A report published in the American Heart Association’s Heart and Stroke Statistics annual report cite 48% of US adults have some type of cardiovascular disease.

The uptick could be due to rising obesity, and lowering thresholds for diagnosing guidelines such as high blood pressure (now considered high if over 130/80).

Although smoking rates have declined over the years, many still use tobacco and recent research has found E-cigs to increase risk of heart attack and stroke by 70%.

What is a stroke?

A stroke occurs when an area of the brain does not get the proper oxygen and blood flow it needs. There are two major types of stroke:  ischemic and hemorrhagic.

Ischemic strokes are more common than the latter and occur when a clot prevents blood flow to part of the brain.  80% of all strokes fall under ischemic.  It is a likened to a heart attack, except the brain tissue is being deprived of blood and nutrients.  Plaques commonly arise from arteriosclerosis that break off travel to the smaller vessels of the brain.

Hemorrhagic strokes are less common and occur when there is a bleed of one of the brain vessels.  The bleed prevents blood flow into the brain since it is seeping outside the brain tissue, causing damage to nearby cells.  The bleeds could occur from high blood pressure or aneurysms that rupture.

What are the signs of a stroke?

Since a clot or bleed usually affect one area of the brain, we see symptoms on one side of the body, many times its contralateral (opposite) side.  We can also see central effects.  The symptoms of stroke include the following:

  • Weakness of one side of the body
  • Loss of balance
  • Numbness on one side of the body
  • Slurred speech
  • Vision issues
  • Headache
  • Facial droop

and more…..

How are strokes treated?

If the stroke was caused by a clot (ischemic) immediate treatment includes dissolving/removing the clot.   Aspirin is used initially and if within the proper time frame, tissue plasminogen activator (TPA).  These clots can also be surgically removed and arteries widened to bring blood flow to the brain.

With a hemorrhagic  stroke, we need to stop the bleed and improve flow to the brain.  Controlling the bleed, bypassing the vessel, “clogging” the aneurysm with techniques such as “coiling” (endovascular embolization) are sometimes utilized.

Time is of the essence, so it's crucial to identify the warning signs and call 911 immediately.  The American Stroke Association uses the acronym “FAST” (Facial drooping, Arm weakness, Speech difficulty, and Time to call 911).  The sooner a stroke victim receives medical attention the better the prognosis.

What are the risk factors for stroke?

The following put us at risk of having a stroke.

  • High blood pressure
  • Family history of stroke
  • Diabetes
  • Cardiovascular disease (artery clogging, such as the heart and carotid arteries)
  • Abnormal heart rhythms, such as atrial fibrillation
  • Smoking
  • Drugs
  • Obesity
  • Inactivity
  • Clotting disorder
  • Sleep apnea
  • Being older (greater than 55)
  • African-Americans appear to be more at risk than Caucasians and Hispanics
  • Men seem to be more affected than women

How do we prevent strokes?

Avoid the following:

  • Excessive drinking
  • Drug use
  • Tobacco products
  • Control blood pressure, sugar and cholesterol
  • Get evaluated by a medical provider if at risk for heart disease or stroke.

Preventing Heart Disease

Firstly, we must know our risk factors. These include:

Family history of heart disease

Personal history of heart disease

High Blood Pressure

High Cholesterol

Diabetes

Smoking

Obesity

Inactivity

Males over 40

Females who are postmenopausal

High stress

and even short stature has been cited as a potential risk factor.

As you can see, many of us can be at risk for heart disease.  Therefore secondly, we should be evaluated with an EKG, echocardiogram and any other exams our medical provider and/or cardiologist deem necessary.

Thirdly, reduce your risk by the following:

Maintain a normal blood pressure

Maintain normal blood sugar

Maintain normal cholesterol and lipid levels

Reduce stress

Maintain a balanced diet, rich in potassium-rich foods such as fruits and vegetables

Quit smoking

Stay active

Maintain a healthy weight.

 

---- 

Daliah Wachs is a guest contributor to GCN news, her views and opinions, medical or otherwise, if expressed, are her own. Doctor Wachs is an MD,  FAAFP and a Board Certified Family Physician.  The Dr. Daliah Show , is nationally syndicated M-F from 11:00 am - 2:00 pm and Saturday from Noon-1:00 pm (all central times) at GCN.

 

 

On Thursday, The Supreme Court blocked a Louisiana law designed to restrict access to abortions. In a 5-4 decision the surprising swing vote came from Chief Justice John R. Roberts Jr., who is generally considered a conservative justice. Instead of siding with fellow conservatives Justice Thomas, Alito & Gorsuch; Chief Justice Roberts sided with liberal appointees Ginsberg, Sotomayor, Kagen and Breyer.

 

So, just what is the Louisiana law that was struck down?

 

Well, it’s called, “Louisiana’s Unsafe Abortion Protection Act.” The premise of the law argues that doctors should have “admitting privileges” at a hospital within 30 miles of where an abortion is performed, and, if they do not have said privileges they are not allowed to perform an abortion there. If passed, the law would reduce the number of doctors allowed to perform abortions and therefor, possible enforce an “undue” restriction on a woman seeking an abortion.

 

An “admitting privilege,” means that the doctor has the privilege to admit patients to the hospital for some diagnostic or therapeutic services. “Admitting privilege,” as implied in the Louisiana law, and here is the important part - has nothing whatsoever to do medical competence.

 

So the law ties to say that a patient might be “unsafe” if they receive an abortion from a doctor that does not have admitting privileges. Hence, the title of the act.

 

The obvious problem, as has been pointed out many times, and has been the reason this act has been previously struck down in courts is: there are many legitimate reasons why a doctor might not have admitting privileges to a hospital that have nothing to do with medical expertise. Which, obviously means that just because a doctor doesn’t have admitting privileges does not mean he/she is unqualified to perform an abortion. Which means the law is trying to enforce an undue restriction.

 

In fact there was a Texas law that was struck down by the Supreme Court in 2016 in their Whole Woman's Health vs. Hellerstedt decision. The Texas law was very similar to Louisiana’s “Unsafe Abortion Act.  In a 5-3 decision (they were one Justice down at the time, as Scalia had just died) court said the Texas law constituted an “undue burden” on a women’s right to seek an abortion, and struck it down. Which is exactly what they did to the Louisiana act.

Now, it’s interesting to note that Justice Roberts did not vote against the Texas law in 2016. He did vote against the similar Louisiana law on Thursday. As to why? Well, we don’t know why, exactly. That being said, I did find an interesting breakdown over at Rolling Stone (.com) in a 2018 interview with veteran Newsweek reporter David Kaplan. Kaplan had just published a book called The Most Dangerous Branch, which was drawn from interviews “with 165 people including sitting justices, retired justices, clerks, lower court judges and federal officials.”

Tessa Stuart, from Rolling Stone, asks Kaplan if a new court (w/ Kavanaugh, who had not yet been confirmed) would overturn Roe. v. Wade? Kaplan said about Roberts: “I think Roberts is troubled by seeing the court get put in the maelstrom. And I think he recognizes that Roe v. Wade would put the court in the maelstrom like no other ruling in modern times … My guess would be that Roberts would not vote to explicitly overturn Roe…” (Which then would turn into a 6-3 vote against striking it down, in his opinion).

Fair enough. Maybe this is Robert’s first chance (the Thursday Louisiana vote) to suggest precisely what Kaplan was talking about. I guess, Kaplan is saying that Roberts just doesn’t want to rock the boat, per say. Although Kaplan did, at the time of the interview, seem to feel the Kavanagh would also vote against striking down Roe v. Wade.

Maybe. But maybe not. Kavanagh wrote the dissent against Thursday’s decision and it’s kind of dull but it’s only four pages if you want to check it out (linked above).

I read it. To the extent I understand it, it’s kind of a mess. Kavanagh goes back and forth and says, “Yeah, well, I guess I would be for this. But then again, I can see in some instances this would be undue (therefor illegal). You know I would need more facts about the new law, specifically, in order to make a more informed vote. But since I don’t have those facts - I’ll  just vote yes. Yes, the Louisiana Unsafe Abortion Act is fine!”

Um. Okay. But one would assume that, without more facts about something that is going into law - you should vote, no.

Right?

 

Anyway. This will not be last time we see abortion rights front and center at the Supreme Court. 

%PM, %07 %937 %2019 %21:%Feb

Gestapo Tactics in America?

Written by

It sounded like it came out of a movie plot.  In the early morning hours, federal agents stormed a home to make an arrest.  They had to be after some major drug lord or a sought-after terrorist.  There were 29 agents all wearing military gear and carrying weapons.  High powered assault rifles were involved.  Seventeen SUVs and two armored vehicles surrounded the home with lights flashing and sirens blaring.  It must be a really dangerous dude.

In a nearby canal, amphibious watercraft charged the home filled with more federal agents.  A helicopter hovered in the sky with long range weapons focused on the home.  As agents approached the house with battering rams, they demanded that the accused immediately open the door and surrender.  The attack on Osama Bid Laden had fewer Navy Seals involved then the number of agents who were sent to arrest this dangerous villain. Was this the seizure of an anti-government leader in Venezuela?  Had El Chapo escaped from prison and his capture was about to take place?  Had the feds found Bin Laden’s successor?  CNN had been tipped off and broadcast the whole attack live. What was going on?

lt was none of these, but merely a longtime Trump friend Roger Stone.  He was being arrested for making false statements to a congressional committee.  And he was treated like a terrorist?  Stone is an American citizen and has lived in south Florida for a number of years.  He does not have a current passport.  He has known about this investigation for months, and his lawyers said he would be glad to self-surrender if he were charged with a crime. If Stone had documents to hide or destroy, he would have had plenty of time in the months preceding his arrest. He has never been accused of any crimes and has no violent history.

After his arrest, the judge let Stone out on his personal signature without having to put up any property or money.   It was obvious that Stone was no threat and should have been allowed to appear on his own. So what gives?  Have we been turned into a jackboot democracy?

Here was Stone’s response.  “They could simply have called my lawyers and I would have turned my myself in. I’m 66 years old. I don’t own a firearm. I have no previous criminal record. My passport has expired. The special counsel’s office is well aware of the fact that I’m represented. I was frog-marched out the front door barefooted and shackled.  It’s an attempt to poison the jury pool. These are Gestapo tactics.”

Some in the press speculated that the special prosecutor and the FBI were sending a message. They sure were. It’s a message of terror, and fear that no citizen can trust their government. It’s a message that your government is not above using police state tactics, and that the justice system responds, not based on evidence, but based on threats. When thugs come into intimidate, it sends a message that you may not be living in a democracy anymore but a banana republic. It sends a message that no, you are no longer considered innocent until proven guilty in a system that operates in such a dictatorial fashion.

The story gets worse.  Stone’s indictment accuses him of making false statements to the House Intelligence Committee, but the testimony is classified so Stone is prohibited from seeing what he supposedly lied about. How is he supposed to defend himself if he cannot even read what he supposedly said?  What has happened to the supposed constitutional guarantee of being able to confront your accuser and challenging their evidence?

It matters not whether you are a liberal or a staunch conservative, this is not how justice is supposed to operate in America.  Many Americans will feel that if it is not happening to them then why should they care.  But unfortunately, what happened to Roger Stone could happen to anyone.  Are we not a better country  than this?


Peace and Justice

Jim Brown

 

---

Jim Brown is a guest contributor to GCN news. His views and opinions, if expressed, are his own. His column appears each week in numerous newspapers throughout the nation and on websites worldwide. You can read all his past columns and see continuing updates at http://www.jimbrownusa.com. You can also hear Jim’s nationally syndicated radio show, Common Sense, each Sunday morning from 9:00 am till 11:00 am Central Time on the Genesis Communication Network.

Now that we’ve witnessed Super Bowl Dull it’s time to dive back into the important things in life. Like - deciding what the best ad during the Super Bowl was!

Lots of people seem to have their opinions, of course. The folks over at Yahoo News seem to think it was the NFL 100. Which is a delightful ad putting together NFL super stars, old and new. And I like the commercial quite a bit. It’s funny. It’s fast paced. And it’s not too long (because I think this bit could wear itself out if it were say, several minutes long). Of course, it is an ad about football. During a football game. Which is a little silly, but whatever.

The folks over at CBS Sports really like the Bumble Serena Williams spot. It’s a socially aware female empowerment type commercial which goes really well with their brand messaging. For those that don’t know, Bumble is a dating app where women must make the first move / send the first message. Which is designed to cut out a lot of the crazy, toxic things that men send to women (usually, unsolicited). The commercial is well done, just not my favorite.

CNN went with the (perhaps, obvious) Bud Light/ Game of Thrones mash up. Continuing their charming “Dilly, dilly” line up, Bud Light knocks it out of the park with this one. “I don’t have the plague, anymore” is probably my favorite line from a commercial in a while.

There was lots of love for the Hyundai / Jason Bateman commercial, which I thought was pretty clever. There was equal amounts love/shade thrown around for the Change Up the Usual ad for Stella Artois which put together Carrie Bradshaw (SJP from Sex and the City) and “The Dude (Jeff Bridges from The Big Lebowski). People seem to love it or REALLY HATE it. I kind of liked it.

There was the Michael Bublé / Bubly commercial, which everyone at my Super Bowl party (including me) thought was pretty charming. And even though Donald Trump, Jr hated the Washington Post ad, his opinion is wrong. The Tom Hanks voiced ad is all about the importance of journalists and journalistic integrity and features the two murdered journalist that worked for the paper. It's a pretty powerful ad. Though, I do think the criticism of “The struggling newspaper spent HOW MUCH on the ad?” is fair.  

There are, of course, ads that didn't work as well as the advertiser hoped and some flat out stinkers too (but then again, this is all subjective). Including one with a really creepy robot kid and a gross one with chunky milk. But I’m not going to link to them or any of the other ones I hated since that will only give them more traffic.

All that being said, there was only one ad that I thought was exceptional, that one being: Microsoft’s "When everybody plays, we all win" two minute commercial for the XBOX Adaptive Controller. Seriously, you guys, every “I’m not crying, you’re crying!” meme becomes a harsh reality up in my crib when I watch that ad. And, um, it’s possible I’ve watched it several times.  

Back in July I wrote about the Adaptive Controller and basically said it’s the greatest gamer thing ever. I still feel that way. And with twenty five million hits on the commercial already since Sunday (on YouTube alone), I have a sneaking suspicion lots of folks feel that way too.

 

A recent study published in the Lancet finds Millennials to be at much higher risk for cancer than their parents and grandparents ever were.

Those born between 1981 and 1997 appear to be at increased risk of cancer of the:

  • colon
  • pancreas
  • uterus
  • bone marrow
  • gallbladder
  • kidney
  • and more.

Study authors cite obesity as the main culprit.

The CDC reports the prevalence of obesity was 35.7% among young adults aged 20 to 39 years.

In 2016 the International Agency for Research and Cancer listed multiple cancers in which obesity plays a role.  They include the above as well as breast, ovarian, and esophageal cancer.

Why is obesity linked to cancer?

Studies have found obesity to alter hormone levels which could incite cells to rapidly divide. Fat acts as if it's another organ, inducing signals that can affect insulin, sugar and fat metabolism and can induce inflammation when it accumulates around other organs.

Moreover it could be an associative relationship in which those who are obese may have poor diets and exercise habits which are linked to cancer as well.

In the above study, non-obesity related cancer, such as lung, appears to be at less risk for millennials as many are saying no to tobacco products.

However, other causes could be at play such as radiation exposure.  The verdict is not yet out on vaping either.

Study authors state:

IMPORTANTLY, THE FINDINGS SUGGEST THE NEED FOR FURTHER CLOSE EPIDEMIOLOGICAL MONITORING OF CANCER INCIDENCE TRENDS IN YOUNGER ADULTS AND HIGHLIGHT THE NEED FOR RIGOROUS AETIOLOGICAL STUDIES OF EXPOSURES THAT COULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE TRENDS.

We all know the old saying, “Some heroes don’t wear capes.” Which is kind of a silly saying though, because lots of super heroes don’t wear capes. But whatever. We all know what it’s supposed to mean.

Anyway. Enter Candice Payne (not to be confused with Candace Payne, the Chewbacca mom). Candice, rightfully called a good Samaritan by every Chicago paper and news site, after hearing about the Polar Freeze that was sweeping the Midwest, rapidly organized with a few of her friends and offered to spring for motel rooms for about 70 homeless people.

The folks were staying in about a dozen or so tents that had been set up in a vacant lot near Willis Tower, several of them were actually heated with portable propane tanks but when one of the tanks exploded (no injuries) their heat source was gone. So, while the folks living there didn’t have to evacuate - there wasn’t going to be any heat during the minus thirty degree weather. And they clearly didn't have anywhere else to go. 

So Candice did something about it. Apparently, she called dozens of hotels but couldn’t find one willing to take 70 homeless folks until she hit jackpot with the Amber Inn. The rooms cost about $70 each and she ended up paying about $1400 out of pocket, that she put on a credit card.

Payne posted on her Instagram account and several of her friends helped by offering money, donating food, clothes and diapers. Then they ordered several Ubers to move the folks to the motel where Payne and her volunteers had provided enough food for three meals a day until the cold front ended.

Payne and her all volunteer group hopes to find a more long-term solution for the homeless and plan to continue working together. 

So, I don't know about you but - I kind of love Candice Payne. 

A Harvard study finds popcorn and caramel flavor electronic cigarette liquid may damage the cilia of one’s respiratory system.

Diacetyl and 2,3- pentanedione have been found in multiple products to aid in flavoring and considered safe for human consumption. But that’s the key….consumption by eating,  not necessarily inhalation.

In this recent study from Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health, the cilia, small projections that line the respiratory tree allowing for a brush and propelling of contaminants coming down the pipe, appeared impaired in function when exposed to the chemicals.

Changes in gene expression of the cilia’s production and function were witnessed and could put one at risk for lung disease and lung cancer.

Diacetyl has been linked to “popcorn lung,” in which inhaling the yummy smelling chemical lined vapor could cause scarring of the lungs and loss of function.

9 Vaping Flavors Found to Increase Heart Risk

Last summer a study published by the American Heart Association found nine different E-cig flavors  to impair blood vessel function, which can impair heart health.

Endothelial cells, which delicately line blood and lymph vessels, were found to become inflamed at low concentrations of some vapor flavors.  And at high concentrations of others, exhibited cell death.  Nitric oxide production, necessary for vessel dilation to improve blood flow, was impaired as well. These are often the same changes seen in early heart disease.

The 9 flavors (and the chemicals within) cited in the report to cause the endothelial inflammation and/or damage were:

  • Mint (menthol)
  • Vanilla (vanillin)
  • Clove (eugenol)
  • Cinnamon (cinnamaldehyde)
  • Strawberry (dimethylpyrazine)
  • Banana (isoamyl acetate)
  • Butter (diacetyl)
  • Eucalyptus/spicy cooling (eucalyptol)
  • Burnt flavor (acetylpyridine)

Strawberry flavoring appeared to have the most adverse effect on the cells.

Now, many other flavors were not included in this study, so it's unknown how safe they may be.

For more on the study, read here.

An alternate study published last November looked at vaping flavors and their effects on heart muscle cells.

For more on this study, read here.

The moral?  Just because we love the taste of something, doesn’t mean it’s safe to inhale.

___________________________________________________________________

Vaping Linked to Heart Disease and Cancer

A study from New York University found the nicotine in electronic cigarettes to cause DNA damage similar to cigarette smoking.

Dr. Moon-shong Tang and his colleagues exposed mice to e-cig smoke during a three-month period, 5 days a week for three hours a day.  They found these mice, compared to those breathing filtered air, to have DNA damage to cells in their bladders, lungs and hearts. The amount of nicotine inhaled was approximately 10 mg/ml.   That dose would be commonly consumed by many humans who vape.

They then looked at human bladder and lung cells and found tumor cells were able to grow more easily once exposed to nicotine and vaping chemicals.

In a previous study,  researchers from Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center in Nashville found e-cig smoke to increase one’s risk of bladder cancer.

In 2015, the University of Minnesota identified chemicals commonly found in e-cig vapor to include:

  • Formaldehyde (human carcinogen)
  • Acetaldehyde (carcinogen related to alcohol drinking)
  • Acrolein (highly irritating and toxic)
  • Toluene (toxic) NNN, NNK (tobacco carcinogens related to nicotine)
  • Metals (possible carcinogens and toxins)

Although electronic cigarette “juice” may appear safe, it could produce harmful chemicals once heated to become a vapor.

A lethal dose of nicotine for an adult ranges from 30-60 mg and varied for children (0.5-1.0 mg/kg can be a lethal dosage for adults, and 0.1 mg/kg for children).  E-cigs, depending on their strengths (0 – 5.4%) could contain up to 54 mg of nicotine per cartridge (a 1.8% e -cig would contain 18mg/ml).

The topic of nicotine increasing one’s vulnerability to cancer is nothing new as decades ago researchers found nicotine to affect the cilia (brush border) along the respiratory tree, preventing mucus production and a sweeping out of carcinogens trying to make their way down to the lungs.

More research needs to be performed but this recent report reminds us that exposing our delicate lung tissue and immune system to vaping chemicals may not be as safe as we think.

For more on the study read here.

Toxic metals found in vaping liquid

In February, one study reported that toxic levels of lead and other metals may leak from the heating coil element into the vapor inhaled during e-cig use.

Researchers at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health found these metals to include:

  • lead
  • nickel
  • manganese
  • chromium
  • arsenic

We’ve known for some time that vaping fluid could contain chemicals that turn toxic once heated, but this study shed light on e-cig metal components causing metal leakage to the vapor making contact with delicate respiratory epithelium (lining).

Reported by Forbes, Rich Able, a medical device marketing consultant, stated the following, “the FDA does not currently test any of the most popular vaping and e-cigarette instruments being manufactured at unregulated factories in Asia that source  low-grade parts, batteries, and materials for the production of these devices,” suggesting that “the metal and parts composition of these devices must be stringently tested for toxic analytes and corrosive compounds.”

These chemicals may act as neurotoxins, affecting our nervous system, cause tissue necrosis (cell death) and even multi-organ failure.  Moreover they can affect how our immune system reacts to other chemicals as well as foreign pathogens, affecting our ability to fight other diseases.

Although studies have suggested e-cig vapor to be safer than tobacco smoke, not enough research has been done, in the relatively few years vaping has been around, looking at how heat-transformed chemicals and leaked metals affect our breathing, lungs and other organs once absorbed into the body.

 

---- 

Daliah Wachs is a guest contributor to GCN news, her views and opinions, medical or otherwise, if expressed, are her own. Doctor Wachs is an MD,  FAAFP and a Board Certified Family Physician.  The Dr. Daliah Show , is nationally syndicated M-F from 11:00 am - 2:00 pm and Saturday from Noon-1:00 pm (all central times) at GCN.

 

 

 

 

“And because I tell you the truth, ye believe me not.” -John 8:45

It is has been a week of weeks this last week.  We left freezing temperatures in Minnesota of -35 degrees to fly to Florida where the temperatures are around 82 degrees, which isn't that bad a tradeoff.  First, I preached at the Church that Dr. D. James Kennedy used to pastor and then was off to the Church Rick Wiles pastors, and finally back to Orlando to do more interviews with Mike Spaulding concerning the state of America today.

Mike covered my last column on his show titled: How Does the deep State Push Their Agenda Forward without America’s Politicians Doing to it For Them? They cannot!

The article covers the obvious hypocrisies and crimes of this current administration in pushing forth the same global agenda that administrations have advanced in the past by committing crimes against “We the People.”

Among those hypocrisies are publicly playing the pro-life advocate while behind closed doors fully funding Planned Parenthood through the covert $1.3 trillion omnibus bill.

The president plays up to the public that he is in full support of the Second Amendment, and then blatantly attacks it by suggesting after the Parkland shooting that government should first take the guns first and then provide due process.  The president goes on to show his hand by banning bump stocks, as well as nominating gun confiscating advocate William Barr for Attorney General of the United States. In Trump's first 500 days of incumbency, 55 illegal and unconstitutional legislative acts have stripped Americans of the right to bear arms under 26 governors in which most were Republicans.

Finally, I highlighted the treasonous acts of this administration concerning that of removing NAFTA and replacing it with something far worse. I wrote that the American people have been diverted in keeping their eyes on the southern border concerning illegal immigrants coming into America, but they fail to hold accountable America’s said representatives who are illegally alluring them into your country in the first place. Point man Donald Trump and rivals Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer have you heated up over a wall that was promised, which has yet to be built.

On November 30, 2018, President Trump, along with the Prime Minister of Canada and the President of Mexico, signed the United States-Mexico-Canada (USMCA) “Trade Agreement”. “Trade” is in quotes, because the document isn’t about “trade” – it’s about setting up global government. “Agreement” is in quotes because the document is a “treaty” – and that invokes the two-thirds ratification requirement of Art. II, §2, cl. 2, US Constitution.

Kristin Stockheimer wrote at The New American:

Not only is it still alive, it is larger and much worse than NAFTA! The text of the USMCA, according to former U.S. Ambassador to Canada Bruce Heyman, has portions and chapters of the agreement that are identical to those in the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP). Robert Lighthizer even admitted it is “built on” many TPP aspects. These facets, according to The New American writer Christian Gomez, have the potential to strip the U.S. of its sovereignty: 

Much like the TPP Commission, the Free Trade Commission can make changes to the USMCA without the consent of Congress. In fact, the agreement completely undermines Congress’ Constitutional Article I, Section 8 power to regulate trade with foreign nations.

While doing the interview with Mike, a caller called in and questioned what I just highlighted concerning the fruit of Donald Trump's administration and its actions, as if to suggest that it may or may not be true.

I asked, "How many times did Jesus warn you to not be deceived? Over and over, he warned us."

Furthermore, He said that many will come in His name and claim that they are His followers. Be not deceived.

“For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.” -Matthew 24:5

I then asked this caller, "When you walk up and see oranges hanging on the branches of a tree, do you deny the fact that it is an orange tree that is bearing the oranges?  If you see apples hanging on the branches of a tree, can you deny that it is an apple tree that is bearing apples?"

When I show you the fruit that this administration has been bearing, somehow or another, we are supposed to deny the corrupt fruit that's on its branches?

How do you help a people like this (Matthew 15:14)?

So it is with how we are to judge all men.  We judge them by the fruit that they bear.  No one that can deny this truth.  Yet, many that profess Christ as their Lord, who are truly worshipping Trump, are blatantly denying the lessons that Jesus taught.

So, I asked this caller how it was that Jesus said that we were to judge men? I quoted:

“Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes from thorn bushes or figs from thistles? Even so, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit.  A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit.  Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Therefore by their fruits you will know them.” -Matthew 7:15-20

And that in 2 Corinthians 11:13-15:

“For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works."

When are Americans going to break the same deceptive cycle that they have put themselves in (2 Peter 2:19)?

 

Bradlee Dean is a guest contributor to GCN news. His views and opinions are his own and do not reflect the views and opinions of the Genesis Communication Network. Bradlee's radio program, The Sons of Libertybroadcasts live M - Sat here at GCN. This op-ed was originally published by Sons of Liberty Media at www.sonsoflibertyradio.com. Reprinted with permission. 

%PM, %31 %876 %2019 %20:%Jan

Make Performance Matter!

Written by

How do you put a dollar value on the worth of a public official? How about this idea. 

Shouldn’t receiving any salary increase be based on results?

LSU football coach Ed Orgeron will pocket some three and a half million dollars this year, making him one of the highest-paid football coaches in the nation. He received such an enormous salary package based on results. It’s the old adage that you get what you pay for, and with Ed, LSU ended the football season winning 10 games.

Should time and work be the only criteria in paying public employees? Why not pay the governor, the secretary of economic development, the superintendent of education, and a cross section of other public officials that directly affect our lives based on a scale of how well they perform and what results they achieve?

Experimentation with performance pay in the public sector is on the grow. A New York City charter school is promising to pay teachers $125,000 a year, plus bonuses based on classroom and school-wide performance. Sure, this is a lot of money, but those in charge are looking for a significant increase in student performance levels. Bottom line — results.

All of this aside, the heart of our query is about pegging the pay of the governor and his top assistants to performance. I would surmise that most voters in Louisiana would think it’s a good idea, but how do you do it? When you talk about results, it is certainly easier to define in the private sector. Results are measured in the stock price of a publicly traded company or by profit in any other company. The more the company makes, the more its managers can earn.

But can you create an accountability and production index in government? I think you can. This would be a challenge for key economists at Louisiana universities. Develop a formula that would give a “performance index.” Sounds difficult, but why not give it a try?  If you take the economic figures below and compare them with other states, Louisiana comes in 48th in the nation.

 

  • 5 yr. GDP annual growth rate:-0.1% (3rd largest decrease)
  • 2017 GDP:$207.9 billion (25th largest)
  • Unemployment:7% (tied — 4th highest)
  • 5 yr. annual employment growth:+0.4% (2nd smallest increase)

 

I suggest starting a Louisiana “misery index.” Go ahead and pay Gov. John Bel Edwards and his brain trust the big bucks. The governor should make $1 million a year. But this amount would be adjusted by the misery index. Right now, the index is high on poor growth and low on performance, so Edwards salary would be close to what he now makes: $125,000.  Now this should just be the beginning. As Governor Edwards often tells us, future economic growth in Louisiana is tied to job skills through education. Therefore, we should build into the formula increases in high school math performance, elementary student test results, reduction in the state’s troubling pollution levels, and maybe the number of new movies that are shot in Louisiana each year. Leave out the LSU national football ratings but include the student athlete graduation rates.

Finally, I would factor in consumer confidence. Are the voters getting tangible results? Are they happy with the performance of their top public officials? If you own shares of stock, and have little confidence in your company investment, you simply sell the stock. The average Joe ought to be able to put in his two cents worth as to the value he’s getting out of Louisiana government. Get his opinion through a statewide poll and factor the results in to the performance index.

So to all the statewide officials, I say make your case and ask the salary level you think you are worth. But just like in the private sector, be prepared to defend the bottom line. The proof of course is in the pudding. Be accountable for the results that take place. And if you succeed, reap the benefits.

In ancient Rome, there was a tradition when major projects were built. Whenever a Roman engineer constructed an arch, as the capstone was hoisted into place, the engineer assumed accountability for his work in the most profound way possible. He stood under the arch.

So pay these pied pipers of change and economic growth the big bucks they say they are worth. But keep them directly under the arch of performance, and let voters know there will be a day of reckoning if this promise of change and results plummet to the ground.

 

 

Peace and Justice

Jim Brown

 

---

Jim Brown is a guest contributor to GCN news. His views and opinions, if expressed, are his own. His column appears each week in numerous newspapers throughout the nation and on websites worldwide. You can read all his past columns and see continuing updates at http://www.jimbrownusa.com. You can also hear Jim’s nationally syndicated radio show, Common Sense, each Sunday morning from 9:00 am till 11:00 am Central Time on the Genesis Communication Network.

%PM, %30 %962 %2019 %22:%Jan

Tony Romo and the Super Bowl

Written by

Former Dallas Cowboy QB1 now CBS announcer Tony Romo blew minds and drew national headlines due to his uncanny “future reading” ability during the AFC Championship Game as he kept calling plays before they happened, during the Patriot’s victory over the Chiefs (37-31). And now he’ll be calling Super Bowl LIII (53).

Romo was so impressive that CBS immediately offered him a huge raise for him to return as a broadcaster for CBS because NFL teams were actually exploring the possibility of having Romo return to the league as QB. But … I don’t know about that. I mean, Romo is really great as a broadcaster and fans love him but as QB1 he was … well, he was good. Not great. But good. He was a starter for ten years, threw for 35k yards and went 78-49 in the win/loss category and was 50% in the playoffs (never made it to the Super Bowl). So, he was good. But he wasn’t THAT good. I mean, it’s not like he could predict the future during his games, as he appears to be doing as a broadcaster not only the AFC championship game but with numerous games in the past few years (go YouTube “Tony Romo predicts the future”). Which is precisely what the Onion joked about last week with their: “Tony Romo Realizes He Should Have Used Ability To Read Defenses Back When He Was Still Playing.

But not everyone is as impressed with Romo’s ability to read the game and seemingly predict the future. Former NFL tight end and now writer, Nate Jackson wrote Let’s All Calm Down about Tony Romo for Deadspin.com. In it he writes:

“Romo’s predictions were mostly about the Patriots’ offense, and almost all in the second half and overtime. He had a firmer grasp on the Patriots’ offense than he did on the Chiefs’. It seems safe to assume, based on his lack of “predictions” when the Chiefs had the ball, that Romo did not know what plays they would run any more than the rest of us did. This is because the Patriots’ offense is more predictable … As any football game wears on, the playbook shrinks. This is typical of any game: as the thing starts to shake out, a game plan that can be hundreds or thousands of plays shrinks to five or 10 bread-and-butter options. These are plays that are working. Plays that everyone knows. Plays that can be communicated with hand signals. Simple plays. Effective football plays. Recognizing this is not prescience, this is just science.”

This are fair points and Jackson's entire article is good; you should read it (linked above). So, I don't know if Romo is predicting the future or just calling predictable plays but I do feel he was a pretty good QB1 and is a very good announcer (even Nate Jackson agrees with this). This will be his first, but probably not his last Super Bowl appearance.

Sadly, the appearance will not be, as he one day no doubt hoped, as a player, but still. 

The NFL (at least the announcing booth) seems to be in good hands.  

Page 5 of 53