Fall off a roof and bang your head up and die ? … It MUST be the Chinky Virus !!! …

A construction worker who died after plunging from a 10-foot ladder in Croatia was actually killed by the coronavirus, doctors said in a report.

The unnamed 51-year-old man fell into a yard while building a home earlier this year and suffered cuts and bruises to his head, according to the Journal of Forensic Pathology.

The builder was declared dead at the scene but an autopsy later revealed that COVID-19 had indirectly caused the accident because effects of the illness were disorienting, the journal notes.

During the autopsy, doctors found that large swaths of the man’s lungs were blocked. The finding then led scientists to conclude that he suffered from Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) — a life-threatening condition that CAN ( But not necessarily ! ) be caused by Covid-19.

MORBNOTE ; Did these ‘ scientists ‘ bother to find out if this guy was a 2 pack a day smoker ? … If that’s the case , that would be , in and of itself , and clue to the cause of respiratory distress … Just sayin’…

“Based on all findings, the death was ruled as natural, caused by COVID-19,” the report notes. The man also tested positive for the virus.

Doctors later determined the illness, which keeps air from flowing to the lungs, had likely caused his fall, according to the journal. Ultimately, the death must be recorded as a COVID-19 fatality under World Health Organization guidelines, scientists said.

The man’s location and the date of the accident were not immediately clear.

They can determine the EXACT cause of death ( The WUHU Flu ) … Yet they don’t know what time and what roof he fell off ?!!! …

Gimmie a break !!! …

Killed by COVID-19

It’s in the code …

On Saturday, in American Thinker article “Biden’s Great Leap Forward: A split second in Wisconsin” author Dan Rabil, who lives in Switzerland, described how he personally saw the sudden switch from a Trump to Biden lead in Wisconsin. As he describes it, “I was stunned to see the Fox election map suddenly do something completely unnatural: in a split second between 3 A.M. and 4 A.M. U.S. Central Time, the Wisconsin icon switched from light-red Trump to light-blue Biden.  In that same instant, the probability meter, which had been very accurate in 2016, likewise jerked from a 77% Trump likelihood to over 80% Biden.” (Please read his complete story about this fraud – it will be well worth your time.)

So Dan downloaded the data from the New York Times, searched for the exact moment of the switch, and found it (see below):

For non-programmers, here is the translation:

At 3:37 AM CST, total votes were 3,018,212; Trump had 1,536,270 votes (50.9%); Biden 1,427,614 votes (47.3%); other candidates 54,328 votes (1.8%).

At 3:42 AM CST, total votes were 3,186,598; Trump had 1,561,433 votes (49.0%); Biden 1,570,993 votes (49.3%); other candidates 54,172 votes (1.7%).

Total increase in Trump votes in 5 minutes: 25,163 (1.64%).

Total increase in Biden votes in 5 minutes: 143,379 (10.04%).

(These vote numbers are approximate because they’re calculated from the percentages, which are given to only one-tenth of 1%. But they’re good enough for statistical analysis.)

Before the Biden vote dump, both candidates’ votes were increasing at about the same rate, 1.64% per 5 minutes. So the “legitimate” Biden vote increase is likely around 23,400 votes. The remaining 119,979 votes are fake …

Hit the link below … Well worth the read …

Source: It’s in the code: Trump won Michigan and Wisconsin – American Thinker

Rex Murphy: Why does the CBC care what Mary Trump says ? …

The hundreds of thousands gathered were unequipped with “pussyhats.” This thoughtless failure, almost as much as the consideration that the rally was — can you believe it? — in support of Trump, probably evacuated it of interest to the nation’s news editors. And the absence of rioting or looting was probably another reason to mainly pass it by.

The identical news void played out in Canadian media. In terms of tone or extent of coverage, a good contest would be to distinguish, say, CBC’s coverage, or non-coverage, of the rally from that of CNN or MSNBC.

Now a real Canadian take might have been to ask: why are all these people supporting this man? Why is a full half the nation still enthusiastic over his leadership? Is there anything for Canadians to learn from the Americans’ great divide at this time? Such would have been matter for a worthwhile report.

We might call such an approach news analytics for a Canadian public.

Instead, our one public broadcaster, dedicated by statute to the defence and sustaining of Canadian identity, sought out an “estranged niece” of Donald Trump for a feature interview. Why of all people, it is more than fair to ask, Mary Trump?

Ms. Trump’s view of things shouts out from the title of her family memoir “Too Much and Never Enough: How My Family Created the World’s Most Dangerous Man.” Now her differences with her uncle may very understandably be of deep interest to her, and possibly of some to Mr. Trump as well.

But by what logic of Canadian news, or simple balance, does our national broadcaster seek out a publicly estranged branch relative of the American president, who has an extremely personal interest at play, as a useful guide to the present fraught moment in U.S. politics?

Whatever happened to the grand idea of a unique Canadian perspective on the world? Of getting our own fix on things? Of standing aside from the dominant view?

What, I ask again, in the name of Canada’s distinct cultural identity, is the national broadcaster doing sleuthing through the outer bloodlines of an American president? Are we stuck for news at home? Is there not a WE scandal being buried? Is not every small business in the country about to fold? Are we not dizzy with conflicting, desperately unreliable and inconsistent advice on the plague? Are we not $400 billion in deficit? Is Alberta not bleeding?

There is no reason for the Canadian news establishment to take its cue from American obsessions and flood the zone with every hot Trump hit — to blend in, in other words, ever so neatly with the example and substance of American news.

Source: Rex Murphy: Why does the CBC care what Mary Trump has to say? | National Post

I’ve been saying this for many years !!! …

We are moving in the opposite direction when it comes to voting; rather than making it easier, we should be making it harder—constitutionally, of course. If a voter doesn’t know basic constitutional civics, perhaps he should be barred from voting in any election.

We would achieve this goal via a compulsory passing of a civics exam in order to be eligible to vote.

I know you’re thinking: “Oh, that would be impossible to enact.” It’s only impossible, however, until it’s not, and I’ll show you why it passes constitutional muster.

MORBNOTE ; This article is referring to the American system , but applies to all so called ‘ democracies ‘…

Elections have adult consequences and affect all personal and professional aspects of our lives. We all want a more qualified class of politician; but why not a more qualified class of voter?

Good point ! …

Naturalization candidates are legally required to know civics. The civics test for naturalization is not a multiple-choice test; a U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) officer will ask up to 10 questions, from 100 study questions—IN ENGLISH ONLY  ( My caps ! ) —from the list of 100 questions on the publicly-available practice test, and the applicant must answer correctly six of them in order to pass the exam.

Give it a read … Well worth it ! …

Source: Voters Should Have to Pass a Civics Exam – American Greatness

Had to see what Rex thoughts on election day were …

Whatever suspense attends the vote itself, the greater suspense should be what might follow it … Rex Murphy

I gotta post this in entirety , save clickin’ the link !!! …

President Donald Trump dances with supporters on Friday at the end of a rally in Waterford Township, Mich. MUST CREDIT: Washington Post photo by Salwan Georges

Some quarters are making a lot of hay of the idea that if the American election is a close call, especially if Democratic presidential hopeful Joe Biden wins by a narrow margin, that President Donald Trump will refuse to accept the result. They believe that Trump is a fascist dictator who will ignore the vote and use all his wiles to stay in the White House.

Believing the worst about Trump is as popular as soccer, and like soccer, it’s a sport that’s played worldwide. And so it is that the speculation that he won’t step away from the White House unless ruinously defeated in the vote gets easy purchase in the minds of many.

However, this view does wander a bit from the actual experience of the 2016 election and the Democratic response to Trump’s victory. Who has, as they say in horse racing circles, a history of reluctance to accept an electoral verdict?

Almost within hours of the wildly mispredicted results of 2016, those in the Hillary Clinton camp were astir with speculations and accusations that the election was “stolen,” or that it had been undermined by treacherous foreign actors — those nefarious Russians — and, in particular, that Trump himself was an agent of the steel-eyed, ex-KGB manipulator, Vladimir Putin.

After that, Hillary Clinton almost made a career out of devising new reasons why the election had been stolen from her, and every account was an implicit impugning of the electoral process itself.

The whole Russian collusion experience, which absorbed the attention of the American and international media for three years, was the product of a fake, opposition-sourced document — the Steele Dossier — and was stoked by the intense unwillingness of the Democrats, American intelligence agencies and anti-Trumpers to accept the normal processes of American democracy.

So the thought that Trump is the one who will not abide by Tuesday’s vote is pure projection on the part of people who had such difficulty, and went to such lengths, to delegitimize him.

That effort, as we all know, failed, the Mueller report was a dud, the long investigations came to nothing. It failed but that is not to say that it was without effect, as it gave great currency to the idea of a “resistance movement” against Trump. It led the wilder partisan minds to believe that it was acceptable to go beyond the accepted boundaries of politics. Certainly some of the Antifa and Black Lives Matter excesses, the riots and arson that have been visited upon a host of American cities, were a symptom, at least in part, of the adamant refusal to accept Trump’s legitimacy.

Which brings us to the current moment. This election could, whichever way it goes, unless it is an indisputable majority win, produce a very unhealthy reaction. U.S. politics has been ramped up to an unprecedented intensity. The violence in the streets, which was already present before the election, is a worrying sign.

It has been noted that throughout the country — mainly in the cities such as Washington, D.C., and New York — businesses are boarding up ahead of the vote.

I think it’s reasonable to say that should Donald Trump be the victor, it will not be, let’s speak gently, easily received. This will be especially the case because for weeks, the American public has been told that Biden is way ahead in the polls. That Trump won in 2016 in spite of similar polling predicting Clinton’s victory was — even then — a seismic shock from which many have not recovered.

Should there be a repeat of that this week, shock will not adequately describe the response.

The other element comes from the Trump side. In the last week or so of the campaign, he has been showing up to rallies that are huge in both size and enthusiasm. He has brought out larger crowds than former president Barack Obama, and his were record-setting.

Biden, by contrast, either has stayed home or, when he did travel, attracted remarkably sparse audiences. It is hard to reconcile, in other words, what the polls have been saying with what people are seeing on the ground. A Trump loss will look to some, let’s speak gently again, to be extremely dubious.

There is tinder here for a blaze. Maddened partisanship, overt violence in the streets, the politicization of the media, politics itself becoming a badge of personal identity and virtue: all these combined have introduced a perilous volatility into American democracy.

Whatever suspense attends the vote itself, the greater suspense should be what might follow it.

National Post

The best and the worst of Halloween candy …

I’m posting this for my older sister Bev … I think she’d get as much a kick out of this as I did ! … Bev and I were 2 years and change apart … Our younger three other siblings are 6 and 13 years younger than me … Anywho … The following is an article about changing trends in Hallowe’en candy over the years when it comes to filling the tyke’s bags with all those sugar buzz nuggets that will drive mothers crazy ’til Christmas arrives !!! ( except for the handful she confiscates for herself in the evening after the little ones have been shuffled off to bed ! …

One of the best parts of collecting Halloween candy — aside from eating it — is the assessment, sorting and analysis of the merits of the Oct. 31 haul. Kids can spend hours deciding which candy should be eaten and what in order; which treats should be traded to siblings; and which unwanted candy can be tossed to parents.

So, what are the best Halloween candies to get? According to candystore.com and its annual ranking of Halloween candies, the No. 1 treat in the United States — in terms of volume of purchases — is Skittles. That’s followed by Reese’s Peanut Butter Cups, Starburst, M&Ms, Hot Tamales, candy corn, Snickers, Sour Patch Kids, Hershey Kisses and Jolly Ranchers. However, in Canada, those boxes of Nestle mini chocolate bars rank high. People know they can’t go wrong with Kit Kats, Coffee Crisp, Aero bars and Smarties. A survey in one Canadian city last year (Ottawa) showed Reese’s Peanut Butter Cups were chosen as a favourite Halloween treat by 23 per cent of poll respondents, followed by Coffee Crisp at 18 per cent and Kit Kat at 16 per cent.

While most people enjoy a good chocolate bar, many of the faves from days past are now long gone, perhaps even extinct. Mainstays of the 1960s and 1970s like Kraft Caramels and Rockets are rarely seen. Little boxes of Chiclets, Dubble Bubble gum and Mojos don’t make appearances. Also largely gone — thankfully — are those handfuls of hard-to-bite, hard-to-define candies wrapped in orange-and-black Halloween-themed wrappers.

And, let’s not forget about the ubiquitous sucker. They were plentiful and popular for decades.

I , myself have , have never been a fan of peppermint and the resulting ‘ Pep ‘ discs you always ended up with a few of those , they went to mother … She thought I was being polite , loving and caring because she liked those things … I was , but also , I was happy to unload’em !!! …

Then , of course , there were those hideous ping pong sized ‘ gumballs ‘ , I think they were called … Imagine trying to bite down on a golf ball !!! … I still haven’t figured out how anyone ate those things !!! … And even if you were supposed to suck on them for 14 hours and they’d soften up eventually , who the hell wants to walk around with a golf ball lodged in their mouth for that amount of time ?!!! …

I know there are more bombs , but I’ll have to comb the memory banks a bit and get back to ya. Maybe Bev can think of a few …

Source: The best and the worst of Halloween candy, all the way back to the 1930s | Calgary Herald

Biden gets shown the way outta town ! …

Democratic candidate Joe Biden is set to spend the remainder of the presidential race in Pennsylvania, a battleground state that has become increasingly significant to both candidates.

Donald Trump on Sunday will hold five rallies in five states, in last-minute, breakneck appeals to energize voters – a strategy that helped him ride to victory in 2016.

The Republican president has praised a caravan of supporters that harassed a Biden campaign bus , leading to the cancellation of an event in Texas.

Uh … NO … They didn’t ” harrass ” anyone … They were obviously organized , but they didn’t force him of to the side of the road or anything … They simply ‘ escorted him out of town ‘ !!! …BYE BYE BYEDEN !!! …

This is Al Jazeera mimicking the Bullshit American Press ! …

Source: Biden, Trump campaigns enter final sprint: US elections live news | US & Canada | Al Jazeera

Rex Murphy hits the nail on the head once again …

Was it really four whole years ago that America walked away from the precipice of a Hillary Clinton presidency?

Yes, it was. I recall so vividly, as if it were but days ago, the storms of jubilant relief that swept over the whole United States.

The faces of the anchors of the great American news networks were a tableau of ecstatic release from nightmare anxiety. It is still a strange joy to visit YouTube, where one can relive the very moment when Florida — which had been swaying all evening from Clinton to Donald Trump, Trump to Clinton — finally yielded and placed the Clinton campaign into history’s sad loss file.

Is it possible that I am replaying that immortal scene with a jaundiced eye and a careless laptop?

Yes, it is. It’s early, as I tap the keys, and my morning yogourt sometimes awakens odd strains of irony that not even vats of Nescafe can tame.

One element we may all agree on, however, is that the second-biggest story of Nov. 8, 2016 (Trump’s win being first), was the near total collapse of the American polling industry, and the media outlets that eagerly supported its predictions.

It wasn’t just that the polls were wrong. It was how extravagantly wrong the near totality of them were, and all in the same direction. This I have written about before, but it is so delicious a news morsel, I like to return to it. The New York Times, the ponderous Vatican of American public affairs, had Clinton’s chances — as of half an hour before the results started rolling in — at 92 per cent, and sad-sack Trump barely breathing at eight per cent.

America’s other oracle, the Huffington Post, left Trump with the tiniest breathing hole at two per cent — only, I believe, as a kindness to a candidate who its editors were absolutely certain was fully down for the count.

When, as time and fate unfolded, Trump, to the combined consternation and incredulity of the collective news media of the United States, walked past Clinton, the shock was seismic. Review the footage on YouTube. The faces of the anchors and pundits are a collage of bewilderment and deep woe.

(Just on a personal note, looking, on that night, at such ranks of overpaid dejection, my fruede tank ran out of schaden.) …

I found that last line hilarious !!! …

Hit the link below for the whole thing …

Source: Rex Murphy: If the polls got it so wrong in 2016, why is the media so confident this time around? | National Post