Displaying posts published in

March 2020

Wuhan Virus Exposes The Danger of Reliance Upon China Chris Buskirk

https://amgreatness.com/2020/03/10/wuhan-virus-exposes-the-danger-of-reliance-upon-china/

What we know at this point is that the virus is more infectious than the flu. Some studies suggest it is roughly two to three times as contagious. There is also good reason to believe that this virus and the COVID-19 respiratory syndrome that it causes are particularly dangerous to older people and those with underlying health problems. This, of course, is also true of the seasonal flu, but it appears to be much more pronounced with this virus.

What’s more, the range of preexisting or chronic health issues that materially raise susceptibility to serious illness as a result of this virus keeps expanding. At first, doctors thought it was limited to people with respiratory conditions, but they since added high blood pressure, which affects 77.9 million Americans, and diabetes, which affects 30 million Americans. Add in asthma and some other chronic conditions and something like one-in-three Americans may be in the high-risk category.

There is some good news: the vast majority of people who contract the Wuhan Virus will experience only mild symptoms, many will remain completely asymptomatic, and then they will recover.

In other words, this isn’t the plague that killed 30 percent of Europe’s population. But it is a very serious public health threat for a significant portion of our population and that needs to be handled effectively lest the death toll spiral.

The time for handling Wuhan Virus as a threat that we could avoid has passed. It’s here. Now we need to focus on mitigating it’s spread and treating those who develop life-threatening pneumonia and long-term fibrosis of the lungs “as seen in SARS and MERS.” Both are potentially deadly. Worse, the fibrosis doesn’t heal. Its spread can be arrested with treatment so that it doesn’t consume the entire lung, but those who develop it are stuck with it—and all of the accompanying limitations—for life.

The ongoing experience of treating Wuhan Virus has exposed dangerous inadequacies in our healthcare system, in our government’s ability to handle foreseeable public health threats, and even in the way we have ordered our economy. They are all interrelated and they all need fixing.

One thing that became clear very quickly in China is that the Chinese lacked hospital capacity. According to viral videos, they constructed that capacity very quickly. Feel free to take that with a grain of salt if you like. The Chinese were also able to direct production of drugs, N95 masks, and biohazard suits, so that healthcare workers and first responders could do their jobs.

Of course, that’s because China manufactures all of those things in their own country. We do not.

An anonymous Department of Homeland Security official told Reuters of the protective equipment needed by healthcare providers that “very little of this stuff is apparently made in the [United] States, so if we’re down to domestic capability to produce, it could get tough.”

And that’s a major health and national security risk that must be remedied.

The Italian experience, an open society much more like our own, is perhaps more instructive. In mid-February, Italy had very few known cases of coronavirus and none of them were from community infection. That’s when one of the first Americans to contract the virus, Marc Thibault, a vice principal from Rhode Island guiding a school trip, picked it up. He was an otherwise healthy 48-year-old father of two who spent two weeks in the hospital, most of it in intensive care connected to a ventilator, where he was given last rites by a priest. Thibault recovered due to the timely application of expert healthcare and a lot of resources. Again, thank God.

But his experience exposes the weakness in our system. Treating the people with the worst cases of Wuhan Virus is possible—but it takes a lot of resources. When there are one or two or 10 cases, that works. But when we are talking about thousands flooding hospitals, as in Northern Italy, the system breaks down.

There are only so many ICU beds and even when the hospitals convert whole floors from standard care to intensive care, there are only so many respirators, so many doctors and nurses—some percentage of whom will get sick even with extreme preventive measures—and even in the absence of sickness are limited as they become exhausted. What happens next is that healthcare workers must triage the patients and they are left with hard, heartbreaking decisions.

The question isn’t who could we treat and probably save under normal circumstances but rather who has the best chance of survival when there are limited resources and the rest get a palliative and a prayer.

What has been the most galling and dangerous weakness to be exposed—but also the most correctable one—is the realization of how dependent the United States is upon China for lifesaving drugs, for hazmat suits, and for N95 masks.

For all sorts of critical products, we don’t and currently can’t make them ourselves. Ninety-seven percent of antibiotics used in the United States are made in China, 80 percent of the chemical components necessary for the drugs that we do make here come from China. Within one year, nearly the entire production of N95 masks went from “Made in USA” to “Made in China.” The U.S. Strategic Stockpile currently holds just 12 million N95 masks, a small fraction of the 3.5 billion the DHS estimates we would need in the event of a pandemic. This is insane and it must change.

Outsourcing manufacturing to China has done incalculable damage to the United States. It’s impoverished countless towns and many millions of people. It’s shrunk the American middle class and made it more precarious. And that’s led to all kinds of social and political distress from skyrocketing opiate addiction and deaths to an embrace of radical politics.

For some people the connections between these things are too abstract or they just shrug and say, “Well, that’s the market” as if Americans—real people—exist to serve “the market” rather than markets existing to serve Americans by making their lives better. But the simple fact that we can’t make the very products necessary to provide lifesaving healthcare for Americans in a time of crisis isn’t an abstraction. It’s real, it’s dangerous, and it’s time to change.

The Chinese know our lives are dependent upon their good will. The state press agency, Xinhua, published a not so thinly veiled threat targeting the United States on March 4:

If China retaliates against the United States at this time, in addition to announcing a travel ban on the United States, it will also announce strategic control over medical products and ban exports to the United States. Then the United States will be caught in the ocean of new coronaviruses.

According to the US CDC officials, most masks in the United States are made in China and imported from China. If China bans the export of masks to the United States, the United States will fall into a mask shortage, and the most basic measures to prevent the novel coronavirus can’t do it.

Also according to the US CDC officials, most of the drugs in the United States are imported, and some drugs are imported from Europe. However, Europe also places the production base of these drugs in China, so more than 90% of the US imported drugs are related to China. The implication is that at this time, as long as China announces that its drugs are for domestic use and banned exports, the United States will fall into the hell of the novel coronavirus epidemic.

They’re right and they know it. So let’s take the hint and take responsibility for our own security.

Senator Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) has been a leader on this. In February 2019, he published a report warning, “the U.S. runs the risk of losing important components of its medical supply chain to China’s government-backed industry.” He was prescient.

Late last month, he revisited the subject. “At the time, those seemed like abstract concerns, but we now know they are real,” Rubio wrote. “Americans unable to buy medical masks and who see headlines about potential shortages of critical, irreplaceable drugs will be familiar.” Rubio is working on vital legislation that would address these issues. We could go even further.

Here are a few simple ideas policymakers should act on now. As a national security priority, we must mandate by law that the following items and the materials necessary to make them are manufactured in the United States:

Critical drugs, including antibiotics, antivirals, steroids, and vaccines.
Protective gear and medical equipment such as masks, hazmat suits, respirators, and ventilators.
Vaccination for highly infectious new viruses should be mandatory and free where necessary.

On Tuesday, the Chinese government announced it would send an aid package to Italy, where the hospitals have been overrun and where respirators and ventilators—often the difference between life and death—are being rationed. That aid package includes 1,000 ventilators, 2 million masks, 100,000 respirators, 20,000 protective suits, and 50,000 test kits. And it’s all a free gift.

The United States didn’t do that because we can’t do that. We don’t have the capacity to supply our own needs let alone provide lifesaving help to an ally like Italy. That’s shameful and we must do better.

China is not just a strategic competitor, it is a hostile foreign power. And by controlling the manufacture of critical healthcare supplies—not just iPhones and toasters—they hold significant power over this country and the rest of the world. And they know how to use it—especially in a time of crisis.
Chris is publisher and editor of American Greatness and the host of The Chris Buskirk Show. He was a Publius Fellow at the Claremont Institute and received a fellowship from the Earhart Foundation. Chris is a serial entrepreneur who has built and sold businesses in financial services and digital marketing. He is a frequent guest on NPR’s “Morning Edition.” His writing has appeared in the New York Times, the Washington Post, The Hill, and elsewhere. Follow him on Twitter at @TheChrisBuskirk

No Thanks: Biden Promises ‘Return to Normal’ Julie Kelly

https://amgreatness.com/2020/03/10/no-thanks-biden-promises-return-to-normal/

President Trump, for all his flaws, has exposed the arrogance, ignorance, and failures of Washington’s ruling class. That’s why they’re desperate to oust him, even if it means replacing Trump with a man way past his prime who’s exhibiting more alarming behavior each day. There’s nothing “normal” about it.

If he wins the White House in November, Joe Biden is pledging a “return to normal.” And apparently Team Biden thinks that catchy slogan sounds like a promise instead of a threat.

Since announcing his candidacy last spring, Biden and his boosters have touted the former vice president’s ability to roll back the clock to the period of political appeasement that was interrupted by the unwelcome rule of Donald Trump. Biden, who has roamed the halls of power in Washington, D.C. for nearly five decades, claims only he can restore the nation’s capital to the comfort zone it had formerly been for him and his cronies, a place where mean tweets and spontaneous firings and “irregular channels” don’t frustrate the Beltway’s business-as-usual brotherhood.

“Joe Biden wants to take America back to a time before Trump,” cooed a headline in a lengthy puff piece on Biden in the July 2019 issue of the New York Times magazine. “For voters unnerved by Trump’s conduct in office but not necessarily seeking radical change, he offers vast experience, conciliatory instincts and an empathy rooted in personal anguish.”

Now, Biden’s view of what constitutes “normal” might be a tad out of whack after 47 years in national politics. After all, the Democratic front runner remains gobsmacked as to why anyone would question the propriety of his son’s profitable international business dealings while Biden worked in the West Wing.

And Biden’s recent interactions with “normal” Americans have veered from creepy to dangerously aggressive. At a campaign appearance in Michigan on Tuesday, Biden berated an autoworker, pointed in his face, and said he wanted to “go outside” with the man.

Democrats: A Disaster for African Americans How the Left exploits the victimhood narrative and devastates a community. Wed Mar 11, 2020 Bruce Hendry

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2020/03/immigration-bruce-hendry/

Below is Part 6 of a new essay written by Bruce Hendry: Democrats, Progressives and Socialists. Stay tuned for the ensuing chapters. [See links to previous chapters below this article].

14. Immigration.

I have often wondered why it has been so difficult for Congress to agree on sensible immigration laws, and also why existing immigration laws have not been enforced. The other mystery to me is why we let immigrants into our country that need to be on welfare when there are many immigrants that are highly educated who want to be here, but are denied. With so many people that want to come to America to live, why wouldn’t we pick the ones who would benefit our country the most?

Democrats are the answer to this mystery. Poor illegal immigrants from Africa, Mexico and Central America eventually vote for Democrats. It’s that simple. It’s not good for our country to let poor, sometimes uneducated persons who need welfare and medical assistance into our country. But it is good for Democrats. In simplest terms, Democrats sacrifice the good of the country in order to import future Democratic voters. An example of that is California, a state that used to be Republican when Ronald Reagan was governor, but now because of legal and illegal immigration, is solidly Democratic.

15. Democrats are a Disaster for African Americans.

94% of the African American vote goes to Democrats, despite the fact that Democrats have been a disaster for their communities. Historically, and prior to the Civil War, slave owners in the South were Democrats. In the 1860’s, the northern political party of the Whigs would not take a courageous stand against slavery. So a sizable portion of the Whigs broke away and formed the Republican party in order to free the slaves. The Republican party, the one that still exists today, was originally formed to free the slaves of the South and 360,000 mostly white men from the North died freeing the black slaves. 260,000 men from the Democratic south died trying to keep slavery.

After the Civil War, the Democrats in the South sought to keep African Americans from full citizenship by passing a series of laws that we now call “Jim Crow” laws. These segregationist laws identified people with black skins and then made special rules for them that kept them second-class citizens. Republicans came to the rescue again and with northern Democrats had those laws invalidated.

Another primary and another spectacular victory for Donald Trump By Andrea Widburg

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2020/03/another_primary_and_another_spectacular_victory_for_donald_trump.html

Normally, when an incumbent who is popular with his party is running unopposed in a primary – or when the opponents are fairly marginal figures most voters have forgotten actually exist – there’s very low turnout for the incumbent. That was not the case with Donald Trump last week, on Super Tuesday. He had a blowout primary, with people turning out in unexpected droves to vote for him.

Trump voters knew that their vote wouldn’t matter in terms of Trump gaining the delegates for their state. They turned out to make a point: Trump’s voters are wildly enthusiastic. They don’t just talk the talk on social media, they walk the walk at polling stations, even when the results are a foregone conclusion.

The same pattern repeated itself on March 10’s Mini Super Tuesday.

Because of the publishing schedule, as this goes to publication not all of the votes have been counted in the various Mini Super Tuesday states. Nevertheless, there’s a pattern that cannot be ignored and it’s one that favors Trump – especially when compared to those states in which Obama showed up on the ballot as the 2012 incumbent (Missouri, Mississippi, and Michigan).

All of the information below is from Decision Desk HQ. If you hate numbers, the interesting facts can be found after the list:

The Danger of Democrats’ Distorting Legal Arguments Against Impeachment by Alan M. Dershowitz

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/15703/distorting-legal-arguments

In response to a question whether it matters “If there were a quid pro quo,” I said that would depend on “If the quo were in some way unlawful.” If the politician’s motive were “corrupt” — for example, if he were seeking a kickback, that would be an impeachable crime. But if his entirely lawful act had “mixed motives,” including his re-election, that would not turn a lawful act into a crime or impeachable offense.

“Start with the media claim that defense lawyer Alan Dershowitz said a President can do anything to further his re-election as long as he thinks it is in the national interest. This isn’t what he said. The Harvard professor said explicitly that a President can be impeached for criminal acts.” — Wall Street Journal, Editorial, January 30, 2020.

Perhaps the most disturbing consequence of distorting the so-called “Dershowitz doctrine” into a justification for any and all presidential actions, is that it may create a dangerous precedent. Because of the persistent mischaracterization of “Dershowitz doctrine,” the Senate vote to acquit may be taken as a confirmation that a president who believes his re-election is in the public interest, can do anything he wants — even commit serious crimes — to help himself get re-elected. That is not what I said or believe. Nor is it the precedent the senators who vote for acquittal intended to establish.

It has now been a month since the Senate acquitted U.S. President Donald J. Trump, but the lies persist. Democratic leaders and the media continue to put on trial what they have denominated as “The Dershowitz Doctrine”: namely that a president can do anything — even commit serious crimes — as long as he believes his election was in the public interest. Congressman Adam Schiff described it as a “lawless” variation on the “Nixon” doctrine that whatever a president does is, by definition, lawful. Senator Schumer said that under “my” doctrine, former President Richard M. Nixon did not commit any impeachable offense, despite evidence of his numerous crimes. (Ignoring my explicit statement that I supported Nixon’s impeachment.) Media pundits went even further: Joe Lockhart, former Press Secretary to President Bill Clinton, accused me of making arguments that would justify the genocides of Hitler and Stalin.