RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://issuesinsights.com/2021/10/18/buttigieg-the-weak-link-in-the-supply-chain/

The only thing more laughable than Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg’s claim that spending two months on paternity leave counts as “work” is that the massive infrastructure bill in Congress would do anything to fix the supply chain crisis.

When asked on CNBC why the administration waited so long to take action, Buttigieg responded that “we’ve been working this issue from day one”.

Well, not exactly.

As Politico reported, Buttigieg was “mostly offline” starting in mid-August, and only went on a media blitz after Politico disclosed the fact that he’d been on an unannounced leave.

It’s true that Biden issued a supply chain executive order in early February, saying that “we’re not going to wait for a review to be completed before we start closing the existing gaps.”

In June, Biden announced the creation of a new Supply Chain Disruptions Task Force with Buttigieg one of the key members. The next month, Buttigieg said, he’d “convened the entire ecosystem of supply chain actors.”

Press Secretary Jen Psaki, in an attempt to defend the administration’s response, told reporters that “we’ve not only been talking about this since January, we’ve been working to put in place a range of steps to help address the challenges in the supply chains.”

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2021/10/17/bidens_epic_fail_at_unity_146577.html

“As I write this, Biden’s job RealClearPolitics average approval rating is underwater by 7.9%. His low numbers, they’re becoming bipartisan.”

As a candidate, now-President Joe Biden said that if elected, he would bring the country together, heal partisan divisions and get things done. How’s that working out?

Sure, on the campaign trail, Biden seemed so convincing. He was the seasoned hand, a former vice president with 36 years in the Senate who knew the ways of Washington.

“We need to revive the spirit of bipartisanship in the country,” he said in Ohio in October 2020. He said he wanted to “work with one another.” If he occupied the Oval Office, he promised, “there will be no blue states and red states with me.”

Some nine months into his tenure, it’s evident that Biden’s unity pledge ranks with former President Barack Obama’s campaign whopper, “If you like your health care plan, you can keep it,” which won him PolitiFact’s Lie of the Year in 2013.

It’s not just that Biden isn’t producing unity; it’s also that he’s squandering the moment for a bad idea.

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2021/10/the_great_struggle_of_our_time_the_battle_for_reality.html

With societal turbulence all around us, many people feel that we are locked in some great and portentous struggle. But because it is so pervasive and multifaced, the nature of this struggle is not readily obvious. There are many fronts on which this struggle is being fought: racial relations, education, healthcare, popular culture, financial system, and freedom of speech, among others. It is not easy to make sense of it all, especially since the battles are highly pitched and emotions are running very high.

What characterizes these battles, besides their intensity, is deep polarization. The possibility of the warring camps coming together and meeting on some common ground seems to be growing more distant by the day. There is even talk that the two sides will either come to blows, or they will each go their own way in some form of secession.

Many have observed that the contenders seem to be separated by an unbridgeable gap, and yet no one has been able to explain the nature of this gap, or what exactly it is that separates the mindsets of the opposing sides.

In our view the great struggle in the grip of which we find ourselves cuts much deeper than the immediate issues we argue over. The real fight extends beyond any particular point of public friction.

The great battle of our time is a battle about the very nature of reality. More precisely, what the two sides war over on the most fundamental level is what constitutes truth and how it should be determined.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2021/10/nebraska_ags_devastating_critique_of_the_suppression_of_effective_covid_therapies.html

What the AG’s formal opinion amounts to is a full and complete takedown of the conspiracy to suppress cheap and effective early Covid-19 treatments.

Legal opinions usually aren’t terribly fun to read, but if you’ve been an ivermectin and/or hydroxychloroquine advocate for use against Wuhan Plague, this one definitely will bring you much joy.

It’s a rather lengthy and full spectrum opinion issued by Doug Peterson, Nebraska’s Attorney General, in response to a query from the state’s Department of Health and Human Services as to whether physicians can be persecuted and tormented for prescribing ivermectin or hydroxychloroquine to patients sick with the China Flu. What the AG’s response amounts to is a full and complete takedown of the conspiracy to suppress cheap and effective early Covid-19 treatments.

All the players — FDA, CDC, Fauci, Big Pharma, the media, all of them — get a glorious and swift kick in the rear end. Portions of it even made me laugh out loud. As far as legal documents go, it’s definitely easy reading and understandable to everyone. It seems clear that the AG’s office went to some trouble to layout the whole saga in a way the masses can understand without translation by legal scholars.

What follows are some of the most relevant parts (at least in my sometimes-humble opinion), but it really is in everyone’s best interest to personally read the opinion in full. People must individually understand what’s actually happening for themselves. This is what will enable We The People to course correct and divert from the ruinous path set for us by the overlords.

https://amgreatness.com/2021/10/16/art-under-peer-pressure/

The Whitney Museum of American Art in New York is just so excited to introduce us to “Jasper Johns: Mind/Mirror,” its huge retrospective of Johns’ work from the 1950s to the day before yesterday. (Indeed, it’s so huge that New York wasn’t big enough to house it. Part of the exhibition is on view at the Philadelphia Museum of Art. But it doesn’t matter where you start. As Bertie Wooster said in another context, “Slice him where you will, a hellhound is still a hellhound.”)

Quoth the Whitney: “Jasper Johns’ groundbreaking work sent shock waves through the art world when it was first shown in the late 1950s, and he has continued to challenge new audiences—and himself—over a career spanning more than sixty-five years.”

“Groundbreaking”? “Shock waves”? “Challenge”? The only thing that Johns’ work—all those crude paintings of American flags, targets, and images swiped ( er, “appropriated”) from innocent teens—the only thing it all challenges is one’s credulity; a credulity, I admit, that cannot help being attended by a certain mixture contempt and envy when you discover that these daubs regularly fetch millions of dollars. Even Hunter Biden must be envious.

The truth is that the images bearing the name of Jasper Johns deserve an honored place not in the history of art but in the history of publicity—department of cheap tricks and mercenary genius.

In this respect, Johns’ oeuvre resembles that of many other celebrated figures in the art world (not to be confused with the world of art), not least his longtime lover and sometime collaborator Robert Rauschenberg, who died in 2008 at 82.

When Rauschenberg died, the Hosannas were loud and predictable. Michael Kimmelman, then chief art critic for the New York Times, spoke for the terminally infatuated when he praised Rauschenberg as an artist who “time and again reshaped art in the 20th century,” whose work “gave new meaning to sculpture,” and whose promiscuous dabblings “defied the traditional idea that an artist stick to one medium or style.” (Unlike, for example, Leonardo da Vinci, who painted, sculpted, designed buildings, composed music, and did serious mathematical, engineering, and scientific work.)