Connect with us

Wire

CNN Worries About Biden’s Age and Popularity, Drops Names of 11 Candidates to Replace Him in 2024

Western Journal

Published

on

The next presidential election might be almost three years away, but for Democrats, it’s already time to worry.

The aging, inept Democratic president in the White House is finishing a first year in office marked by disaster at home and abroad and has polling numbers to show it; his vice president has even lower approval ratings than he does, and anyone watching American politics with even casual interest anticipates a well-deserved bloodbath for the Democratic Party in next year’s midterms.

As bad as that appears, when one of CNN’s most prominent commentators took a look at the party’s presidential bench — as possible replacements for President Joe Biden on the 2024 ticket — it looks a whole lot worse.

Spinning off a New York Times report published Sunday about the potential presidential maneuverings by ambitious Democrats, Chris Cillizza, CNN editor-at-large and notable liberal sycophant, published a rundown Monday of potential successors to the already-blackened Biden name in the White House, with a cheery one-sentence description of the individual’s strengths.

take our poll - story continues below

Did SCOTUS make the right decision on medical mandates for large businesses?

  • Did SCOTUS make the right decision on medical mandates for large businesses?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Flag And Cross updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

It’s not just that the list isn’t intimidating, for a political party that currently dominates power in the nation’s capital — it’s downright embarrassing.

Leading off, of course, is Vice President Kamala Harris, a woman who’s unsuitability for anything close to a position of power grows by the day (even the mainstream media has noticed). As Biden’s understudy, she has been impressively unimpressive since the inauguration — with a notable face-plant on dealing with the illegal immigration crisis that managed to turn off Americans on both ends of the political spectrum.

Behind her is Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, the robotic former mayor of South Bend, Indiana, whose chief claim to fame is being gay and legally married to another man. Buttigieg’s other noteworthy “accomplishment” is supposedly being in charge of the nation’s transportation system in a year when the “supply chain” has been an American worry for the first time in living memory.

(No worries, though, Mayor Pete was at home with his husband and their two adopted children. It’s all good.)

Do you think President Joe Biden will leave office before 2024?

What’s particularly pathetic about the whole thing is that Cillizza calls Buttigieg “the most naturally talented” Democrat in the field. And he’s probably right.

Following the Big Two come two senators, Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota and Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts — the Democrats’ Good Witch from the Midwest and the Wicked Witch of the East. They presumably have some name recognition, but their performances, even in the Democratic primaries of 2020, don’t indicate there’s a national following waiting to well up.

Klobuchar and Warren at least have names familiar enough to shorthand in a headline.

After that, the list drops from also-rans into the vaguely-familiar — Mitch Landrieu? Former New Orleans mayor and now Biden “infrastructure coordinator.” Nothing gets American hearts beating like “infrastructure coordinator.”

Roy Cooper? He’s the governor of North Carolina, but if there are 50 Americans outside the Tar Heel State who know that, it just means they’ve got relatives there.

Gina Riamondo? She’s the secretary of commerce, a cabinet position that actually gives her a leg up on the presidency over Buttigieg at transportation, under the Presidential Succession Act of 1947, but it’s a good bet that’s about the only place she has a shot. (And if it comes to getting that far into the presidential succession ranks, we all have bigger problems anyway.)

For some reason, both the Times and Cillizza thought it was worth mentioning Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer as a potential candidate, a woman who will be lucky to win reelection in her own state after her scandal-plagued performance during the coronavirus pandemic.

Then there’s New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy, who damn near didn’t win reelection in his home state only last month — a Democratic stronghold where a Republican shouldn’t have had a prayer, but did because of Murphy’s weakness.

Next is Illinois Gov. Jay Pritzker, a man whose presidential qualifications, according to Cillizza, boil down to “he’s the governor of a Midwestern state” and “very, very rich.”

While “very, very rich” probably trumps “infrastructure coordinator” in terms of PR, it does not, by itself, a president make. (Just ask Michael Bloomberg.)

And, of course, no list of Democratic dreamers would be complete without Stacey Abrams, the failed gubernatorial candidate in Georgia who apparently plans to seek the top job in the Peach State again next year.

According to the Times, Abrams’ campaign manager insists she’ll serve a full term in Atlanta if she wins in 2022. (The nation can breathe at ease.)

Of course, it’s a political eternity before the next presidential election, and political obscurity doesn’t necessarily doom any campaign. (How many normal Americans outside of Arkansas had even heard of Bill Clinton in 1989? How well-known was Barack Obama outside of Illinois in 2005?)

But there are two points worth noting here.

The first is that not even a year into his presidency, Biden’s physical and mental health, and political weakness, are at the point where even sympathetic outlets like The New York Times and CNN are already looking past him for potential replacements.

The second is that the list of potential replacements is so laughably weak.

In the 2016 GOP primary, the Republican field was overcome by the vibrancy, political energy and sheer star power of the Donald Trump campaign, but just about every contender was a viable candidate for the presidency. (Even John Kasich, if he’d been running as a Democrat.)

The Republican primary field in 2024 will, of course, hinge on whether Trump runs again. But if he doesn’t, there’s no reason to think the GOP field won’t be as strong.

What the Times and CNN are really highlighting here is how weak the current Democratic administration is and how weak any potential successor might be.

With Biden looking and acting every weary minute of his 79 years on this earth, there’s a rock-solid reason for his party and his country to be thinking about who’s going to be in the Oval Office sooner rather than later.

And even with an election almost three years off, it’s time for Democrats to worry. If you were a Democrat, you’d worry, too.

This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.

Wire

Footage Captures Shocked Woman Moments After Bear Attack in Her Own Driveway

Western Journal

Published

on

Many people don’t think about the possibility that they might run into a bear — or vice versa — when they take their dogs out for a walk in their neighborhood, but that’s one possibility that will forever haunt one woman from DeBary, Florida.

The woman, who only gave her first name, Aydee, stepped outside onto her driveway with her two dogs Amaya and Hemmy around 9:00 p.m. on Jan. 13 and was soon met by a large adult female mother bear.

Aydee ran, and her dogs ran off, but the bear caught up to her.

“When I realized it, she got me here,” Aydee told WOFL-TV. “But I took off running, and she took running behind me.

take our poll - story continues below

Did SCOTUS make the right decision on medical mandates for large businesses?

  • Did SCOTUS make the right decision on medical mandates for large businesses?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Flag And Cross updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

“I was screaming going to my neighbor’s to see if he, you know, he can call 911 or help me or, or I don’t know — take the gun out, whatever.”

The bear had three yearling cubs in a tree nearby, and after attacking Aydee, was treed by several neighbors who responded to the woman’s cries.

Neighbor Awston Kennedy had spotted the bear, a familiar sight in the area, shortly before the attack in the trees in front of his house. It was checking out some trash and then was shooed away by some other neighbors.

“Next thing you know there’s pounding on the door,” Kennedy said. “There was about four of us came out to check on her pretty quick … Her main concern was her dog.

“They had it cornered in the tree for a bit with dome lights trying to make sure it didn’t come out,” Kennedy said of the other neighbors who responded. “One of the neighbors actually came out with his jeep and threw the spotlights on it.”

According to the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, the bear was dispatched on the scene.

“Volusia County Sheriff’s Officers arrived on the scene and found an adult female bear with yearlings in a tree nearby,” a statement by the FWC read. “EMS arrived on the scene to treat the woman’s injuries, which were not life threatening. The woman’s dog was not injured.

“FWC bear biologists darted the adult bear in the tree and humanely killed it per the FWC policy to protect public safety. The three 100-pound yearlings are old enough to survive on their own and so no attempt was made to capture them.”

Aydee’s dogs were found later, unharmed, but Aydee suffered from bites and scratches on her face and back, as well as a concussion and twisted ankle. Some of her wounds required stitches.



“The worst [experience] of my life,” she told WESH-TV. “Like, you know you go through stuff in life, but this is like the worst. No. 1, I would say … I feel lucky to be alive.”

Aydee also isn’t happy that the yearlings were left in the same area instead of being relocated.

“I’m an animal lover too, but those are not a friend,” she said. “She was trespassing my house. I was not in her territory. Two more years and we will be in the same boat.”

Despite the victim’s insistence that the bear was out of line, some locals are upset the bear was killed as she’s been a staple in the neighborhood for over seven years and has reportedly never been an issue before.

“Unfortunately, the neighbor got scratched up by the bear,” local David Mangham said. “She’s fortunate to be alive, I guess, but as far as euthanizing it, why not relocate it?”

After this incident, a petition has been circulating to get the “FWC to change their ‘Aggressive Bear’ killing policy,” according to a post by Bear Defenders on Facebook.

“The Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) has an ‘Aggressive Bear’ killing policy that does not consider the circumstances that cause bears to act aggressively,” the post read.

“There are humane and non-lethal ways to handle these situations. The FWC kills bears who act in self-defense or are defending their cubs. If a bear indeed attacked, it would result in severe injuries and even death, yet NO ONE in the State of Florida has ever died from a bear attack.



“If bears are in residential areas, they are most likely there because of unsecured trash and other bear attractants. We believe in self-defense, including a black bear’s right to defend her cubs. We wish the FWC would take into account what triggered the defensive (aggressive) response from the bear before labeling them aggressive and killing them as a result of human error.”

According to the FWC’s Bear Management Coordinator Davis Telesco, killing the bear was a sad necessity.

“We can’t have bears living in neighborhoods that are willing to hurt somebody,” he said. “We just can’t allow it.”

This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.

Many people don’t think about the possibility that they might run into a bear — or vice versa — when they take their dogs out for a walk in their neighborhood, but that’s one possibility that will forever haunt one woman from DeBary, Florida. The woman, who only gave her first name, Aydee, stepped outside onto her driveway with her two dogs Amaya and Hemmy around 9:00 p.m. on Jan. 13 and was soon met by a large adult female mother bear. Aydee ran, and her dogs ran off, but the bear caught up to her. “When I realized it, she got me here,” Aydee told WOFL-TV. “But I took off running, and she took running behind me. “I was screaming going to my neighbor’s to see if he, you know, he can call 911 or help me or, or I don’t know — take the gun out, whatever.” The bear had three yearling cubs in a tree nearby, and after attacking Aydee, was treed by several neighbors who responded to the woman’s cries. Neighbor Awston Kennedy had spotted the bear, a familiar sight in the area, shortly before the attack in the trees in front of his house. It was checking out some trash and then was shooed away by some other neighbors. “Next thing you know there’s pounding on the door,” Kennedy said. “There was about four of us came out to check on her pretty quick … Her main concern was her dog. “They had it cornered in the tree for a bit with dome lights trying to make sure it didn’t come out,” Kennedy said of the other neighbors who responded. “One of the neighbors actually came out with his jeep and threw the spotlights on it.” According to the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission,…

Continue Reading

Wire

CDC Study: Natural Immunity Provides Significantly More Protection Against COVID Than Vaccination Only

Western Journal

Published

on

Ebola

A study by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released on Wednesday shows that those who have recovered from COVID-19 have more protection against infection than those who have only been vaccinated.

Researchers reviewed data from California and New York from May to November, when the delta variant was dominant in the U.S.

The study looked at four groups of people: unvaccinated with no prior COVID-19 infection, vaccinated with no prior infection, unvaccinated who recovered from COVID-19, and vaccinated who recovered.

By the first week of October, COVID-19 rates among the vaccinated with no previous infection were 6.2 times lower in California and 4.5 times lower in New York than among the unvaccinated with no previous infection.

take our poll - story continues below

Did SCOTUS make the right decision on medical mandates for large businesses?

  • Did SCOTUS make the right decision on medical mandates for large businesses?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Flag And Cross updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

However, among the unvaccinated with a previous infection, the COVID-19 rate was 29 times lower in California and 14.7 times lower in New York.

The individuals most protected against infection were those who had previously had COVID-19 and were also vaccinated. Their infection rate was 32.5 times lower in California and 19.8 times lower in New York.

“These results demonstrate that vaccination protects against COVID-19 and related hospitalization, and that surviving a previous infection protects against a reinfection and related hospitalization,” the CDC determined.

The agency noted that natural immunity proved more efficacious as the delta variant became predominant and vaccine-induced immunity for many began to wane.

The CDC also highlighted that the study took place before omicron became the dominant variant in the U.S. and before the impact of booster shots could be adequately measured.

Dr. Benjamin Silk of the CDC told the media on Wednesday, “Before the delta variant, COVID-19 vaccination resulted in better protection against a subsequent infection than surviving a previous infection,” CNN reported.

“When looking at the summer and the fall of 2021, when delta became the dominant in this country, however, surviving a previous infection now provided greater protection against subsequent infection than vaccination,” he added.

Dr. Eli Rosenberg, New York state deputy director for science said the safest course of action for those who have never had COVID-19 is to get vaccinated.

“Having COVID the first time carries with it significant risks, and becoming vaccinated and staying up-to-date with boosters really is the only safe choice for preventing COVID infection and severe disease,” he said.

Dr. Marty Makary, a professor at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, has faulted policymakers for being too slow to acknowledge natural immunity.

“The pandemic of the unvaccinated is a misnomer. It’s a pandemic of the non-immune,” he tweeted in July.

“More precisely, it’s a series of regional outbreaks in select pockets of the country with low population immunity,” Makary said. “Same take-home message though: If you’re not immune, get immune by getting vaxed.”

This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.

A study by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released on Wednesday shows that those who have recovered from COVID-19 have more protection against infection than those who have only been vaccinated. Researchers reviewed data from California and New York from May to November, when the delta variant was dominant in the U.S. The study looked at four groups of people: unvaccinated with no prior COVID-19 infection, vaccinated with no prior infection, unvaccinated who recovered from COVID-19, and vaccinated who recovered. By the first week of October, COVID-19 rates among the vaccinated with no previous infection were 6.2 times lower in California and 4.5 times lower in New York than among the unvaccinated with no previous infection. However, among the unvaccinated with a previous infection, the COVID-19 rate was 29 times lower in California and 14.7 times lower in New York. The individuals most protected against infection were those who had previously had COVID-19 and were also vaccinated. Their infection rate was 32.5 times lower in California and 19.8 times lower in New York. “These results demonstrate that vaccination protects against COVID-19 and related hospitalization, and that surviving a previous infection protects against a reinfection and related hospitalization,” the CDC determined. The agency noted that natural immunity proved more efficacious as the delta variant became predominant and vaccine-induced immunity for many began to wane. The CDC also highlighted that the study took place before omicron became the dominant variant in the U.S. and before the impact of booster shots could be adequately measured. Dr. Benjamin Silk of the CDC told the media on Wednesday, “Before the delta variant, COVID-19 vaccination resulted in better protection against a subsequent infection than surviving a previous infection,” CNN reported. “When looking at the summer and the fall of 2021, when delta became the…

Continue Reading
The Schaftlein Report

Latest Articles

Best of the Week