Were you triggered by the religious views of Nigerian born and trained, Texas licensed and practicing, Dr. Stella Immanuel?
Not only is she a passionate, powerful, and persuasive speaker and a professional black woman who committed the sin of going against the grain on an unreasonably politicized medical treatment. Worse: she was praised by President Trump. So, she had to be put under the political microscope.
There was a video of a press conference held on the steps of the Supreme Court in Washington, DC by a group called “Front Line Doctors.” The group spoke in favor of Hydroxychloroquine therapy for treatment of COVID-19 an included a Congressman from North Carolina and 15 to 20 doctors. Virtually all of the various online video tech hosts keep censoring the video, removing it almost as soon as it’s posted.
After reading about the censorship of the video, I was able to access a site and watch about 10 minutes before called away from my phone. When I came back, the video had been removed.
The five docs I originally heard (& possibly the 10 to others who were lost to censorship) spoke about their experience and preferences for treatment. Were any of the other docs the object of deep background scrutiny?
I disagree with some of the claims made in the video, especially the use of the word “cure” (rather than treatment) and with the opposition to the routine use of face masks to decrease exposure and viral load.
Dr. Immanuel only talked about her clinical experience. She spoke about successfully treating patients with Hydroxychloroquine for malaria in Nigeria and, along with zinc and Zithromax (azythromycin), as treatment for COVID-19 in her practice in Texas.
Ignoring the fact that the WHO resumed
trials of Hydroxychloroquine June 3, the policy that masks were not helpful was promoted by both the WHO and CDC just a couple of months ago. Are the old documents from these organizations being removed from servers?
From what I understand, Dr. Immanuel is a preacher in addition to being a doctor. The things I’ve read about her sermons seem bizarre to me, but they remind me of a certain Chicago minister who had a few bizarre beliefs about HIV/AIDS, the US, and roosting chickens.
Nigeria has a different folklore tradition than mine in Texas; with a background of animalism and spirits, instead of our Greek mythology and Judeo-Christian history.
Cultural explanations and practices for disease have evolved, but traditions and habits persist: in the West, we knock on wood or throw salt over our left shoulder to chase off the “evil humours” that were the explanation for something that couldn’t be seen before microscopes.
I trained in South Texas, where I learned to ask about and counsel on the curanduras’ advice and practices. Curanduras still tell mamas to put pennies on baby’s umbilical cord to ensure an “innie”belly button and to place raw eggs under the bed to draw away sickness. Never was able to do as well with devotees of homeopathy & “adjustments” for asthma and “subluxation” or the irrational opposition to vaccinations.
I’ve had my medical and political credibility questioned because I’m a Christian. In contrast, I try to be respectful of people of different ideologies, evaluating their actual knowledge of science and practice of medicine, no matter what I think about their religion.
Would the theories of the origins of disease have been familiar to people from Dr. Immanuel’s culture? More importantly, does she understand and practice medicine according to the germ theory and current science?
There are no PROVEN therapies for COVID-19! Hydroxychloroquine/zinc/azithromycin is no more “unproven” than any other. It’s “unproven” that HCQ is unsafe.
(As of Midnight, 30 July, the video was available at https://www.bitchute.com/video/09K3kIwzeewO/?fbclid=IwAnR2E-LChNhpqOktcV4GPeT0ZS79cdf1tjdlnfNSlpGNWMCW6vVYYnHLCbjU so I was able to watch the rest of the docs.I am impressed especially by Dr. Joseph Ladapo, beginning at minute 33.)
CNN has an opinion piece disguised as a report on yesterday’s “hearing” with Attorney General William Barr. Even as the author, Jerry Herb, repeatedly declared statements by Barr and President Trump as “false,” he took note of the poor treatment of Barr by the Democrats.
“Jerry Nadler of New York and the panel’s Democrats did not offer Barr any niceties congressional witnesses typically receive. Democrats repeatedly cut off Barr’s responses, accused him of being wrong or lying and made clear they weren’t interested in the explanations he was offering. Barr wasn’t allowed extra time at the end of each lawmaker’s five minutes to respond to questions that witnesses typically receive — forcing Republicans to use their time to let Barr push back on the Democratic accusations.”
Indeed, rather than a ” hearing” to learn from General Barr, the Democrats made sure *they* were heard. One after the other ranted angrily and refused to allow the General to speak, much less respond to any questions. All too often, the Dem shouted, “I’m reclaiming my time!”
(“I’m reclaiming my time!” “I’m reclaiming my time!” “I’m reclaiming my time!” It started sounding like one of the rioter’s chants.)
There were few questions with an opportunity to answer, only
character attacks and accusations that the AG is guilty of politics and doing the bidding of the President. (Wingman?)
More than once AG Barr was accused of racism and causing people to die. One man flatly declared that the Attorney General of the United States was guilty of breaking his oath of office. And, of course, there were threats of impeachment.
Cedric Richmond from Louisiana ironically gave us a great example of racism by noting that when the AG came to his office, he didn’t have a black staffer.
Is there supposed to be a “quota?” Isn’t hiring according to race the definition of “racism?”
I kept waiting for someone to have a stroke – not the AG, he was usually amazingly cool and calm.
(Or spontaneously combust?)
Bizarrely, toward the end of the day, Nadler committed the most egregious act by harshly refusing AG Barr’s request for a 5 minute break.
The meeting began an hour past schedule: Nadler was late because he had an automobile accident on the way to the Capitol. He then jumped into a hostile rant about Barr, skipping the Chairman’s routine notification that the witness could request such breaks as needed.
Throughout the day, the Representatives had, as is customary, individually left the hearing room, coming and going at will. The Attorney General, however, sat for over 5 hours with only three (3) 5-10 minute breaks. There was no lunch break and no scheduled recesses.
The only reason to breech the usual House protocol – not to mention common courtesy – in such a way would be to force the 70 year old witness to ask repeatedly before being excused.
The Democrat members of the House “Justice” Committee could have acheived the grandstanding they apparently craved by simply holding a press conference or giving one of their “One Minute” speeches. Rather than *hearing from* the Attorney General of the United States, they shamefully went out of their way to abuse – and even humiliate him.
I agree with the General: Nadler, indeed each of his Democrat colleagues, are a “real class act.”
General Barr is, however.
(This is an edited version to clear up typos.)
The Democrats and their allies in the media lie about the small things, it shouldn’t surprise us when they ruin lives by lying about the real issues.
From just one weekend, just three of the petty lies:
- Hitler and a Bible: even Snopes agrees that it was photoshopped.
- White House lights turned off because of riots: photoshopped photo from the Obama era.
- Tear gas ordered to facilitate a photo shoot: the Park police deny that they used tear gas.
About that tear gas, there’s proof in the photos and videos they didn’t falsify (yet?): the police aren’t wearing gas masks.
And, here, where neither the horses nor the police are affected the way they would have been by tear gas.
Please leave comments at my WingRight Facebook page.
Dems used to just act as though government owns your current and future earnings. Now, they want to know the value of your wedding ring, grandma’s China, the homestead, & your golden parachute. The plan is to tax them *every year* until you have to sell them (to them?) to pay those taxes.
“But, but, but,” you say, “It’s only on the greedy $Ultra-Rich!”
- A wealth tax like the one proposed by presidential candidate Sen. Elizabeth Warren would make ultra-wealthy Americans pay the federal government a small percentage of their net worth each year.
- Sen. Bernie Sanders released his own proposal for a wealth tax on September 24 that his campaign claims would cause “the wealth of billionaires would be cut in half over 15 years.”
Suuure it is. That’s what they said about the income tax in 1913. (and you can keep your doctor, too.)
By 1918, the highest tax rate went from 1% to 67%, 77% in 1918. The lowest on incomes less than $4000, went from 0% to 6%.
No, the $UltraRich might not all up and leave the country. The income tax law requires
expats to continue paying US income tax for years after leaving.
Yes, in a (coco)nut shell, that is it. If you want the tax break, all you have to do is abandon everything you own, book a flight and never return, or at least not that much anyway.“ (HT: The Points Guy)
If you denounce your citizenship, you may be liable to an “Exit tax” calculated as though you sold everything you own on the day you “expatriate.” And you can’t get your citizenship back.
So, what we have is a bunch of 70 year olds who have enjoyed their wealth and some 20- to 30-somethings who don’t want to pay their student loans and don’t really want to work hard enough to accumulate wealth on their own.
Eat the Rich. It’s a thing.
Nite: comments disabled. Please comment on my Facebook page.
Some (political) animals are more equal, I guess.
all there is to the OIG report by Michael Horowitz that we were told was coming in June? (It’s now the end of August.)
If not, why is the IG’s report piecemeal? Why is it taking so long? And why is the follow through on “wait until the IG finishes the investigation” so chaotic – or at the least, highly variable?
The Inspector General released info that he found Comey broke FBI policies *after* the Justice Department determined that Comey wouldn’t be prosecuted.
It turns out that Horowitz actually referred the Comey violation to the Justice Department for prosecution but the DOJ decided not to prosecute.
Who – in actual places of responsibility – cares about policies? What good is an Inspector General investigation and referral for prosecution, anyway?
The Washington Post
distorts history and geography to advocate for abortion- and for the Democratic Party.
The Texas Medical Board this year reported that 25 Counties don’t have any physicians at all. Many Texas Counties are health care shortage areas because of there’s not enough population to keep doctors busy.
And many high population centers are shortage areas because Texas has a doctor shortage over all.
In 2011, Texas cut virtually every item on our budget due to the requirement of the State Constitution to balance our budget.
One measure used to balance the budget was to focus State healthcare dollars on County clinics and hospitals that provide comprehensive, continuing – not single organ system – care.
Then, in 2013 we prioritized public and county clinics and hospitals over those single-issue facilities. Planned Parenthood was never mentioned, nor were the other abortion providers in the State. If the clinic or group took care of the whole patient and didn’t provide abortions, they would be eligible after County and State funded health care was funded.
We could have done more if President Obama hadn’t blocked Texas from receiving Federal Women’s health or Family planning funds. Texas taxpayers paid into that Federal fund, but were denied its return to us. Texas did our best to fill in the gaps this lost funding created, allocating $32M of our State tax funds to Family Planning and Women’s Health programs in 2013-14.
In 2015, when the budget improved, we increased State spending for Women’s health and Family Planning beyond historic amounts. In 2019, nearly $400M was allocated, including raising the cut off for eligibility to 200% of the poverty level. $15M+ was set aside to improve post-partum care.
The main goal of the opinion piece is not only to increase State and Federal funding for Family Planning and Women’s Health. The author, Richard Rival of San Antonio, attacks Texan’s science, religion and assumes that government should consider elective abortion an integral part of “reproductive health” programs.
Nevermind that science affirms that the life of each human begins at fertilization. Or that “reproduction” has obviously occurred before any woman has an abortion, ending the life of that other body, her child. (Yes, one commenter tried to tell us that not only women seek abortions.)
But it’s the last paragraph that tells the truth about the author’s agenda, with a little side dressing of racism. Mr Rivard tells voters to end the ,”one-party state” – to force taxpayers to fund elective abortion for both citizens, non-citizens, and illegal aliens alike.
Beverly B Nuckols, MD
Edit 8/21/19 5:15 EST (France time) to fix typos. BBN