Category: Pat’s Opinions

The new Juden?

So they want their white employees to be less white because it’s plain to all Caucasians are racist .

Do they intend to work on blacks to become less black or Hispananic be less brown?

This crap needs to stop .

These people teaching this stuff are treading on dangerous ground for us all .

Who will be the next evil class that needs to be eliminated?The Jews, mentally disabled and Romani were picked on the last time.

How woke can you be?

Avoid his stories with all your might. Avoid Dr. Suess ’cause he’s too white!


A national educators organization is telling schools to avoid reading Dr. Seuss because the children’s books allegedly have “racial undertones.”For more than 20 years, March 2 has been recognized as Read Across America Day in honor of Dr. Seuss’s birthday. The reading recognition day was founded by the National Education Association — the nation’s largest labor union — in 1998. This year’s theme is “Create and Celebrate Diversity.”


SOURCE:https://www.dailywire.com/news/oh-the-places-the-woke-will-go-dr-seuss-canceled-for-racial-undertones?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=benshapiro

Received in an email 2/26/21

Do your own due diligence to verify;

Kamala Harris
Date: January 24, 2021

Wow…wonder why the media never mentioned any of this during the campaign? Maybe they were just too busy! ……….
The History of Kamala Harris

Here is a timely editorial that exposes the hidden background of Kamala Harris from the Combat Veterans for Congress Political Action Committee that is posted here with permission of the author. CVFC PAC supports the election of US military combat veterans to the US Senate and House of Representatives. The editorial begins:

Kamala Harris’ father was an avowed Marxist professor in the Economics Department at Stanford University in Palo Alto, CA. Both of Harris’ parents were active in the Berkeley based Afro-American Association; Fidel Castro and Che Guevara were the heroes of the Afro-American Association.

The group’s leader, Donald Warden (aka Khalid al-Mansour), mentored two young Afro-American Association members, Huey Newton and Bobby Seale; they created the Maoist inspired Black Panther Party which gained strong support from Communist China; the Black Panther Party served as the model for creation of the Black Lives Matter Marxist organization Khalid al-Mansour subsequently went on to arrange financing and facilitated for Barack Hussein Obama to be accepted as a student to matriculate at Harvard Law School.

Following her graduation from college, Harris returned to California and subsequently became the mistress of the 60-year-old married Speaker of the California Assembly, Willie Brown, Jr. Brown’s political campaigns were supported and funded by Dr. Carlton Goodlett, the owner of The Sun Reporter and several other pro-Communist newspapers. Brown was elected as Mayor of San Francisco, and strongly endorsed Harris’ Marxist political philosophy; he guided Harris’ political rise in California politics, leading to her election as California’s Attorney General. Willie Brown, Jr. was a well-known long-time Communist sympathizer. Willie Brown, Jr. was initially elected to public office with the substantial help of the Communist Party USA. Today, Willie Brown is widely regarded as one of the Chinese Communist Party’s best friends in the San Francisco Bay Area.

While serving as San Francisco District Attorney, Kamala Harris mentored a young San Francisco Radical Maoist activist, Lateefah Simon, who was a member of the STORM Revolutionary Movement; Simon currently chairs the Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) Board. Simon has always been close friends with the founder of Black Lives Matter Marxist Domestic Terrorists, Alicia Garza, as well as STORM member and avowed Communist, Van Jones. Harris has been openly and aggressively supporting Black Lives Matter Marxists; Kamala Harris is still closely associated with Maoist Lateefah Simon and Marxist Alicia Garza.

Kamala Harris’s sister Maya Harris was a student activist at Stanford University. She was a closely associated with Steve Phillips, one of the leading Marxist-Leninists on campus and a long-time affiliate with the League of Revolutionary Struggle, a pro-Chinese Communist group. Phillips came out of the Left, and in college he studied Marx, Mao, and Lenin, and maintained close associations with fellow Communists.

Phillips married into the multi billion dollar Sandler family of the Golden West Savings and Loan fortune. He funded many leftist political campaigns, and the voter registration drives in the Southern and South Western states in order to help his friend, Barack Hussein Obama, defeat Hillary Clinton. Phillips has been a major financial sponsor for Kamala Harris’s political campaigns for various California elective offices.

Harris’ husband, Doug Emhoff works for the law firm DLA Piper, which “boasts nearly 30 years of experience in Communist China with over 140 lawyers dedicated to its ‘Communist China Investment Services’ branch. He was just appointed to Professor at Yale to school future lawyers in the fine points of Communism. When she was elected to the US Senate, Kamala Harris appointed a Pro-Communist Senate Chief of Staff, Karine Jean-Pierre. Jean-Pierre was active with the New York-based Haiti Support Network. The organization worked closely with the pro-Communist China/Communist North Korea Workers World Party and supported Jean-Bertrand Aristide, the far-left Communist former president of Haiti and the radical Lavalas movement.

Fortunately for Harris, but potentially disastrous for the Republic, elected office holders are not subject to the security clearance process. If the FBI did a Background Investigation on Kamala Harris, she never would have passed, because of her 40-year close ties with Marxists, Communists, Maoists, and Communist China. Harris would never have been approved for acceptance to any of the 5 Military Service Academies, been appointed to a US Government Sub-Cabinet position, or would have been approved to fill a sensitive position for a high security defense contractor. Yet, since Joe Biden was elected, Harris could be a heartbeat away from being President.

The US constitutional Republic is being threatened by the People’s Republic of Communist China (PPC) externally, and by their very active espionage operations within the United States. The People’s Republic of Communist China (PPC), with 1.4 billion people, is governed by the 90 million member Chinese Communist Party (CCP), that has been working with Russia to destroy the US Constitutional Republic for over 70 years.

If the American voters read the background information (in Trevor Loudon’s article) on Kamala Harris, they would never support her election as Vice President of the United States. Joe Biden is suffering from the early onset of dementia and will continue to decline in cerebral awareness; he will never be able to fill out a four-year term of office. Since Biden was elected, the Socialists, Marxists, and Communist who control Kamala Harris, are planning to enact provisions of the 25th Amendment, in order to remove Joe Biden from office, so Harris can become the first Communist President of the United States.

Since Biden was elected, because Biden would not be up to it, Kamala Harris would lead the effort to appoint very dangerous anti-American Leftist, Communist, Socialists, and Marxists to fill highly sensitive positions in the Washington Deep State Bureaucracy. She would fill all appointive positions in the US Intelligence Agencies, in the Department of Homeland Security, in the Department of Defense, in The Justice Department, the Department of State, the FBI, the CIA, most cabinet positions, the National Security Council, and in the White House Staff.

American voters must alert their fellow Americans that Kamala Harris is a very serious National Security threat to the very survival of the US Constitutional Republic; she has been a fellow traveler of Marxists, Communists, Maoists, Socialists, Progressives, and Chinese Communists for over 35 years. President Trump had much more background information on Kamala Harris than we presented here, and he was correct, when he accused Kamala Harris of being a Communist subverter.

Geoffrey B. Higginbotham
Major General, USMC (Ret.)

Heads up!

We’ve become a nation at war with ourselves.

Molon Labe

None of us know what’s coming, but I think we can all agree that the “signs of the times” point to serious disruption in our way of life. The “blue states” are showing signs of reverting to socialist dictatorships. The “red states” are rebelling against attempts to force them into that same mold, and resisting as best they can. Within each state, “blue” or “red” enclaves are resisting the other side, and trying to build their own little fiefdoms, insulated from views and policies with which they don’t agree. There’s no longer a sense of a shared national identity. We’ve become a nation at war with ourselves.

Nobody knows what’s coming . . . but something’s got to give, sooner or later. I have a feeling that we may have less than a year before things get out of control, at least somewhere in these formerly United States. Be as ready as you can to protect and safeguard yourself and your loved ones if and when that happens – and if you’re in an area where you think the danger is particularly great, leave.

Now.

You may have less time than you think.

Are you sovereign over your own body?

So, you think you are sovereign over your own body? Not so fast, Sparky. What about employers mandating the injection of the experimental COVID “vaccines”?

EUA and Mandates
First, the current COVID-19 vaccines, Pfizer and Moderna, are authorized under an emergency use authorization (EUA), not approved through the regular FDA process. There is legal uncertainty as to whether it is possible to mandate a vaccine under a EUA.

I am more inclined to think that for employers, at least, it is probably legal to require a vaccine under a EUA – or at least, such an employer would have a good argument in court, though it’s unclear which way a court will decide.

Four things support an employer mandating vaccines.

The law does not address employers at all. It speaks to vaccine recipients, administrators, and the secretary, but does not directly impose anything on employers. In a reality in which employers normally would be able to impose a vaccine requirement, reading a prohibition into a law that doesn’t explicitly contain one is a big step.

The law does mention that there can be consequences to removal.
In guidance to employers, the Equal Employment Opportunities Commission (EEOC) did not suggest a EUA is a barrier to a mandate.

Finally, we know that quite a few employers have mandated testing – and many of those tests were only authorized under a EUA, creating a precedent for mandating something under a EUA.

The best argument to counter this would be to view the vaccine under a EUA as experimental, and concluding that you cannot mandate an experimental vaccine.

There is no jurisprudence directly on this point since there has never been a vaccine provided for general use under a EUA – the only previously EUA for a vaccine was for anthrax for the military only.

In my belief, an employer mandating a vaccine is taking a risk of litigation on this issue, but has a reasonable chance of success in such litigation, though there is also a chance of losing.

Another potential limit on an employer’s ability to mandate vaccines may come from collective bargaining. If the workforce is unionized, the collective bargaining agreement may require negotiating with the union before requiring a vaccine. Unions may or may not support a mandate.

This will be a case-by-case issue, depending on what specifically the collective bargaining agreement says, and what the union’s position is. In at least one case, a court upheld an arbitrator’s ruling that a vaccine mandate could not be imposed without a collective bargaining agreement.

Unions opposing mandates in a case like this may not be anti-vaccine but may be acting to preserve their powers vis-à-vis management. But it is a potential limitation to COVID-19 vaccines employer mandates.

Americans with Disabilities Act and Mandates
The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) was created to protect the right of people with disabilities to access a variety of things, including workplaces. For the purpose of this discussion, the ADA requires employers with over 15 workers, in some circumstances, to provide reasonable accommodations to workers with medical conditions that make vaccines especially dangerous.

A vaccine contraindication would be a disability under the act, and the employer would have to provide accommodation unless it’s an undue hardship, which is a fairly high bar in this context, requiring showing a significant difficulty or expense.

Accommodation, however, would not necessarily mean that the employee gets to access the workplace in exactly the same way as everybody else, or gets to set the term. The employer can create an accommodation that protects the medically exempt worker and others, for example, requiring that employers who cannot be vaccinated wear extra personal protective equipment (PPE), provide for social distancing between them and others, if possible, or if working remotely is an option, prioritizing such employees for such work. The EEOC provides more details.

The balance is between not forcing the medically exempt individual – someone who cannot protect him or herself because of something beyond their control, a medical issue – to take a risk much higher than others by vaccinating, and protecting that person and others from Covid-19, in the absence of a vaccine.

Religion and Mandates
Most of the discussion so far applies to public and private employers alike. One area where there may be a difference is in relation to religion. Public employers are subject to constitutional limits, and private employers are not: you do not have constitutional rights against another private person, only against the government.

Public employers are subject, among other things, to the first amendment. Under our current jurisprudence, a government body does not need to give a religious exemption from a generally applicable law that does not target religion.

Here is the essence of what you need to know, structured under the three parts of sincere religious beliefs, reasonable accommodation, and undue burden.

Challenging a claim of sincere religious belief is full of pitfalls. An employer cannot require, for example, that an employee bring a letter from a priest, since that discriminates in favor of organized religion, or try to assess the reasonableness of the belief.

An employer can, however, require an employee to write an explanation of their belief, and query the employee about that – but here, too, an employer needs to be careful. The focus is on personal belief and its sincerity. It needs to be religious in nature, and sincere. That does not require believing in a God, but it does mean that the belief has to be about fundamental questions and part of a system of belief. “I think vaccines are dangerous” won’t cut it, even if the employee cites one or two verses.

The reasonable accommodation, again, does not have to be what the employee would prefer. In essence, courts are looking to whether the employer made a good faith effort to allow the employee to work in spite of the limits the belief imposes.

The undue burden here means something different than in the disability context, requiring an accommodation only if it’s less than a minimal cost. https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/guidance/questions-and-answers-religious-discrimination-workplace.

Liability
Employers need to consider their liability in two opposite contexts here. First, if an employer requires vaccines from employees, any adverse reactions to the vaccine, as a work requirement, will likely be covered by workers’ compensation. Ironically, this may put workers who are required to get the vaccine in a better position compensation-wise than others who may have been harmed by a rare side effect, since anyone else needs to go through the very un-generous Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program.
This is a lower bar than for the ADA.

Bottom line to answer the original question, No! You do not have sovereignty over your body… sorry about that. Welcome to the Brave New World.