaccinated, and it’s hard for schools to determine who is as new variants emerge that might spread more easily among children.

Why is the AAP, which is the largest, most prestigious pediatric organization, making this recommendation?  Could it be because Pfizer, which is making bank on a vaccine that the American taxpayer helped fund, is one of its big supporters?

It certainly benefits Pfizer if the AAP is telling parents to vaccinate their kids or see their kid forever trapped in a mask like a burqaed Afghani girl under the Taliban.

The AAP also freely admits that it came up with this plan working with the hard-left, Critical Race Theory–supporting American Federation of Teachers.  Oh.

There’s also the fact that the AAP has some peculiar opinions.  For example, it’s completely on board with giving young people dangerous hormones and surgery in the name of so-called transgenderism when there’s nothing whatsoever on the AAP’s website scientifically showing that transgenderism is anything more than a mental illness requiring psychiatric intervention or a hormonal imbalance best treated by giving the afflicted children hormones aligned with their biological sex.

Instead, the AAP’s transgender policy statement cites a cartoon book to support the condition’s alleged existence.  Moreover, as best as I can tell, every AAP publication on transgenderism simply assumes that the condition exists and then tells ways to fold, spindle, and mutilate a child’s body in pursuit of a magical sex transformation.  In other words, to my non-scientific eyes, the AAP is driven more by agendas than by science.

When an organization with suspect funding and trendy biases insists that children as young as three wear masks all day long, despite evidence showing that most kids are at no risk from COVID and that they are at risks from masks, I’d take their advice with a grain…no, a barrel of salt.