The Defense Production Act for baby formula?

Administrator

That’s a hard no. Yet another example of government overreach. Are you surprised that so many on the right are pushing for it? Republicans are on board just to illustrate the Biden Administration incompetence at handling a situation and see this as a highly visible solution. But the DPA is a Korean War relic instituted to remedy very different problems. The baby formula shortage was an FDA creation. Their regulatory structure and response capabilities when addressing public health problems is the cause for the shortage. Implementing a government agency to rectify a different government agency is right up the alley of big government creating problems and then being the only solution.

We’re all aware how real and serious the shortage is. Which is why the FDA needs to address things like this in the regulatory structure PRIOR to events happening. There are a multitude of ways to deal with it immediately such as alternate supply options, temporarily relaxing or eliminating regulatory hurdles for other companies, some foreign, to step in and replace supply shortages. But this must be done in advance and the FDA isn’t setup in a FEMA like disaster response structure, they exist to regulate.

Yes the Biden Administration absolutely dropped the ball in not addressing the problem in the beginning months ago. But I see using the DPA to solve it now as more of a lifesaver to Biden than a partisan embarrassment. And simply not necessary. The FDA can easily and quickly issue the necessary regulatory guidance to resolve the shortage. The fact is the problem predates Biden. Solving it in the future requires the regulatory agency to already have in place procedures that will still have public safety as the top priority. If the FDA can’t comply that’s when you know the agency itself comprises a larger threat to public safety than any potential issue that may arise.

An outdated ad from the past or a predictor of the future?

Administrator

My how the times…aren’t changing? This 1955 ad seems to confirm it. Fluoride is still horrific yet make that claim and you’re canceled. Take it from someone who works in the water industry and sees firsthand how bad fluoride is, the orthodoxy is akin to a doctor stepping out of line and not supporting the covid vaccines. Now add PFAS and micro-plastics to our polluted ‘safe’ water supplies.

The vaccine push is well documented and the debate isn’t centered on safety and effectiveness as it should be but on compliance and ideology.

Mental hygiene? Our approach to depression is the twisted collusion one would expect from science and big pharma. Dependency and addiction to the ‘cure’ far outweighs the hippocratic oath toward prevention and therapy of the ever-widening range of mental illnesses.

No doubt a poll of Americans would show overwhelming surprise that issues from nearly 70 years ago are so prevalent today. We’re always media fed illusions that we somehow have it worse than ever before and everything is unprecedented. The ad messaging to reject communism and government centric solutions is still as relevant today as it was then. The battles we’ll be fighting at the end of the century seem impossible to predict but that isn’t much further away than 1955 was from now so this ad may still be cutting edge in 2100 as it was in 1955.

SCOTUS will rule States have responsibility to rule on abortion and the Federal Government overstepped it’s authority

Administrator

That’s the essence of overturning Roe vs. Wade. It merely shifts the decision back to the States as it was before Roe vs. Wade. No abolishing the 14th Amendment as Democrats are screaming. No taking away a woman’s right. Roe vs. Wade didn’t give women a right to choose nor does it take it away.

This was never, ever about a woman’s right to choose. It was always a Federal Government power play to grant itself the authority to make decisions over your life. Just like marriage. Or healthcare. There’s a long list of issues the Federal Government should have no business being involved in whatsoever. The Constitution is without question a limiting document specifically outlining the powers enumerated to the Federal Government and anything not specifically granted is given to the States or the people. Couldn’t be more clear.

Furthermore, America was founded on Christian based principles. This is why progressives are so adamant in attacking it today as religion is intolerable to their goals. Which simply means the conception of life is from our Creator God, therefore no mere human has any authority to take life away. God creates, only God can take away. The seemingly ever growing list of ‘devout’ Catholics like Biden and Pelosi that claim abortion is allowable shows the reach of Satan. You cannot, absolutely cannot, be a Christian and accept abortion. Nor gays either for that matter. Sorry, those are the rules. However I’d also point out that no mere sinner such as myself has the ability or authority to judge. Only the Good Lord does. So I won’t condemn anyone for issues like this because I can’t. Anyone violating God’s Law will face their own Judgment Day and have to account for their life choices. But I can be adamantly against Government overstepping it’s authority where it shouldn’t be involved at all.

BTW, I can also support self-defense that results in murder because you’re protecting your own life. I don’t support capital punishment for the same reasons, humans can’t be the ultimate arbitrator of judgment when it involves a life. When you stand on principles all of this is quite easy. No big deliberations on my views. We live in a God vs. Satan world like it or not. Good or evil fits pretty neatly in one side or the other. You can believe whatever you like but some things just are no matter what you say or think. Taking the life of a human in or out of the womb is out of your league. You will answer for it. God help you.

What’s Musk really up to with Twitter?

Administrator

Has Twitter been punk’d? Maybe Elon Musk has no intention of owning Twitter. There is still plenty of time and a myriad of opportunities to back out. Why? Musk is already achieving the goal of exposing Twitter for the bigoted censorship machine it is. They’ve already rolled back their algorithm to censor conservatives rather than get caught with it in place if Musk completed the deal and took control. It’s no coincidence that Musk is already dumping Twitter stock, $4 billion yesterday alone. He has no interest in long-term ownership of Twitter. His goal is to manipulate the censorship of social media. Why not just make a power play of a hostile takeover bid and force Twitter to show its hand? So it costs him a billion if he pulls out. The damage is already done. Twitter has been exposed for their censorship. Their self-importance is forever tarnished as the world realizes Twitter has limited value and influence and can’t compare to other platforms like Tik-Tok for influence. Musk knows this as an investor. His role as an influencer is what’s at stake here, not a return on investment. We’ll see how it plays out. Spellchek has made a prediction or two in the past and has a pretty good track record. Did Musk never have any intention of buying Twitter? We’ll see.

Opinion | What if Putin Didn’t Miscalculate? – The New York Times

Administrator

https://archive.ph/2022.03.31-073040/https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/29/opinion/ukraine-war-putin.html

The New York Times of all places gets it right? Spellchek is a longtime proponent of global conflicts being driven by natural resources. Putin is playing the E.U., NATO and the U.S. like a fiddle. Russia and China have zero interest in any Great Reset or climate change agenda. Ukraine is merely a pawn, a piece of the puzzle in the much larger battle between globalists and the non-complying Eastern bloc powers. Food is essentially a natural resource and utilizing it as a bargaining chip is an act of war as water will be as well. The poor people of Ukraine are a shiny object designed to take the focus off what’s really happening in the bigger picture. Buckle up as we’re just getting warmed up in a true global conflict that won’t generally involve military conflict, but strategic resource control.