As a child of the 1950s, I have seen a lot of changes in terms of safety over the years:
Back then, nobody wore seat belts in automobiles. Most cars didn’t even have them. Today, they are standard equipment, along with air bags. In most states, you can be issued a ticket for not wearing them, but as a kid from a different era, I still resist using them as it doesn’t feel natural to me.
I loved riding my bicycle just about everywhere. I took it to school every day, rode it to my Little League games, to go fishing or visit a neighbor, etc. At that time nobody wore a helmet, and yet I didn’t know of anyone falling off their bike and hurting themselves. Today it is a requirement with some states issuing fines for not wearing them. As for me, I refuse to wear a helmet as I never wore one as a child. I still think they look stupid, but people have embraced them as the government enforces their use.
We rode on skate boards and went down steep driveways, all without helmets and leg or arm pads, none of which existed at the time. If you were going to crash, you simply learned to slow down and fall on grass. It was no big deal. Now it is.
In Little League, we wore canvass “ear muffs” to protect our heads at the plate. When we would have a pick-up game though, we just wore baseball hats, just like the major leagues. Today, Little League includes full helmets with face guards.
We also played hockey without face masks, including myself as a goalie; we went down winter hills on sleds without any protection; we shot BB guns and slingshots in the fields (and No, we didn’t “shoot our eyes out”); we learned to shoot bow and arrows; we lit firecrackers; went fishing and used knives to clean our catch, and; we even played lawn darts (aka, “Jarts”). Remarkably, we all survived unscathed and enjoyed ourselves immensely. In truth, it was a glorious time to be a kid. When I describe this to parents today, they look at me like I have three eyes, that I am some kind of glutton for punishment.
The same is true with surgical face-masks. In the depths of the many influenza outbreaks we have had, very few people wore face-masks. Today, thanks to COVID-19, we are told by our government to wear them everywhere. President Biden wants to send a face-mask to each American and have us wear them until at least 2022. There are also new requirements to wear face-masks on government property, including our national parks.
The question though becomes, “When can we stop wearing them?” There are some medical institutions now questioning the effectiveness of face-masks on COVID-19; others suggest we need to wear multiple layers of face-masks.
My feeling is, face-masks are here to stay. It is now the “new normal,” just like seat belts, helmets, and other safety equipment. Even if 100% of the American public was properly vaccinated, we would still be asked to wear face-masks. Why? Because government officials will claim there is a new “strain” of some kind which will likely come and go in perpetuity. So, in all likelihood, the government will never tell us to put the masks away. It is not in their best interest to do so as it represents a form of control and is deemed to be politically correct to wear, particularly among Democrats.
Even if the government declared “the coast is clear,” people will likely continue to wear face-masks in supermarkets, social gatherings, at work and school, and wherever. The government has created a new habit, which people will be reluctant to give up. Years from now, you will tell your grandchildren, “I remember when I was a kid, we never wore face-masks, not until the government mandated their use.” They will look at you and say, “Wow, you are really old, aren’t you?”
You will know face-masks are a permanent fixture of our society when you start seeing television commercials featuring designer masks. They will likely be embraced by the fashion industry who will use it as an excuse for changing our wardrobe. Over time, we’ll look like a nation of holdup artists ready to stickup gas stations and convenience stores.
As for me, like I said, I’m a child of the 1950s. I will continue to resist seat belts and helmets. Heck, I’ll even play a game of lawn darts if anyone has them. And I have no intention of wearing face-masks 24/7. I guess I like to live on the edge.
(I would like to give a tip of the hat to A.R. in Dunedin for the inspiration for this piece).
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Tim Brycehttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngTim Bryce2021-03-02 06:21:582021-07-15 10:26:09PODCAST: Face-Masks Are Here To Stay
We have been reporting the failure of America’s government schools who now follow UNESCO’s worldwide Common Core. You read that right: Common Core is a UNESCO program, and is supported by Microsoft. When Common Core was required parents, teachers, and administrators were warned that our students would be approximately two (2) behind. No one cared or listened and another unproven program was forced on our students. Today with CCPvirus, students will be about 3-4 years behind. Mission Accomplished. American Exceptionalism is dead. Mediocre, indoctrinated, woke students afraid of words now rule. The communists have created their internal army. Mission Accomplished.
American government schools are failing our students. Fifty percent of American graduates cannot read, write and do simple math. Bill Gates admitted its failure. More money was his answer. We all know that the only thing that will affect change is a return of the curricula back to traditional education, WHICH WAS A HUGE SUCCESS.
OK, so the schools are failing, who cares? What does that mean to me? Why should I care? Our government positions are filled by diversity using racial lines not ability; therefore, the high standards and pride in work ethic are no longer important. Due to the extreme push for diversity, important positions are filled following a racial quota, not ability guaranteeing a failure of the program. Scientists and experts are motivated by grants and money “proving” theories that have no scientific or technical basis. Functionally illiterate people (people taught to be illiterate) are below average, so standard employment requirements are also lowered. Employers are finding workers are not qualified. Workers can’t read and follow directions. Too often, ignorant people make costly mistakes which could pose safety hazards or damaged products. Instead of addressing the real issue, poor quality education, employers are forced to lower standards to meet racial quotas often imposed by government through grants, subsidies or directives. Too often lowered standards pose a danger to the people they serve.
Eric Holder when AG lowered the standards of the police force.
Tucker Carlson reported that the Obama administration put diversity over safety in hiring for air traffic controllers. How enthusiastic will you be to travel by air?
New York City Mayor Bill DeBlasio wants to lower the standards for NYC’s elite high schools. Will they still be elite after quotas have changed their academic rating?
These are just a few Obama examples.
Trump turned it around and excellence with America First was just beginning to take hold. Communists hate excellence because it brings opposition.
No fear Joe is here. He will fix and segregate the government again under the banner of equity. Biden’s newest Executive Order Executive Order on Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government.
Joe has turned the clock back to when the government under the original order of Woodrow Wilson, was segregated. Joe managed to cancel MLK JR, by putting the 1963 Civil Rights Act in the trash.
Biden immediately nixed the 1776 project. Biden will force America to take its place at the bottom of the worldwide heap. Biden is more interested in color and race than exceptionalism. After all communists believe educated people require more of their government so their vow is to keep the people stupid. Ignorant people can easily be diverted to activism since they have no skills and must fill a void to feel useful. Schools are the perfect place to create these “useful idiot”. The destruction of America’s youth is evident as Komrad Biden Removes Trump’s Ban on CCP Propaganda in Schools. Love your enemy.
#17. Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers’ associations. Put the party line in textbooks.
#18. Gain control of all student newspapers.
#19. Use student riots to foment public protests against programs or organizations which are under Communist attack.
What we don’t see is the affect of mediocre schooling. What goes on in the actual office where common sense (no longer taught in school) does not exist? Porn now shown on government computers during work hours is acceptable. Lying is acceptable, Emailing during work is acceptable. All of this amounts to billions of dollars lost due to incompetence, theft and corruption. Remember the Gulf Oil Spill? Government Inspectors from MMS were busy watching porn rather than inspecting rigs.
According to the CDC, American suicide is up and higher due to CCP Virus. Instead of asking why more meds are given to depressed people—often causing more depression, while root causes are ignored.
Depression has multiple causes. Some are:
an individual forced into a controlled environment
not being able to express themselves as individuals
ignoring natural psychological and physical needs
loneliness (devices replacing friends)
lack of responsibility
lack of morality
life without meaning or purpose
lack of common sense
inability to logically draw conclusions in problem solving
inability to reason (thus drawing wrong solutions)
frustration having no future or destiny.
All of these are key triggers often leading to anxiety and depression.
Depression can lead to violence and or suicide. Sadly key skills have been eliminated from schools giving student nothing meaningful to look forward too. Schools now teach our children to hate their country family and G-d, forcing students through communist propaganda of what to think, not how to think.
Common Core forces a child to think in a box with little hope for a future not in line with the predetermined government goal. Common Core is based on the premise that people are stupid and the “smart academics know best”. If a child makes a different response not their desired response, often a child will be bullied by other students or teacher. A child might act out just to make their ideas known. Then too often students feeling worthless turn to drugs, massive piercing, tattooing, drinking, cutting, murder, terrorism, or suicide. Hopelessness is the dominant emotion. Common Core manipulates emotion and eliminates individualism, forcing a child into groupthink, not innovation and creation. Emotion become dominant with no logical reason to balance. A person can only think of one thought at a time. By forcing overuse of right brain function (emotion) the left brain (logic and reason) become dormant from lack of use. Today, aside from being functionally illiterate, too many people are motivated by trigger words that unleashes unbridled emotion too often resulting in violence or suicide. Not to worry. Common Core will be gone. That is the name Common Core not the ideas. We must be vigilant and learn the names of the new programs saying the same things like BLM or 1619 Project.
Continuing to do the same thing over and over, expecting different results, is insane, as we have heard over and over. Common Core, Whole Word Reading, Eureka Math, Evolution all assist in diminishing the capacity of America’s future. Yet we ignore the facts and continue to push this horrid programs filled with errors, omissions and bias. Have we learned nothing from years of failing grades? Not to worry, more money will “fix” the problem. No, “It’s the curricula stupid.”
Why are we forcing America’s children to follow a failed program? Education based on collectivism not individualism, training not education and values not facts, according to the brilliant educator Shirley McCune, in a speech to the Governors Association under GHW Bush, it is necessary to change and alter the culture and society. This is not education. It is indoctrination. She promotes outcome based education. Our children’s destiny will now be chosen by a computer. How many more generations of Americans will we lose to this indoctrination called education? So far we have lost 4 generations. You can listen to Shirley.
I have a challenge. Since Common Core was thrown at us without proper vetting (no test run) and violates many educational codes and statutes, why not have at least one school in each district teach traditional education? Several states are finally beginning to recognize the harm that training not educating have brought. Florida, Texas, are taking the lead. How is this problem being address by Wall Street?
If nothing is done, how many more agencies and businesses will fail putting the public at risk? Do we now get to choose our doctor, mechanic, air traffic controller, police based on color of skin or ability to do the job? The choice is ours.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Karen Schoenhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngKaren Schoen2021-02-27 08:13:382021-07-15 10:26:14Mediocrity Is The New Excellence
A recent Federal Reserve Bank of New York found that a monetary shock would raise stock prices by 5 percent, raising the annual incomes of white people by as much as 300 percent more than those of blacks.
The Biden-Harris administration has made stamping out racial “inequities” the focus of all its policies. But the government interventions proposed to close these gaps will only “accentuate inequalities for extended periods” of time, according to a recent study.
This includes the prospect of instrumentalizing the Federal Reserve’s control over monetary policy to equalize wealth across racial categories. His campaign platform, which pledges to “strengthen the Federal Reserve’s focus on racial economic gaps,” states that “the Fed should aggressively enhance its surveillance and targeting of persistent racial gaps in jobs, wages, and wealth” and then report “what actions the Fed is taking through its monetary and regulatory policies to close these gaps.”
The idea has a full slate of supporters, who want to add effecting racial equity to the Federal Reserve’s two existing mandates of “maximum employment and price stability.” Elizabeth Warren, Kirsten Gillibrand, and Maxine Waters introduced the Federal Reserve Racial and Economic Equity Act last year, which instructs the Federal Open Market Committee “to minimize and eliminate racial disparities in employment, wages, wealth, and access to affordable credit.” And Rep. Ayanna Pressley raised the issue with Fed Chairman Jerome Powell during a House Financial Services Committee hearing last Tuesday.
It is, shall we say, a going concern.
These politicians would have the Fed keep interest rates artificially low and the monetary supply growing, based on the Phillips Curve. Jared Bernstein, one of Biden’s economic advisers, believes that lower interest rates and what are traditionally regarded as inflationary policies will juice the economy enough to decimate persistent pockets of poverty.
As it turns out, the policy would backfire, thanks to the law of unintended consequences.
The Federal Reserve Bank of New York tested the impact of a “monetary policy shock” on the black-white racial gap. While such a “policy increases employment of black households more than white households, the overall effects are small” – a mere 0.2 percentage points.
But the “solution” creates two new problems. Low interest rates and inflation punish savers and reward investors by making more capital available and driving people to seek a higher rate of return in the stock market. The study found that a monetary shock would raise stock prices by 5 percent, raising the annual incomes of white people by 200 percent to 300 percent more than those of blacks.
The Fed also made the startling discovery that inflationary policies result in inflation. The proposed policy would raise “house prices by over 2% over a five year period.” That will only deepen the 30-point home ownership gap between whites and blacks. Home ownership accounts for approximately 60 percent of the average household’s wealth.
In the end, the equity-building policy actually “exacerbates the wealth difference between black and white households, because black households own less financial assets that appreciate in value.”
Critical theory’s single-minded focus on “equity” constitutes a four-fold error of collectivism:
It assumes an individual’s race, sex, ethnicity, or other self-identification category is the most important aspect of his or her identity;
It asserts that the individual’s well-being is controlled by membership in these discreet groups
It presumes the individual’s lot in life can be dictated by government intervention; and
It posits that the individual has been harmed when his or her income, wealth, and living standards increase if other groups benefit even more at the same time, widening the gap between population cohorts.
This is all the more frustrating, since the United States has recent experience in how to improve the status of the poor and minorities. President Donald Trump’s administration did not rely on Fed policy to achieve record-breaking employment for blacks and Hispanics. These results came about through a combination of tax cuts and deregulation, which freed the pent-up creativity and innovation that had been lying dormant under more restrictive policies. While they were active, black and Hispanic wealth grew by 1,100% to 2,200% more than whites, according to the Federal Reserve:
Between 2016 and 2019, median wealth rose for all race and ethnicity groups … Growth rates for the 2016–19 period were faster for [b]lack and Hispanic families, rising 33 and 65 percent, respectively, compared to [w]hite families, whose wealth rose 3 percent, and other families, whose wealth rose 8 percent.
These gains came from a president whom critical theory proponents regard as indifferent or hostile to minorities’ interests. The legislation contained no special provisions to boost “equity” by increasing minority wealth. Yet these policies, which generally tended to reduce the role of government in people’s lives, succeeded because they allowed individuals greater margin to pursue their God-given talents for the service of others.
Perhaps the wisest counsel to reduce racial inequities comes from the Apostle James: “My brothers and sisters, believers in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ must not show favoritism” (James 2:1).
Rev. Ben Johnson is a senior editor at the Acton Institute. His work focuses on the principles necessary to create a free and virtuous society in the transatlantic sphere (the U.S., Canada, and Europe).
EDITORS NOTE: This FEE column is republished with permission. All rights reserved.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Foundation for Economic Education (FEE)http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngFoundation for Economic Education (FEE)2021-02-26 05:52:052021-07-15 10:26:16Federal Reserve Bank of New York Study Finds Biden-Harris ‘Equity’ Proposal Would Make Racial Inequality Worse
Defend Florida wants to thank you for your SUPPORT in helping us get the word out about Defend Florida and ACTING when we send the Call to Action! Our efforts have inspired and connected leaders in our communities across Florida. We, collectively, stand as a force for freedom, justice and The American Way.
Exciting Things Are Happening at Defend Florida and You Are Part of This Amazing Movement!
General Flynn Exclusive: We the People, Power of the Grassroots!
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Defend Floridahttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngDefend Florida2021-02-26 05:35:502021-07-15 10:26:17Defend Florida Video Update: Protecting the Rights of Florida and Its Citizens
In many countries, there has been a systematic and mandatory paralysis of schooling, work, leisure, and mobility.
When respected scientific experts sitting on prestigious governmental advisory committees warned citizens early last year that the only way to protect themselves against Covid-19 was to shut down their businesses and stay at home until public health officials deemed it safe to come out again, most complied, even at great personal and economic cost.
The result has been one of the most far-reaching and unprecedented social experiments of modern times: the systematic and mandatory paralysis of a large swathe of normal social activity, including schooling, work, leisure, and mobility. If this giant experiment had been run on a one-off basis for a few weeks, the impact might have been moderate; but as it morphed into “rolling” lockdowns, the cure became far worse than the disease.
China got the ball rolling, by imposing a dramatic lockdown upon its citizens in January 2020. A host of Western governments soon followed suit, and lockdowns were imposed in relatively quick succession in Italy, France, Spain, Ireland, Germany, Belgium, Greece, the United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand, and large parts of North America.
A “lockdown” could be technically defined as one or more non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) which heavily restrict the movements and activities of the general population in order to contain the spread of an infectious disease. Voluntary reductions in socialising are not considered as lockdown measures; involuntary, police-enforced restrictions such as stay-at-home orders, travel restrictions, partial or complete border closures, and mandatory school and business closures, are.
The use of these sorts of highly intrusive population-wide measures to mitigate a pandemic represent a revolutionary break with conventional wisdom and best practice surrounding infectious disease control.
Prior to 2020, national and international public health authorities generally accepted that infectious diseases should be mitigated through relatively non-intrusive measures like improved hand hygiene, the development of more effective medical treatments and vaccines, and isolation of specific individuals or groups known to have been exposed to an infectious disease.
For example, the report on “Non-pharmaceutical public health measures for mitigating the risk and impact of epidemic and pandemic influenza” issued by the World Health Organisation in 2019 did not endorse the general efficacy of border closures as tools of disease control, nor did it contemplate the possibility of confining healthy populations to their homes.
So much for the prevailing philosophies of disease control. What of prevailing practices of disease control? To my knowledge, neither mandatory school and business closures, nor stay-at-home orders, have ever been employed in a systematic and centrally coordinated way to mitigate disease – that is, until January 2020. Therefore, centrally coordinated lockdowns of the sort that we have seen in 2020 must be considered as unorthodox, untested, and highly experimental interventions.
The question is, what have been the fruits of this giant public policy experiment? Have lockdowns actually been vindicated by their net benefits?
In order to adequately address this question, we must be clear on one thing: the appropriate benchmark for assessing the merits of lockdown policies is not just their capacity to reduce Covid infections or deaths, but their capacity to advance the overall health and well-being of affected populations.
For example, even if we eliminated Covid from the face of the earth, that would hardly be desirable if it drove a large section of the population into poverty and increased overall excess mortality.
Nobody in their right mind would deny that Covid-19 illnesses and deaths are a serious harm that we should mitigate in any reasonable way we can. Nonetheless, given the massive collateral damages that severe and prolonged lockdowns are known to inflict on society, they should never be undertaken in the absence of a careful cost-benefit analysis.
Yet to this day, I have not seen reports of any serious or sustained effort by pro-lockdown governments to show that the enormous harms of lockdown are justified by their likely net benefits. The fact that lockdowns have been employed without this sort of justification in hand is reason enough to consider them as reckless, inhumane and morally abhorrent.
The predictable harms of lockdowns, which will have to be carefully documented and tallied over the coming months and years, are extensive.
They include the worst global recession, according to World Bank analysts, since World War II, and dramatic increases in poverty and unemployment (currently at 25% in Ireland, including recipients of Covid payments according to the Central Office of Statistics), which are known to bring in their train declines in mental and physical health. This is also resulting in reduced public funding for healthcare due to a depressed economy; and an increase in social inequality, as day labourers and contract workers are uniquely vulnerable to the economic shock of lockdowns.
We’ve also seen an unprecedented transfer of wealth from small and medium businesses to multinational companies like Amazon, Netflix, and Google (given that small and medium traders are hit much harder by lockdowns than online traders).
Other tragic consequences of lockdown include spikes in loneliness, depression, and domestic abuse as people are deprived of social outlets beyond their homes. A generation of children are being set back in their education and life prospects by prolonged school closures (according to UNESCO, the impact of school closures “is particularly severe for the most vulnerable and marginalized (children)”.
A spike in untreated illnesses in expected, including cancer and heart disease, due to the cancellation of routine medical services and the generalised fear and panic generated by lockdowns. The WHO reported this month that the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic was “stark” and “profound” with “50 per cent of governments (having) cancer services partially or completely disrupted because of the pandemic.” One study in The Lancet Oncology journal estimates an increase of 8-9% in breast cancer deaths up to 5 years after diagnosis due to reductions or suspensions in cancer services.
On top of these obvious harms, we should not underestimate the impact of lockdown policies on civil rights and the rule of law. Legislators across Europe and North America have empowered the police to interrogate citizens just because they step into their cars, pay a visit to a friend or relative, or take a walk on the beach.
This level of State interference with basic civil liberties puts in jeopardy something very precious about the Western way of life: the idea that law-abiding citizens are free and responsible for their own actions, and not prisoners or wards of State.
Lockdowns are morally questionable on civil liberty grounds alone. But even if one believes it is legitimate to imprison citizens in their homes and strip them of a livelihood for the greater good, lockdowns remain a dangerous social experiment which should never be attempted in the absence of a compelling case that they do more good than harm.
Any government that does not provide a transparent and rigorous assessment of the likely costs and benefits of lockdowns before implementing them is guilty of gross negligence, and must answer to its citizens for its reckless and misguided interventions.
This article has been republished from Gript, with the permission of the author.
David Thunder is the Ramón y Cajal Researcher at the Institute for Culture & Society, (Religion & Civil Society Project) Biblioteca de Humanidades, University of Navarra, Spain. His publications… More by David Thunder
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00MercatorNet - Navigating Modern Complexitieshttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngMercatorNet - Navigating Modern Complexities2021-02-24 07:12:362021-07-15 10:26:25Are lockdowns one of the most catastrophic policy errors of the century?
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers will need preapproval from a senior manager before trying to deport anyone who is not a recent border crosser, a national security threat or a criminal offender with an aggravated-felony conviction, according to interim enforcement memo issued by the Biden administration Thursday.
The narrower priorities are expected to result in a steep drop in immigration arrests and deportations. Biden officials said the new guidelines — which will be in effect for the next 90 days — will allow the agency to make better use of its resources while prioritizing public safety threats.
Having spent 26 years as an INS (Immigration and Naturalization Service) special agent provides me with a unique perspective that I have provided at numerous congressional hearings and when I provided testimony to the 9/11 Commission.
As I read Biden’s Executive Orders and the various proposals for immigration law changes and massive amnesty programs, I am disheartened and frustrated. What was the point to the hearings and the 9/11 Commission when the President promulgates policies that not only ignore the 9/11 Commission but actually take America in precisely the opposite direction from where we should be going?
With the stroke of his pen, and without legislation, Biden has profoundly undermined immigration law enforcement.
The DHS (Department of Homeland Security) was created in the wake of the 9/11 terror attacks. The INS which had been under the Justice Department was replaced by ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) and moved into the DHS. ICE agents have the same lawful authority to enforce and administer the Immigration and Nationality Act as did agents of the INS and are important elements of what is referred to as the “Interior enforcement” of our immigration laws.
Under the law such agents are empowered to make warrantless arrests of aliens who are illegally present in the United States. This is important to back up the efforts by the Border Patrol to prevent the un-inspected entry of aliens into the United States and the CBP (Customs and Border Protection) inspectors at ports of entry who admit aliens under various categories of visas.
Any alien who runs the border or violates the terms of his/her entry into the United States should not ever feel confident that they will not be discovered and arrested. This is important to not only address alien law violators who are present in the United States but to deter foreign nationals who may seek to enter the United States illegally or otherwise violate our immigration laws.
This contributes to the integrity and credibility of our immigration laws and, indeed, all of our laws in general. It has been said that you only get one opportunity to make a first impression. Generally the first laws alien encounter are our immigration laws. How we enforce those important laws sets the tone for all that follows.
Aliens who illegally take jobs are subject to deportation. This is to protect the jobs and wages of American and lawful immigrant workers and is of particular importance during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Biden’s Executive Order, stripping ICE agents of discretionary authority to arrest illegal aliens they encounter sends a dangerous message to aspiring illegal aliens from around the world- that in America violations of our laws will not only be tolerated, but rewarded!
Preventing ICE agents from arresting aliens who are not “recent border crossers” is absurd. No record of entry is created when aliens enter the United States without inspection. From a practical standpoint, any illegal alien can now avoid arrest by lying about when he/she ran the border.
ICE agents would find it virtually impossible to refute such false claims as to the date the alien entered the United States.
Page 54 contained this excerpt under the title “3.2 Terrorist Travel Tactics by Plot.”
Although there is evidence that some land and sea border entries (of terrorists) without inspection occurred, these conspirators mainly subverted the legal entry system by entering at airports.
In doing so, they relied on a wide variety of fraudulent documents, on aliases, and on government corruption. Because terrorist operations were not suicide missions in the early to mid-1990s, once in the United States terrorists and their supporters tried to get legal immigration status that would permit them to remain here, primarily by committing serial, or repeated, immigration fraud, by claiming political asylum, and by marrying Americans. Many of these tactics would remain largely unchanged and undetected throughout the 1990s and up to the 9/11 attack.
Thus, abuse of the immigration system and a lack of interior immigration enforcement were unwittingly working together to support terrorist activity. It would remain largely unknown, since no agency of the United States government analyzed terrorist travel patterns until after 9/11. This lack of attention meant that critical opportunities to disrupt terrorist travel and, therefore, deadly terrorist operations were missed.
While I agree that law enforcement has to prioritize actions which get the “most bang for the buck” through the creation of a sort of triage system where violent criminals should be the focus, it is wrongheaded and dangerous to ignore aliens who are not “aggravated felons.”
It is also wrong and dangerous to require ICE agents to provide information to local law enforcement about impending arrests since this presents a potential security problem, especially in “Sanctuary” jurisdictions.
Sleeper agents are foreign terrorists who are careful to not attract anyone’s attention. It has been said that effective spies would not attract the attention of a waiter or waitress as a “greasy spoon diner.” International terrorists operate in the exact same manner, and, in point of fact spies and terrorists may well work as waiters or waitresses as they go about their deadly and nefarious goals.
Therefore there is no such thing as a “minor case.”
My very first fraud investigation, as a brand-new agent, caused me to trip over a terror plot in Israel. A young man from Israel arrived at John F. Kennedy International Airport in the summer of 1976. He had apparently altered his visa by chaining the date of expiration and the fact that he had already used that visa to enter the U.S. the previous year. (The visa was valid for one entry and he had changed the number “one” to the number “two.”) I was instructed to take a statement from him, if he was willing to cooperate. This was supposed to be more of a training exercise for me. He was going to be sent back to Israel, no matter what he might have to say.
Because of his recalcitrance to answer certain questions, I called the Israeli consulate in New York and they sent over several security officials to interview him.
During the course of interviewing him I found that his shirt did not fit properly. I had him remove his shirt and was surprised to find that a pocket was sown into the inside of his shirt. The pocket contained a piece of paper with an ink-drawn schematic diagram and Arabic writing. I handed it over to the Israelis and we were all shocked that the diagram was of an oil refinery in Israel. He was, we later found out, here to get the money to buy explosives to be used in a terror attack.
My superiors notified the FBI and working with the Israeli National Police six would-be co-conspirators were arrested in Israel just days before the attack was to have been carried out.
Another memorable case involved an alien working in a glass factory in Brooklyn. He claimed to have been a naturalized citizen. His story, however, did not add up. He lied about his name and other facts. As it turned out, he had been convicted of a homicide years earlier, served time in jail and was then deported back to his native Belize. He was arrested when he reentered the United States without permission and was serving a prison sentence in a federal penitentiary for the crime of Reentry After Deportation (8 U.S. Code § 1326) when he escaped from the prison. He took a job in that factory where we found him. His boss, the factory’s owner, was shocked; he told me that he actually trusted him to lock up the factory the night when he had to leave early and had invited him to his home for dinner.
Rather than deterring violations of our nation’s immigration laws by aliens, which constitute our first and last line of defense, Biden has singled-handedly deterred the enforcement of those vital laws by dedicated ICE agents.
There is an expression used by agents that is worth considering: “Big cases- big problems, little cases- little problems, no cases- NO PROBLEMS!”
It would appear that a new version of the “Miranda Warning” should be given to ICE agents warning them that anything that they do may be used against them!
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Michael Cutlerhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngMichael Cutler2021-02-22 06:06:222021-07-15 10:26:29Biden Cripples Immigration Law Enforcement: When Executive Orders handcuff agents – and set law violators free.
Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook CEO in July 2020: “But I do just want to make sure that I share some caution on this [vaccine] because we just don’t know the long-term side effects of basically modifying people’s DNA and RNA…basically the ability to produce those antibodies and whether that causes other mutations or other risks downstream. So, there’s work on both paths of vaccine development.”
During a public live stream with Dr. Fauci in November 2020, Zuckerberg had a different take: “Just to clear up one point, my understanding is that these vaccines do not modify your DNA or RNA. So that’s just an important point to clarify.”
Facebook announced last week that they are “expanding [their] efforts to remove false claims on Facebook and Instagram about COVID-19, COVID-19 vaccines and vaccines in general during the pandemic.”
Facebook said it would remove claims that vaccines change people’s DNA.
Facebook claims it wants people to “discuss, debate and share their personal experiences, opinions and views” as it pertains to the pandemic but will remove vaccine concerns from its platform that had once been expressed by their own CEO.
It is unclear if Facebook still stands by Zuckerberg’s concerns in July and whether or not the company would ban this video of Zuckerberg from its platforms because of vaccine policy violations.
Project Veritas continues to seek Brave Insiders working within Big Tech to come forward with more newsworthy information.
I was recently talking to old friend Rick Trader of the Conservative Commandos Radio show regarding President Biden’s cabinet picks. This caused me to dig in deeper and look into their background. Naturally, they are all filled in by Democrats, just as President Trump’s was filled in with Republicans, but there is something else going on.
In theory, the cabinet Secretaries should be the most qualified people for their jobs, just as in the business world. The idea of appointing someone for political favoritism reeks of nepotism and, quite often, is an impediment to progress. We typically see ambassadorships rewarded to political donors but cabinet positions are used to run the country, and political rewards would be a serious mistake.
In looking over the appointments, some make sense, others are just plain off the wall. It appears Biden has been selecting people based on their race, gender, their far-left ideology, or their work in the Obama administration (6 in all). It was certainly not for their management skills. As one example, Pete Buttigieg is a young man who only served as mayor of South Bend, Indiana (home of the University of Notre Dame), with a population of 102K, which is rather small in comparison to most major American cities. Nonetheless, he was appointed Secretary of Transportation, a field in which he has no experience whatsoever. I suspect he was rewarded this for his position on climate control which he spoke on during his failed campaign for president.
Let’s look over the list of cabinet appointments, and consider their qualifications; let us also look at the immediate predecessor from the Trump administration.
CABINET – APPOINTMENT
AGRICULTURE – TOM VILSACK
An Obama appointee, he held this position from 2009-2017. He is also a former governor of Iowa.
Trump: Ed Schafer – served twice as Agriculture Secretary and is a former governor of North Dakota.
ATTORNEY GENERAL – MERRICK GARLAND
Garland is best remembered as the Obama pick to replace Antonin Scalia on the Supreme Court, which was not acted on by the Senate. He has been serving as a federal judge, on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. Believed to be moderate in most decisions, but leaning slightly left.
Trump: William Barr – twice served as Attorney General.
COMMERCE – GINA RAIMONDO
Currently, she is the governor of Rhode Island. Her background includes being a venture capitalist. As governor, she cut taxes every year, removed thousands of pages of regulations, raised the state minimum wage to $11.50, and made community colleges tuition-free (a favorite with the far-left). However, her approval ratings routinely ranked in the bottom of all governors in the United States.
Trump: Wilbur Ross – successful businessman. Named by Bloomberg Markets as one of the 50 most influential people in global finance.
DEFENSE – LLOYD AUSTIN
Austin is a West Point graduate and served over 40 years in the military. If confirmed, he will be the first black defense secretary. Previously, he was picked as Vice Chief of Staff of the United States Army by Barrack Obama.
Trump: Mark Esper – Also a West Point graduate, Esper joined the U.S. Army and served as an infantry officer with the 101st Airborne Division. He saw action in the Gulf War. Afterwards, he served in the 82nd Airborne and the Army National Guard.
EDUCATION – MIGUEL CARDONA
Cardona serves as the Connecticut commissioner of education. He has an extensive background in Connecticut education. The hard issues he faces include opening schools closed due to COVID-19, and transgender sports.
Trump: (acting) Phil Rosenfelt – been with the Department of Education since 2005.
ENERGY – JEFFIFER GRANHOLM
Former governor of Michigan. Was a member of the Obama transition team. Granholm is a distinguished adjunct professor of law and public policy at UC Berkeley. No energy experience.
Trump: Dan Brouillette – previously served as the Deputy Secretary of Energy from August 2017 to December 2019.
HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES – XAVIER BECERRA
He is currently attorney general of California. He was previously a Congressman representing downtown Los Angeles. While in the House, he served as the chair of the House Democrat Caucus from 2013 to 2017. Becerra is perhaps best known as the AG, along with 15 other Democrat-led states, to file a lawsuit against the Trump administration over the president’s declaration of a national emergency to fund and build the southern U.S. border, as well as many more lawsuits against the administration. He is far-left.
Trump: (acting) Norris Cochran – part of DHHS since 2006.
HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT (HUD) – MARCIA FUDGE
Fudge is currently a Democrat member of the House from Ohio. Her background is substantially different than her predecessor.
Trump: Dr. Ben Carson – a pioneer in the field of neurosurgery. He was also a professor of neurosurgery, oncology, plastic surgery, and pediatrics at the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine. He is also known for his run for the presidency in 2016. If anything, Dr. Carson was over qualified for his job as HUD Secretary.
INTERIOR – DEB HAALAND
If confirmed, she will be the first Native American cabinet secretary. She has been very active in Democrat politics, such as speaking against the appointment of Judge Kavanaugh to the U.S. Supreme Court. She also actively supports the Green New Deal and Medicare for All. She is far-left.
Haaland’s appointment is controversial as a group of 15 Republican House members sent a letter to President Biden urging him to withdraw her name claiming, her nomination is “a direct threat to working men and women and a rejection of responsible development of America’s natural resources.”
Trump: David Bernhardt – also worked for the Department of the Interior during George W. Bush’s presidency.
LABOR – MARTY WALSH
Walsh is the current mayor of Boston. He is one of the few cabinet appointments cruising through his confirmation hearing. Walsh has an extensive background in unions, both as a member and as a mayor working with them.
Trump: Eugene Scalia – served one year as Solicitor of the Department of Labor during the George W. Bush administration. He is a son of the late Supreme Court Associate Justice Antonin Scalia.
STATE – ANTONY BLINKEN
An Obama appointment serving as deputy secretary. Also served in Clinton’s state department and on the National Security Council for then VP Biden.
Trump: Mike Pompeo – former CIA Director, graduated first in his class as a West Point graduate, also served in the House of Representatives (KS).
TRANSPORTATION – PETE BUTTIGIEG
Former mayor of South Bend, Indiana. Ran for president in 2020. He worked on John Kerry’s 2004 presidential campaign as an advisor, policy and research specialist. No transportation experience. He is far-left.
Trump: Elaine Chao – Naturalized citizen. Married to Sen. Mitch McConnell. She has served the Department of Transportation since 1986, particularly in the Maritime Administration. Served as Deputy Transportation Secretary from 1989-1991. She was also the longest-serving Secretary of Labor.
TREASURY – JANET YELLEN
Recently confirmed, she is the first female Treasury Secretary. She has prior experience as the chair of the council of economic advisors and chair of the Federal Reserve under Obama. She comes from academia, where she has taught economics for many years at Harvard and the London School of Economics.
Trump: Steven Mnuchin – American investment banker at Goldman Sachs.
As with any job, people should be eminently qualified to successfully fulfill a job, but this isn’t always the case in Washington, DC. Unfortunately, the best people are not always available. After all, they would have to sacrifice their business careers in order to serve. So, you have to ask the question, are the people selected doing this for love of country or are there other ulterior motives, such as political recognition and power?
As we can see, not all of the candidates herein are qualified for their positions. This is like hiring ditch-diggers to work in Silicon Valley. Undoubtedly, all will tow the line when it comes to Democrat values and priorities, but will that make for a well-oiled machine to run the country? In all likelihood, when the Biden administration is done, we will have another costly mess to clean up and not a clean and productive hand-off. Unfortunately, this is how the American public elects to operate.
In the business world, there are two tried and proven tactics to rationalize failure; first, blame your predecessor, and; second, reorganize everything, making it difficult to straighten out later on. What we are now witnessing in the Biden administration is both excuses being implemented at warp speed. God help us!
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Tim Brycehttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngTim Bryce2021-02-16 05:50:132021-02-16 05:50:13PODCAST: Who Is Filling Biden’s Cabinet?
If you cannot attend, please CALL THIS NUMBER, (850) 717-4840, and state your Support of HB133.
Friends, there are 18 members in this Committee and only 3 are Democrats. This should pass with no problems, YET the Dems have successfully killed this bill in prior years because they have more people speaking and showing support Against it!
Let us know you called, emailed committee members, or attended!
1 “Red Flag” Gun Confiscation bills (disingenuously titled Extreme Risk Protection Orders) call for legally owned firearms to be forcibly confiscated from law-abiding Americans without due process, based on unsubstantiated accusations from disgruntled family members, neighbors, co-workers, and/or current or ex-romantic partners, or roommates. In other words: Gun Confiscation without due process. The National Association for Gun Rights expects all pro-gun members of the U.S. House and Senate to join us in opposing this type of gun confiscation.
On the 3rd anniversary of Parkland shooting, Biden pushes Congress to enact gun control measures.
Shredding our Constitutional rights, the First and now Second Amendments, in the continuing destruction of the American greatness.
Joe Biden Marks 3rd Anniversary of Parkland Shooting with Gun Control Push
By: AWR Hawkins, 14 Feb 20212,618
President Joe Biden marked February 14, 2021–the third anniversary of the Parkland school shooting–by calling on Congress to pass more gun control.
He used a tweet to recount the heinous attack, writing, “In seconds, the lives of dozens of families, and the life of an American community, was changed forever.”
Biden referenced the “lone gunman [who] took the lives of 14 students and three educators” and also directed attention toward violence in certain cities across America. He suggested singled out the “gun violence disproportionately devastating Black and Brown individuals in our cities.”
He concluded, in part, by writing:
Today, I am calling on Congress to enact commonsense gun law reforms, including requiring background checks on all gun sales, banning assault weapons and high capacity magazines, and eliminating immunity for gun manufacturers who knowingly put weapons of war on our streets.
A number of things needs to be noted.
First, the Parkland shooter acquired his gun “legally,” according to USA Today. That terminology means he went through a background check, so expanding checks from retail alone to retail and private sales would have done nothing to prevent the attack.
Secondly, the Parkland attack was not carried out “in seconds.” Rather, ABC News reported that the gunman had enough time to “[stop] firing five times to reload his” firearm.
In fact, the Atlanta Constitution-Journalreported the length of the attack at “six minutes.”
This means the attacker could have caused mayhem with any size magazine–he could swap empty mags for full ones–because he had time.
When the commission investigating the Parkland shooting put forward its findings, one key suggestion was to enable teachers to be armed so any future, would-be attacker, would not have the benefit of carrying out his evil deeds without armed response. On January 3, 2019, Breitbart News noted that the commission’s report recommended that teachers “who volunteer to undergo firearms training, should be allowed to carry guns.”
But Biden has made clear no federal funds will be used to train teachers to use guns for classroom defense.
Moreover, Biden mentioned the cities where gun violence is surging but did not note that some of the most violent cities already have the controls he wants federally.
For example, South L.A. saw a 742 percent surge in shooting victims during the first 16 days of 2021, although California has universal background checks and “assault weapons” ban.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Pamela Gellerhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngPamela Geller2021-02-16 04:57:482021-02-17 05:49:19VIDEO: Beijing ☭ Biden Comes For Your Guns
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Dr. Rich Swierhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngDr. Rich Swier2021-02-13 09:16:112021-02-15 07:44:12WATCH: The Dangers of H.R. 127 — Then Take Action!
Governor Ron DeSantis must continue to respond forcefully to these unhinged and slanderous attacks by the MSM. The MSM knows that DeSantis can win in 2024, so they will attempt to destroy his character.
‘Florida Is Going To Kill All Of Us’: Sunny Hostin Blasts Ron DeSantis After Super Bowl Partiers Ditch Masks
Sunny Hostin lashed out Monday at Republican Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, saying, “Florida is going to kill all of us.”
Hostin blamed DeSantis for Florida’s “woefully inadequate” response to the coronavirus pandemic, suggesting on ABC’s “The View” that his move to lift restrictions could turn Sunday’s Super Bowl in Tampa Bay into a “super-spreader”
Hostin began by saying that she intended to continue taking precautions, but that she had been concerned by the number of people who had ignored social distancing and mask guidelines during post-game parties in Tampa Bay.
“I got to tell you, in watching 22,000 fans in the stadium yesterday — most wearing masks, but then afterwards revelers running all around without masks — I just kept on thinking, super-spreader event, super-spreader event, super-spreader event,” Hostin said.
She went on to say that DeSantis had lifted restrictions, a move that she believed to be ill-advised.
“I thought, you know, Florida is going to kill all of us,” she continued, noting that wearing masks still appeared to be a political divide. “There should be no reason why Governor DeSantis has been so woefully inadequate in terms of protecting the people not only of Florida, but the people of the United States. Imagine all those — those people, those 14,500 ticket buyers who are going to fly back home to their community and infect other people. I thought it was despicable and disgusting.”
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Pamela Gellerhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngPamela Geller2021-02-10 06:52:262021-02-10 06:52:26‘Florida Is Going To Kill All Of Us’: Sunny Hostin Blasts Ron DeSantis After Super Bowl Partiers Ditch Masks
The term “terrorist” came into vogue during the 1970’s as we experienced a spike in airline skyjackings. This, of course, led to the tightening of security measures at airports. I’m old enough to remember life before this, back when you just showed up at the airport, walked on the plane and handed your ticket to the stewardess. Yes, it was that easy, and flying was fun. Not anymore, TSA has seen to that.
Since then, use of the word “terrorist” became associated with atrocities in the Middle East, such as kidnappings, murders, bombings, extortion, and executions, such as cutting off heads. In this sense, terrorism has been around for hundreds of years, but more recently it came to the forefront in the latter part of the 20th century and is considered barbarous.
Please understand the purpose of terrorism, to wit; to use unlawful force or violence to intimidate people for political or social gain. It is a technique used to get one’s way, particularly if the opposition is too large to fight one-on-one. Consequently, the terrorist turns to clandestine tactics to intimidate others.
Today, we are hearing a lot about “domestic terrorists,” meaning a group of people in this country who are trying to use savage methods to get their way. Even President Biden, in his inaugural address, alluded to such a phenomenon, “And now, a rise in political extremism, white supremacy, domestic terrorism that we must confront and we will defeat.”
Other prominent Democrats have been repeating this mantra as well, including Rep. Nancy Pelosi and Sen. Chuck Schumer. Much of this is designed to convict President Donald Trump after impeachment, but it goes after his supporters as well. Recently, a group of Senate Democrats introduced a resolution to review “domestic terrorist” threats by extremist groups. It has even been suggested that the Republican Party be placed on such a domestic terrorist watch list. Again, this is designed more to intimidate Trump supporters than anything else. Make no mistake though, their constant references to “White Supremacist” groups is a swipe at Republicans and not the KKK.
These same Democrats have remained stone silent on the violent actions of groups such as Antifa and Black Lives Matter (BLM) who actively participated in the 2020 “Summer of Hate” where buildings were invaded, burned, looted, and local citizens viciously attacked. They were certainly not “peaceful protesters.” This means “domestic terrorism” has two different interpretations depending on the political party you embrace.
The use of the expression “white supremacy” is a clever attempt to label all Republicans as racists and should be punished accordingly, including the termination of their free-speech rights. The Democrats’ loath some characterization of Trump supporters is reminiscent of Hitler’s persecution of the Jews, as evil parasites feeding on the Aryan master race. Yet, the Democrats seem to have no problem threatening Republicans:
“Let’s make sure we show up wherever we have to show up. And if you see anybody from that (Trump) Cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gasoline station, you get out and you create a crowd. And you push back on them” – Rep. Maxine Waters – June 25, 2018.
This is much more threatening than anything spoken by President Trump at the “Stop the Steal” protest of January 6th, yet while the Democrats claim Waters was only kidding, they are Hell-bent on impeaching the former president.
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC) has even gone so far as to brand Congressional Republicans as white supremacists, “This term (2021) there are legitimate white supremacist sympathizers that sit at the heart and at the core of the Republican caucus in the House of Representatives” (as told to MSNBC, Jan 28, 2021).
By doing so, AOC is declaring them racists and, as such, unfit to serve in Congress. This, of course, is fallacious. I just wish AOC was aware of her own party’s role in the preservation of slavery, the Civil War, the KKK, and Jim Crowe laws. She obviously doesn’t remember the “Stand in the Schoolhouse Door” incident in the 1960’s by Alabama Governor George Wallace (a prominent Southern Democrat). All of this is in sharp contrast to the Republicans who promoted freedom and reconstruction, which is all conveniently forgotten. AOC’s sense of history is embarrassing.
Let us also understand this recent push to declare groups of people as “domestic terrorists”; by doing so, this means they can be treated like any other terrorist group and subject to prosecution under the Patriot Act, which is certainly not a misdemeanor. It also means the federal government can spy on you, as well as search and seize your belongings without a subpoena.
So, the question remains, who are the domestic terrorists? That depends on your political persuasion and the violence committed. If you are a Democrat, you point at your political opponents, the Republicans, for whom you brand as “white supremacists” a la Identity Politics. If you are a Republican, you point at those vandalizing and creating mayhem in our cities, such as Antifa, BLM, and those sponsoring these groups.
So, to be correctly labeled a terrorist, you have to ask which side commits true violence and for what purpose, specifically intimidation. If it doesn’t pass this simple acid-test, they are not terrorists, but political pawns instead. All of this is aimed at changing our perspective and a part of a larger picture of de-programming the citizens of this country.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Tim Brycehttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngTim Bryce2021-02-09 07:09:512021-02-09 07:09:51PODCAST: Who Are The Domestic Terrorists?
The Elections Clause of the U.S. Constitution is in Article I, Section 4, which reads:
The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators.
The Framers of the Constitution were concerned that states might establish unfair election procedures or attempt to undermine the national government by refusing to hold elections for Congress. They empowered Congress to step in and regulate such elections as a self-defense mechanism.
[ … ]
The Supreme Court has explained that the Elections Clause also imposes implicit restrictions on the power to regulate congressional elections. Neither Congress nor the states may attempt to dictate electoral outcomes, or favor or disfavor certain classes of candidates.
Contrary to what the Framers of the Constitution intended in the “Election Clause,” H.R.1 is a power grab by Congress to usurp the election process. The “stealing of national elections” may now be codified in law if Congress passes H.R.1 – For The People Act. H.R.1 is the perhaps the most sweeping change to voting regulations ever proposed by Congress. It shifts power from state legislatures to the Congress. Watch:
In January, House Democrats introduced their signature piece of legislation, H.R. 1, the “For The People Act.” H.R. 1 is full of unconstitutional and unnecessary policies that liberals want to use to hijack America’s election processes. This bill is anything but “for the people.”
H.R. 1 forces taxpayers to finance politicians’ campaigns
H.R. 1 eliminates the ability of states to control their own elections
H.R. 1 undermines the First Amendment right to free speech
H.R. 1 eviscerates the right of states to draw their own congressional district lines
Heritage Action For America concludes:
Although Democrats are promoting H.R. 1 as a bill that would “strengthen our democracy and return political power to the people,” it is actually an anti-democratic bill that would wreak havoc on our election system by manipulating election rules in favor of Democratic politicians. H.R. 1 is nothing but a left-wing power grab and is definitely not “for the people.”
We fully agree. H.R.1 is not about empowering the people. It is all about empowering politicians at the federal level.
A more appropriate name for H.R.1 might be the We The Politicians Act.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Dr. Rich Swierhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngDr. Rich Swier2021-02-06 05:07:332021-02-08 06:47:26VIDEO: Proposed Bill H.R.1 Gives Congress Total Authority Over Future Elections Codifying Election Fraud
There’s a simple reasons operations like Chick-fil-A can operate with an efficiency bureaucracies will never be able to match.
When Will Haynie had a traffic problem, he knew just who to call.
It started with a computer glitch on a busy Friday at the COVID-19 vaccination center at Seacoast Church. Health officials told the Mount Pleasant, South Carolina, mayor that traffic was a mess and wait-times for the vaccine had reached more than an hour.
So Haynie called in the cavalry: Chick-fil-A Manager Jerry Walkowiak.
“When you need help, call the pros,” Haynie said. “I called him [Walkowiak] on my way over and he actually got there before I did.”
Standing beneath an umbrella in a cold rain, Walkowiak quickly began directing drivers using the Chick-fil-A blueprint, approaching drivers in line, ensuring they had their paperwork ready to go, and then directing them to a spot where they could wait to receive their vaccine.
Soon wait times were down to just 15 minutes, Fox 11 Los Angeles reports.
“All those issues got fixed as things progressed,” Haynie later tweeted. “[Chick-fil-A] to the rescue!”
Chic Fil A manager Jerry Walkowiak donating his professional drive thru experience to help our vaccination program in Mt Pleasant today. When you need help, call the pros. pic.twitter.com/63RvcVR8KJ
Despite Vaccines, Thousands of Americans Are Dying Each Day
The COVID-19 vaccine has arrived, but the pandemic is far from over. More than 4,000 Americans are dying with the virus each day, according to official statistics.
Part of the problem stems from the clumsy rollout of vaccines by public officials. Distribution has been slow and marred by mass dumping of vaccines—inoculations that could be saving lives—because of bureaucratic dysfunction and rigid guidelines.
While there are no reports of vaccine dumping in South Carolina, some public officials have expressed frustration with delays in the rollout. News reports say that as of Sunday, South Carolina had received 542,750 total vaccines, 277,258 of which had been administered.
To be sure, delivering and administering hundreds of thousands of vaccines takes time. But that’s all the more reason why unnecessary delays—like the one briefly experienced at Seacoast Church on Friday—should be avoided at all costs.
Chick-fil-A’s Legendary Drive-Thru Efficiency
Chick-fil-A is the third largest fast food chain in the US, bringing in $11.3 billion in sales in 2019 at more than 2,600 locations. One of the reasons for its meteoric rise is its legendary drive-thru efficiency.
Chick-fil-A is known for insanely long lines, especially during peak hours. According to Buzzfeed News, on average, a Chick-fil-A drive-thru serves 95 cars between noon and 1 p.m. alone, far more than its competitors, and more than 60 percent of the chain’s revenues come via the drive-thru window.
So many people marvel at Chick-fil-A’s drive-thru mastery that it came as a shock to many to learn the chain’s drive-thru times are actually longer than its competitors. This revelation, which was reported by news outlets with little context, didn’t sit well with Chick-fil-A fans.
But as QSR magazine (who conducted the survey) points out, there’s more to the story than long wait times.
Put simply, [Chick-fil-A’s] speed of service is much longer because its drive-thru lanes are busier than every other competitor—and it’s not even close. A full 77 percent of its drive-thru experiences had three or more cars in line, according to the study, while 35.5 percent had six or more cars in line.
For context, McDonald’s claimed the second-busiest drive thru, and only 41.8 percent of its drive thrus had three or more cars and 9.1 percent had six or more.
Essentially, drive-thru times are a bit longer because of the enormous volume Chick-fil-A serves at the drive-thru.
The reality is people hate waiting in lines, and Chick-fil-A fans are no exception. But Chick-fil-A has managed to make waits relatively short—322 seconds, on average, about a minute longer than the fast food average—despite its insanely long lines.
This speed and efficiency—Chick-fil-A also earns top marks in order accuracy—is the reason surveys show Chick-fil-A ranks number one in customer satisfaction among fast-food chains.
Chick-fil-A is only able to pull this off because of the efficiency Walkowiak showed at the vaccine center. And that efficiency is no accident.
Chick-fil-A has no fewer than three “Innovation Centers” where the chain tests restaurant layouts to maximize efficiency for various operations. Buzzfeed reporter Venessa Wong describes how on one January afternoon, at the Atlanta-based chain’s newest innovation center, workers tested a new drive-thru design at a mock restaurant.
“The main question at hand: How narrow could the drive-thru lanes get to save space?” Wong writes. “There is also the lingering but essential question of how to move cars through more quickly, to shorten those epic lines.”
The solution, or one of them, was to have teams of servers (up to six people) walking among cars drive-thru lanes taking orders and running payments via tablet. This allows Chick-fil-A to get customers in and out quickly despite lines that at times look, frankly, daunting.
But the effort to serve customers and make their experience enjoyable and swift has paid off.
Customers love Chick-fil-A and its stellar service, and the chain continues to see impressive growth in revenue and franchises.
The Incentives of Markets
Compare the miraculous efficiency of Chick-fil-A to, say, your local DMV.
On my last visit, I waited in line 10 minutes before I was able to talk to someone. When I got to the window, I was given a number and told to take a seat. “It might be a while.”
Forty-five minutes later, a woman tested my eyes, snapped my picture, and asked me to sign some paperwork. The entire process took two minutes, but I was there for an hour. And the truth was, I was relieved! It could have taken longer, or I could have dealt with an unpleasant person.
The woman who took my picture was not exactly warm, but at least she wasn’t rude or curt. And in my experience, this often is not the case when dealing with bureaucrats and bureaucracy. In fact, it’s something we almost expect.
There’s a reason the unhelpful or snippy bureaucrat has been depicted ad infinitum in both film and literature. The theme of the nightmares of bureaucracy has been explored by numerous thinkers—most notably, perhaps, by the great Franz Kafka—but my personal favorite depiction comes in the 2015 Wachowskis film Jupiter Ascending, starring Mila Kunis, Sean Bean, and Channing Tatum.
While the space opera was a bit of a disappointment overall, the scene depicting the horror of dealing with an interplanetary bureaucracy (see below) is nothing short of hilarious. And part of the reason it’s so funny is because it’s something nearly all of us have experienced at one time or another.
Think about it for a moment. Why is your service at Chick-fil-A, Home Depot, or the local Toyota dealer so different from your visit to the DMV or the Post Office? It’s not because nice people go into customer service and ornery or unhelpful people go into bureaucracy.
The answer comes down to a single word: incentives. The absence of market forces means there is really no compelling incentive for the DMV to improve efficiency (or smile when you come through the door). As I pointed out earlier, we’ve pretty much come to expect bureaucracies to be slow and cold.
For Chick-fil-A, however, there is a clear incentive. Chick-fil-A wants customers to be happy because they want their business, which means serving them the very best they can. Indeed, the word customer service tells us something about the relationship between buyer and seller. The seller exists to serve customers.
Now, we’ve all had less than satisfactory experiences with businesses as well as bureaucracy, but the inherent dynamics of the systems themselves are unmistakable. Businesses want people to be happy and are incentivized to make them so. No such incentive exists in bureaucracy, which is why we walk on eggshells when going through TSA security checkpoints or walk up to the counter at the DMV.
The “customer” in these situations has very little power. We know it and, more importantly, they know it. This is why the economist Ludwig von Mises found descriptive terms for modem captains of industry—“chocolate king” or a “cotton king” or “automobile king”—as inherently misleading.
“Their use of such terminology implies that they see practically no difference between the modern heads of industry and those feudal kings, dukes or lords of earlier days,” Mises wrote. “But the difference is in fact very great, for a chocolate king does not rule at all, he serves.”
Mises correctly observed that these “kings” do not in fact reign over conquered territory. They exist to serve us.
“The chocolate king—or the steel king or the automobile king or any other king of modern industry—depends on the industry he operates and on the customers he serves,” Mises continued. “This ‘king’ must stay in the good graces of his subjects, the consumers; he loses his ‘kingdom’ as soon as he is no longer in a position to give his customers better service and provide it at lower cost than others with whom he must compete.”
With government “services,” on the other hand, we the “customers” are the ones who often must grovel like subjects to win the good graces of a bureaucrat if we want to make our flight, renew our driver’s license, or (in some systems) get the medical care we need.
It’s this dynamic that explains why our experiences at Chick-fil-A are so much better than those trips to the DMV. And the incentives baked into markets—to make customer experience enjoyable and satisfactory—also explain why operations like Chick-fil-A can operate with an efficiency bureaucracies will never be able to match.
Some might be tempted to believe we could improve, say, vaccine distribution if only bureaucracies had more resources, if they partnered with private industry, or if they were led by people like Jerry Walkowiak.
But that’s the wrong lesson.
The lesson is that vaccine distribution should be removed from the hands of bureaucrats altogether, and placed in the metaphorical hands of markets. Only then will we see these life-saving doses quickly and efficiently administered.
Jonathan Miltimore is the Managing Editor of FEE.org. His writing/reporting has been the subject of articles in TIME magazine, The Wall Street Journal, CNN, Forbes, Fox News, and the Star Tribune. Bylines: Newsweek, The Washington Times, MSN.com, The Washington Examiner, The Daily Caller, The Federalist, the Epoch Times.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Foundation for Economic Education (FEE)http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngFoundation for Economic Education (FEE)2021-02-04 06:40:102021-02-04 06:40:33Why Chick-fil-A Is so Much More Efficient (and Friendlier) Than Government