Triad Conservative

Making Sense of the Coronavirus/COVID-19 Chaos in North Carolina

The medical residency program I completed permitted young doctors to choose one of a few different "tracks". One of those tracks was to go into the field of public health-- an option I did not pursue.

But several of my peers in the residency program elected that path. During my first year-- around late 1987 or early 1988-- they were expected to attend the national meeting of the American Public Health Association. Two of them were conservative guys from Tennessee and Mississippi. They related to me what happened at the meeting.

That year, Jesse Jackson was running for the democratic socialist nomination for president. And he was a featured speaker at the national meeting. My two friends within the residency program shared with me how he gave an impassioned speech advocating for socialized medicine; and how virtually the entire crowd in the massive room rose to their feet and cheered.

I share this story to illustrate the political predisposition of those at the highest levels within the public health community. My two conservative southern friends were outliers, and felt out of place at that convention.

When public health authorities recommend that society must be shut down, we must keep in mind these tendencies. We must keep in mind their mindset and worldview.

Within the last couple of days, for instance, we learned that Dr. Anthony Fauci had written a love letter to Hillary Clinton several years ago. We now know what his mindset and worldview are.

During my previous coverage of this epidemic, I have commented on the panic and hysteria that was deliberately stirred; the illegal suspension of constitutional rights and civil liberties by Governor Cooper; and the possibility that the situation in North Carolina may not be nearly as bad as other areas because of climatic differences and the onset of spring.

A couple of days ago, it was 84 degrees outside when I drove home from work. Yet another study-- this one from China-- suggests the virus might not be as worrisome with warmer temperatures. I had provided another study earlier this week.

Another good article puts in perspective the overall situation, and suggests the number of people killed by the virus might not be nearly as many as had been initially predicted.

Yes, the virus can cause serious complications and death in the elderly and in other patients who are particularly vulnerable. That is true of the flu also. And the coronavirus certainly has the capacity to overwhelm the resources of hospitals already busy this season with patients suffering complications from the usual, annual flu. We will likely learn of many more cases because of expanded testing.

But does that mean that our constitutional rights and civil liberties should have been summarily signed away by Governor Cooper? Does it mean the economy should be sent into a partial shutdown, with potentially grave long-term effects?

There was a much simpler, more limited intervention that should have been pursued. Those over age 65, and those with medical circumstances that place them at increased risk, should have been strongly urged to remain at home and "shelter in place" indefinitely except for essential trips to the grocery store and for health care. (Fortunately, many of these are not employed.)

Repeated, consistent, adamant public health warnings in this manner would have been warranted.

But this was not the approach that was taken. Instead, those with an authoritarian/socialist bent acted as they did. That includes those within the public health community and folks like Governor Cooper. His public health director, readers will recall, is a graduate of the Obama administration. The vast majority of citizens are not at risk of severe complications or death from this virus; and the actions of our leaders were therefore a massive overreach. There was a political agenda to pursue.

Yet, the state's Republican leaders have been mostly silent and/or supportive. Dan Forest called the governor out over his illegal actions by putting out a statement. Larry Pittman spoke out clearly. But otherwise, there has been no evident opposition. They are "playing it safe", for the most part.

At the national level, Congressmen Ken Buck and Andy Biggs have spoken clearly; but their voices have been drowned out.

Let's remember when Cooper extorted Duke Energy of huge amounts of money for fraudulent "mitigation" of local effects on water quality due to the Atlantic Coast Pipeline. When the state's Republicans allowed him to do this, it emboldened him further. When you have people of low character in positions of leadership, it is imperative they be held accountable.

And meanwhile, the state's unemployment numbers exploded by a factor of at least six, in large part because of the restaurant ban.

Cooper's apologists will speak about "flattening the curve"-- i.e., reducing the massive uptick in the number of people affected by the virus. But in fact, if the curve is flattened, we will not know whether it is because of his extreme measures or because of the weather getting warmer.

Those on the left also fault Trump for failing to have testing and protective equipment in place. But they fail to understand that, despite their efforts, we still have some level of capitalism in the United States; and it is private companies that provide testing and equipment-- not government.

Indeed, some of their cherished causes-- urbanization, globalization, population density, mass transit, elimination of "sprawl", multiculturalism, socialized medicine, and education of young people in large institutional settings-- all have been exposed as problematic in the course of the coronavirus episode.

What is better? Driving in cars. Sprawl. Small towns and suburbs and rural areas. Less exchanges of people and economic goods among widely disparate nations. Home schooling and online education. And health care economies that reward providing enough capacity for intervention when people's lives can be saved-- unlike most socialized systems.

My first post on this matter expressed the opinion that the carefully orchestrated panic and hysteria on the coronavirus is reflective of a lack of genuine, repentant faith that is fairly widespread. There is now reason to believe that fear of lockdowns imposed by authoritarian governmental officials fueled part of this panic.

Governor Cooper's religious tradition-- liberal mainline Presbyterianism-- is steeped in apostasy and heresy. His actions reflect his mindset and worldview. And at this point, citizens seem to believe him because there is no political opposition, and therefore no countering voices.

But that doesn't make his actions rightful.

Will the Coronavirus be Less Prevalent in North Carolina Than Feared?

There are two reasons to be cautiously optimistic.

The first has to do with "isotherms". The virus apparently tends to be more prevalent in bands of territory or land that are a bit cooler than the American South; and to act in an apparently seasonal manner. (This study is from the University of Maryland). Combine that with the onset of spring-like temperatures in North Carolina.

The second piece of input is from Richard Epstein at the Hoover Institution (HT:Fred). His specialty is not medical or virological or epidemiological. But he believes the current estimates or projections are excessive:

Based on the data, I believe that the current dire models radically overestimate the ultimate death toll. There are three reasons for this.

First, they underestimate the rate of adaptive responses, which should slow down the replication rate. Second, the models seem to assume that the vulnerability of infection for the older population—from 70 upward—gives some clue as to the rate of spread over the general population, when it does not. Third, the models rest on a tacit but questionable assumption that the strength of the virus will remain constant throughout this period, when in fact its potency should be expected to decline over time, in part because of temperature increases.

Lots of decisions are being made. It would be interesting to see the adverse effects these decisions are having on people, and the consequences that will ensue-- economic, medical and otherwise-- if these decisions put people out of work, or contribute to a recession or depression. We would then need to compare those adverse effects with any caused by the actual virus here in North Carolina.

But let's hope and pray there is some good news on the horizon.

Addendum: The number of new cases worldwide decreased today.

Does Governor Cooper Have the Constitutional Authority to Prohibit State Residents from Assembling?

The news was fairly jarring. Governor Cooper, via executive order, prohibited North Carolina residents from assembling in groups greater than 100 persons for the next thirty days.

He granted exceptions, of course-- airports, bus and train stations, medical facilities, shopping malls and centers, "office environments", factories, libraries, grocery stores, restaurants or other retail establishments.

He overtly refrains from giving an exception to churches. That is very interesting. Does this mean churches must suspend their activities for a month? As a democratic socialist and a cultural Marxist, he is perfectly happy if churches do not meet.

He forbids outdoor gatherings even though viruses are transmitted much more easily in indoor environments for obvious reasons.

And he allows large gatherings of people in indoor environments that are politically protected. For instance, mass transit is protected even though being trapped on a crowded train or bus is fertile ground for transmitting viruses. That is, in fact, why many workplaces in other areas are encouraging their employees to work from home. Mass transit is such an integral part of the infrastructure and lifestyle in large cities that it almost cannot be avoided.

Perhaps the coronavirus will makes mass transit seem less appealing in the eyes of many folks. But the text of Cooper's order clearly implies that it is acceptable for the virus to be transmitted where people are gathered in some places; but it is unacceptable for the virus to be transmitted in other places.

In his executive order, Cooper also cites all the reasons he feels he has legal authority to take these measures.

However, Article I of the North Carolina Constitution states the following:

Sec. 12.  Right of assembly and petition.

The people have a right to assemble together to consult for their common good, to instruct their representatives, and to apply to the General Assembly for redress of grievances; but secret political societies are dangerous to the liberties of a free people and shall not be tolerated.

Sec. 13.  Religious liberty.

All persons have a natural and inalienable right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their own consciences, and no human authority shall, in any case whatever, control or interfere with the rights of conscience.

These are absolute rights granted to the state's citizens by our state constitution. They cannot be signed away by the governor. Article III discusses his role; but makes no mention of a right to invoke "emergency" powers and suspend constitutional rights.

Many churches were already predisposed to cancel Sunday services and masses prior to Cooper's order. I think that is extremely regrettable because some things are much more important than viruses.

But liberty-minded citizens and the state's churches and denominations ought not let this slip by. The courts are there for a reason.

There are few things the democratic socialists and the cultural Marxists would like more than to shut down our churches and prohibit people from assembling. Using the coronavirus to infringe on liberties is happening on a grand scale; and Cooper obviously wants to do so also.

Coronavirus Hysteria: Mission Accomplished

There is no doubt that the virus can cause death and serious complications in vulnerable populations and the elderly. But for younger, healthier populations, the effect is not unlike that of illnesses commonly experienced during flu and cold season.

The thought of hospitals in countries where socialized medicine prevails having had to choose which patients will be placed on scarce ventilators is a bit horrifying. We will see if that happens in the United States.

But what does it say about us when so many events and/or institutions are canceled or closed?

There is doubtless an element of concern over legal liability. But media-generated hysteria scares people into thinking they are acting responsibly when they advocate for things to be shut down.

Some of it borders on absurdity. The premise that outdoor sports like golf tournaments must be canceled is plainly bizarre.

Is it justified to shut down human activity every flu season because people will die? What is the magic number of potential deaths that must loom for us to take actions such as those we have witnessed over the last couple of weeks? How long is it justified to shut things down?

People need to live their lives. They need to make their own decisions on whether to venture out based on their own particular risk profile. Caution and prudence is certainly justified for high-risk groups.

The premise that church services and/or masses must be canceled, however, is quite problematic.

Yes, there is little doubt that certain demographics within media and the democratic socialist party and even Wall Street have been eager to use this episode to kneecap Trump's re-election. Another absurd moment is when those who call him a dictator expect him to act like one in response to the coronavirus, far beyond his constitutional powers. And he has obliged, in part, so the markets will purr with contentment.

But the widespread hysterical response we have seen is ultimately evidence of a lack of faith. (Indeed, for that matter, wholesale adoption of the LGBT agenda and legal-abortion-on-demand also reveals a neo-pagan lack of faith that is fairly widespread.)

The fear response during recent weeks reflects total absorption in our own temporal concerns; and abandonment of a more eternal perspective based on understanding of our own purpose in God's will and design.

People need to get a grip and look at their own hearts.

GOP's First Step Act Implodes in North Carolina

The accepted version of political wisdom within D.C. Republican circles over the last few years has been to pander in order to secure greater portions of the black vote. The two chief manifestations of this approach were increased aid to black colleges and universities; and the passage of the First Step Act to release hardened criminals from federal prisons.

One of these criminals was Troy Powell. He was previously featured at a White House ceremony singing this legislation's praises. He even wanted it to be expanded.

It was reported all over the internet this week that Mr. Powell was recently arrested and convicted in North Carolina for trafficking methamphetamine. The action was in Caldwell County, in the western foothills around Hickory.

Some with a libertarian bent might suggest it is wonderful that folks should be free to sell methamphetamine. Unfortunately, many of the users are also parents whose kids are being raised by grandparents or in foster care. A libertarian approach does not help these kids because it facilitates their parents' behavior.

The Republicans' actions might be politically wise if they gain access to greater portions of the black vote. But let's remember what they did with control of Congress during the 2017-2018 session. There was little to no conservative legislation passed by Congress when they had control. If they secure more black votes, and they regain their majorities, they will do... what?

The First Step Act might have been politically wise. But new Republican majorities, based on recent experience, will not help us significantly. And the bill itself is substantively a serious mistake.

Will GOP County Commissioners Allow Out-of-Town UNCG and A&T Students to Pass a Huge School Bond Package?

Think back to 2008-- the year Obama was elected. Huge numbers of young people rushed to the polls to elect the great socialist deity.

That same year, the Guilford County commissioners' board placed a huge school bond on the ballot. Among them were at least a couple of Republicans who supported the bond. Enormous socialist turnout at the polls combined with our sizable out-of-town college-and-university population passed the school bonds with ease.

This year, that same population will be motivated to go to the polls because of their utter hatred of Donald Trump. It appears the Democratic primary turnout earlier this week was considerably higher than the turnout during 2016.

The regional left has been very insistent about having polling places on or near the university campuses. It is all very strategic.

But what does it mean when young people, devoid of life experience, make decisions of this import when they don't pay property taxes; and when they don't yet understand the reality of working to support a household while having various taxes squeezed out of them from every angle?

Bonds? It's all free money.

Do the GOP county commissioners in Guilford County really want out-of-town students at UNCG, A&T and Guilford College to pass our bonds and thereby hike our taxes? Remain mindful they will vote overwhelmingly to do so.

That is precisely what will happen if the bonds are placed on the ballot.

These commissioners need to remain mindful that the Trump-hating left will be motivated to go to the polls; and the right might turn out to be complacent. These are ideal conditions for passing any school bond issue.

I hope they give this a lot of thought. 

Would Joe Biden Benefit from Cognitive Testing? What About Bernie's Heart?

Readers will likely recall that the media/left complex indulged themselves floating the premise that Trump could be removed from office using the 25th Amendment. The implication was that he is unable to discharge his duties as president.

But we now have a democratic socialist front-runner (in terms of delegate count), Joe Biden, who has demonstrated an alarming series of gaffes and "senior moments" on the campaign trail. The mainstream/establishment media has downplayed and/or covered up these incidents, as expected; but they have been numerous. And they seem to be increasing dramatically.

The question is whether he has some type of cognitive impairment. It seems that, in the interest of disclosure and transparency, the public has a right to know, especially given the stakes.

Testing for cognitive impairment is readily available. Of course, it would need to take place in an institution devoid of partisan bias. That would mean it cannot take place in any kind of academic medical center.

Another important issue is Bernie Sanders' heart history. It is fairly remarkable that he resumed campaigning fairly soon after his heart attack. But every heart attack implies some level of damage to heart muscle. And we don't know about any previous damage.

There is a simple measure-- the ejection fraction-- that can be measured in the course of several different types of cardiac tests. It is very important that we know Sanders' ejection fraction because a lower number connotes impairment and a worse prognosis.

If we are truly concerned about the health status of our presidents, we really need to know Biden's level of cognitive dysfunction, if any; and Sanders' ejection fraction. Transparency requires nothing less.

The Country is ALREADY Wrecked by Socialism and Cultural Marxism

70,000 NC Democratic Socialist Primary Voters Disenfranchised Due to Early Voting

The democratic socialists had a coordinated, calculated series of withdrawals from the presidential race over the last few days. Pete Buttigieg, Amy Klobuchar and Tom Steyer all withdrew. It appears that Biden might have promised Buttigieg a job in exchange for his withdrawal. 

Many North Carolina democratic socialists had already early voted by the time these withdrawals occurred. It appears that at least 70,000 had selected these three candidates during early voting. This means they had been effectively disenfranchised by virtue of the fact that they voted early. They did not get to make their own choice for the party nominee, because their favored candidates had withdrawn in the midst of the North Carolina primary.

Early voting is a sacred cow in North Carolina. At this point, it would be almost impossible to eliminate it because the corrupt, activist judiciary would shoot any effort down alleging an intent to discriminate on the basis of race. This is, after all, the state of our Republic. We cannot make our own laws.

But we ought to get rid of early voting anyway. It is good as a civic exercise for all citizens to vote on the same day; and those who cannot, of course, can vote absentee. Moreover, it is easier to maintain election security and integrity if voting takes place on a single calendar date.

The 70,000 democratic socialist primary voters ought to be disappointed over this situation, even though they had chosen awful candidates. Maybe this situation ought to spur some dialogue in the state of North Carolina.

Addendum 3/4: Sam Hieb has more.

It's OK To Acknowledge God

Indeed, it is necessary: