This rescue dog and his owner have both learned to face adversity with admirable courage, leaning on each other for support. Seeing them together is enough to bring tears to our eyes! Ruth Gentry shared the sweetest video on TikTok of her young son, Roan, reading a book out loud to their dog, Sammy. You wouldn’t necessarily be able to tell from the footage, but the little boy struggles with reading due to his dyslexia. Meanwhile, Sammy is in a wheelchair. Ruth explained to Newsweek that she first noticed her child was having trouble in school in 2022. It didn’t help that, around the same time, the family lost their two beloved dogs. Roan had been especially close to one of the elderly pooches, so the loss wasn’t easy for him. “He was escaping to the bathroom to get away from class everyday, having problems with other kids, and coming home crying and angry,” she recalled. @sammys_chairot_of_fire I hope this message finds other parents of children with dyslexia or other learning disabilities that may be struggling. That was me just 6 months ago when my son was refusing to go to school, throwing books across the room as all he wanted to do was read. He has dyslexia and I felt so helpless on how to help him as his mother. You are not alone. I feel for you. It can get better but you have to advocate. In our case it took private tutoring with @Lindamood-Bell Learning for him to learn to read. It has been life changing. Sadly, I know this opportuntiy is not open to every child, but I wish it could be. Now every night he wants to read to his emotional support dog in wheels. He loves to read the story of @Tilly G & Skippy as this reminds him of his relationship with his dog Sammy with special needs. #dyslexia #dyslexiaawareness #neurodivergent #neurodivergenttiktok #neurodiversity #neurodiverse #dyslexiamom #dogsoftiktok #dogs #specialneedsdog #rescuedogsoftiktokdogs #disableddogsoftiktok #animalhumanbond #emotionalsupportdog #read ♬ original sound – Sammys_chairot_of_fire Meanwhile, Sammy the dog was having a pretty rough life. After being abandoned with the rest of his litter, this poor pup was found and rescued by Churchill Animal Protection Society (CAPS). He was in pretty bad shape at that point. Thankfully, the shelter was able to nurse him back to health. Roan and the rescue dog were instant best friends. Ruth Gentry took her son to CAPS in the hopes of finding another rescue dog to adopt. When Roan and Sammy met, it was love at first sight! Their relationship became a huge comfort to the little boy as he struggled with dyslexia. “He helped us with our grief and helped me get Roan to school,” his mom said. “I could see it was helping Roan emotionally after school as he would often come home and curl up with Sammy and pass out, he was so exhausted.” Sammy also motivated Roan as he went through tutoring to help with his reading skills. Although dyslexia made the process very difficult for the little boy, the rescue dog’s presence made a big difference. “He is still shy about reading, but Sammy helps him with this,” Ruth explained. “Roan now wants to read a book every night to Sammy. He used to throw books across the room. The transformation has been amazing!” Screengrab from TikTok However, there was a time when Roan’s family wasn’t sure if they would be able to keep Sammy. After the pooch got hurt in an accident, he was unable to use his back legs. It was a struggle to care for him as he adjusted to using a wheelchair. Still, Ruth knew how important the rescue dog was to her son. Although by this point the little boy had not been diagnosed with dyslexia, she recognized that Roan was having trouble. She didn’t want him to think that they were giving up on the dog just because he needed a little extra help. “I knew Roan had some issues or learning disabilities that had not been diagnosed yet and giving up Sammy would send the wrong message to him,” she said. Although the road hasn’t been easy for Roan or his rescue dog, they’re still facing the world together. Their bond is truly something special! You can find the source of this story’s featured image here. The post Rescue Dog Helps Little Boy Battle His Insecurities With Dyslexia appeared first on InspireMore.

Teotihuacan was a pre-Colombian Mesoamerican city in the State of Mexico in central Mexico, 35 miles northeast of Mexico City. The site is considered one of the most archaeologically important examples of Mesoamerican architecture and culture. Despite the towering reputation of Egypt’s Great Pyramids at Giza, the Americas actually contain more pyramid structures than the rest of the planet combined. Civilizations like the Olmec, Maya, Aztec and Inca all built pyramids to house their deities, as well as to bury their kings. Ancient alien theorists have pointed out that some ancient monuments demonstrate a thorough knowledge of astronomy surpassing knowledge… This premium content is for PLUS+ members only. Visit the site and log in/register to read. The post Teotihuacan Mystery: The Place Where The Gods Were Created appeared first on Anomalien.com.

Republicans and many independents do not believe in the term “independent fact-checkers” when it comes to federal elections. Fact-checkers predictably defend Democrats from GOP “misinformation” in election season. Democrat extremism on abortion is one topic where the fact “checkers” are the fact manglers. Take Republican Senate candidate Tim Sheehy in Montana. On July 10, PolitiFact broke out the “False” flag for something Sheehy said in a June 9 debate: “Elective abortions up to and including the moment of birth. Healthy, 9-month-year-old baby killed at the moment of birth. That’s what Jon Tester and the Democrats have voted for.” You can tell PolitiFact is politically motivated for Democrats in the tone of their headline: “GOP’s Tim Sheehy revives discredited abortion claims in pivotal Senate race.” Discredited? Donald Trump was slammed in his last debate for saying what he often says -- the Democrats favor abortion up until birth. The first proof of that is plain language in the 2020 Democrat party platform, which explicitly stated: “Democrats oppose and will fight to overturn federal and state laws that create barriers to reproductive health and rights. We will repeal the Hyde Amendment, and protect and codify the right to reproductive freedom.” Fact: They are unequivocally opposed to any “barriers to reproductive rights” and will “codify the right to reproductive freedom.” Nothing in that language expresses any time limit on an abortion. The “right to choose” is absolute. That includes -- if you repeal the Hyde Amendment -- the “right” to force anti-abortion taxpayers to pay for abortions.   PolitiFact tried to “correct” Sheehy by turning to the Democrats passing the “Women’s Health Protection Act,” which was presented by liberal journalists as “codifying Roe vs. Wade” and that ruling's apparent discouragement of abortions late in pregnancy. In reality, this act imposed no real barriers to killing a baby. It simply made it a matter of a supportive doctor’s judgment that the baby endangered the woman’s life or health. Pro-life leaders see that as a broad exception, as no real barrier at all. Here’s how PolitiFact rationalized its “False” tag: “That bill, however, doesn’t open the door to abortion on demand later in pregnancy. Instead, it allows for the role of medical judgment.” Naturally, they added the notion that late-term abortions are “rare” as if that somehow makes the pro-life argument “false.” SBA Pro-Life America, whose arguments are included (and dismissed) in the PolitiFact article, estimates that if one percent of abortions are late in pregnancy, that’s still about 10,000 deaths a year. They also underlined that very few late-term abortions are for birth defects or health concerns for the mother. They put out a tweet thread taking PolitiFact on over a whole series of fact points, including when babies feel pain and how Senator Tester voted twice against protecting babies who were failed abortions, who were born alive. That leaves the prospect of abortion after birth. In the end, Sheehy’s campaign responded with a question for Tester, the same kind of question Dana Bash put to President Biden: "At what week does he think it's inappropriate for medical providers to perform an abortion?" They don’t want to answer that question. They don’t want anyone to ask that question. This is not about facts at all. It’s about maintaining the fiction that the Democrats don’t favor the most permissive, baby-killing extreme, the exact opposite of people who want to ban killing unborn babies. They would prefer the public be swindled into believing the myth that Republicans are extremists on abortion while the Democrats are somehow sensible centrists.

Early in the pandemic, there was a concerted effort to downplay the possibility that the COVID-19 virus originated in the Wuhan Institute of Virology, where radical gain-of-function experiments were conducted on coronaviruses, sometimes with American funding. Now, it appears that the lab origin theory was all along the most likely explanation. The exact timeline regarding the initial leak and subsequent spread remains, however, somewhat fuzzy. The Chinese regime's cover-up of the initial spread and its destruction of critical evidence have made it difficult to nail down precisely when and how the virus got out. Blaze News recently discovered that China may not have, however, been the only nation reluctant to disclose illnesses in Wuhan in late 2019. Playing games with the timeline Months prior to the World Health Organization declaring COVID-19 a pandemic, the Wuhan Municipal Health Commission reported a cluster of cases of pneumonia in late December 2019. The constituents of this cluster were far from being patients zero. Three researchers meddling with coronaviruses at the Wuhan Institute of Virology — including an EcoHealth Alliance subcontractor— became sick enough "with symptoms consistent with both Covid-19 and common seasonal illness" that they needed to be hospitalized in November 2019. Chinese state media indicated that the virus may have begun spreading as early September of that year but, in a desperate effort to assign blame elsewhere, suggested it kicked off in the United States. Researchers at Boston University and Harvard Medical School analyzed satellite imagery of hospital parking lots in Wuhan as well as search queries on China's equivalent of Google from 2018 up until late 2019 and concluded that the virus may have begun spreading as early as August 2019. "Between September and October 2019, 5 of the 6 hospitals show their highest relative daily [parking lot] volume of the analyzed series, coinciding with elevated levels of Baidu search queries for the terms 'diarrhea' and 'cough,'" said the study. "Our evidence supports other recent work showing that emergence happened before identification at the Huanan Seafood market." In August, we identify a unique increase in searches for diarrhea which was neither seen in previous flu seasons or mirrored in the cough search data. While surprising, this finding lines up with the recent recognition that gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms are a unique feature of COVID-19 disease and may be the chief complaint of a significant proportion of presenting patients. This symptom search increase is then followed by a rise in hospital parking lot traffic in October and November, as well as a rise in searches for cough. While we cannot conclude the reason for this increase, we hypothesize that broad community transmission may have led to more acute cases requiring medical attention, resulting in higher viral loads and worse symptoms. If the virus was in circulation by at least October, then a convention of nearly 10,000 athletes from around the world in Wuhan would have served as the perfect vehicle to take the virus global in short order. In fact, some researchers have suggested that there was a good likelihood that the 7th Military World Games held in Wuhan from October 18 to October 28 — where delegates from 109 countries competed, in some cases near the Wuhan Institute of Virology — were indeed a super-spreading event. Mixed messaging Two Canadian military sources who requested anonymity because they were still serving in the Canadian military told the Financial Post in 2021 that there had been infections at the games. One service member claimed he got "very sick 12 days after we arrived, with fever, chills, vomiting, insomnia. … On our flight to come home (at the end of October), 60 Canadian athletes on the flight were put in isolation (at the back of the plane) for the 12-hour flight. We were sick with symptoms ranging from coughs to diarrhea and in between." Upon returning to Canada, the service member said his family members took ill and his symptoms got worse and expanded, such that he experienced fatigue, nosebleeds, fever, and breathing pains. While tested by a military doctor "for various issues," he said he never was tested "for anything respiratory." The other service member said, "One-quarter of us got sick, there and when we returned. Some were bedridden for weeks. This made us potential vectors for the virus. The military did nothing. I was sick and others were, too, with Wuhan symptoms. … I was eventually given a swab test, which measures only recent exposure, and told to carry on." The Canadian athletes were apparently told by the surgeon general that their risk of having been exposed was "negligible." Julia Scott, a communications adviser with the Canadian Forces Health Services Public Affairs Department, told the Post, "We are not aware of any CAF members or civilians becoming sick at the games or after they returned. There have not been any COVID-19 cases identified amongst this group." "As their stay in Wuhan was well before COVID-19 pandemic was declared and before anyone was aware of the virus, members were not tested upon their return. Testing for COVID-19 was not available in Canada prior to January 2020," continued Scott. "Once we were aware of potential risks, the CAF and Department of National Defence took immediate precautionary measures to avoid any illness or additional exposure to CAF members related to the novel coronavirus." A narrative slide Blaze News recently asked the Canadian Department of National Defense whether its awareness about CAF members or civilians becoming sick at the Wuhan games, as expressed to the Post, has shifted in the years since. In reply, a spokeswoman for the National Defense Department repeated much of what the department had previously told the Post but revealed that it "has subsequently been determined that some athletes experienced gastrointestinal symptoms on the flight to Wuhan for the Military World Games and during the return flight home to Canada." "Their symptoms and illness course of one to three days were consistent with gastrointestinal illness, or a 'stomach flu,' and were managed as such, consistent with typical contact precautions when managing patients with mild gastrointestinal illness," added the spokeswoman. The Mayo Clinic lists the following as symptoms of the stomach flu: diarrhea, nausea, stomach cramps, muscle aches, headache, and fever. It appears the stomach flu could possibly be mistaken for COVID-19 or vice versa, given that the symptoms listed for COVID-19 by the the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention include diarrhea, nausea, muscle aches, and headache. The Canadian Department of National Defense has yet to respond to Blaze News' follow-up questions regarding the basis and timing of its subsequent determination, as well as whether the athletes' supposed gastrointestinal illness has been ruled out as COVID-19. The spokeswoman's suggestion that athletes were sick en route to Wuhan may muddy the waters, especially since China has proven desperate in the past to claim Western forces brought the virus to Wuhan, potentially via the games. For instance, Chinese operatives seized upon the theory that Maatje Benassi, a U.S. Army reservist who competed in Wuhan, was patient zero after she crashed during a cycling competition there and suffered a concussion. Blaze News has reached out to coaches and scores of athletes from various countries who competed in Wuhan as well as officials linked to the International Military Sports Council — the outfit that organizes the competitions — for a better sense of the kind of illnesses that supposedly broke out at the games as well as where they may have originated. While so far, there has been a deafening silence about infections at the games, it was not so early in the pandemic. Early allegations of infection There were multiple reports and admissions of infections at the games early in the pandemic by athletes besides the anonymous Canadians. French pentathlete Elodie Clouvel, part of the French delegation invited to participate at the games, indicated in early 2020 that she and many other athletes likely contracted COVID-19 at the games, reported the American Prospect. "We were in Wuhan for the World Military Games at the end of October. And afterwards, we all fell ill. Valentin missed three days of training. Me, I was sick too. … I had things I had never had before. We weren’t particularly worried because no one was talking about it yet," said Clouvel. "A lot of athletes at the World Military Games were very ill. We were recently in touch with a military doctor who told us, ‘I think you had it because a lot of people from this delegation were ill.'" Luxembourg swimmer Julien Henx told RTL Radio that two of his teammates got sick during the competition and stated, "There were 200,000 Chinese volunteers there, who went home in the evening and could very well have transmitted the virus to them." German volleyball player Jacqueline Brock indicated in early 2020 that "after a few days, some athletes from my team got ill, I got sick in the last two days." "I have never felt so sick," continued Brock. "Either it was a very bad cold or COVID-19." Italian fencer Matteo Tagliarol told Corriere Della Sera, "When we arrived in Wuhan, almost all of us got sick. But the worst was returning home. After a week I had a very high fever, I felt like I couldn't breathe. The illness didn't go away even with antibiotics, I recovered after three weeks and remained debilitated for a long time. Then my son and my partner got sick. When people started talking about the virus, I said to myself: I've caught it too." Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Whatever you think about Donald Trump and the life issue, just know that his latest machinations are not about this upcoming election.Case in point: How many of the $300 million ads that the Democrats plan on running to remind every single woman about who appointed the justices responsible for overturning Roe v. Wade were canceled because Trump took the life issue out of the party platform? The answer is none. I mean, how much of normie America even reads the party platform? Again, zero is the answer. So, the idea that Republicans can somehow insulate themselves from what Democrats are going to say between now and November about the guy who did more than any elected federal official in my lifetime to protect life is ridiculous.MAGA thinks it has 2024 in the bag, and MAGA is probably right (at least, let’s hope it is). And if it is, long live the king.And while my opinion of Team GOP has a default setting below subterranean, I don’t believe Republicans are so dumb that they don’t realize that. So, what gives?When I was coming of age politically and listening to Rush Limbaugh daily, I remember hearing him play clips of Roger Stone with his then-wife, Ann, trying to get all the pro-life language taken out of the Republican Party platform. Now, fast-forward about 35 years, and look who is one of Trump’s closest political confidants today. None other than Roger Stone.If we put the Wonder Woman lasso of truth around them, Trump and his political machine would likely admit they are trying to franchise the Republican Party, moving away from the many disparate coalitions within today’s GOP and toward a fealty more akin to that owed to a king.Are there still disparate factions in a king’s court? Yes. Are there different agendas and ambitions? Absolutely. But they’re all united in loyalty to whom? The king. They will learn to share power within that court if they want the continued access and approval they need from the king.This is how the Democratic Party has operated for generations. If you ask someone why they are a Democrat, they would typically cite an identity, such as being a single woman, gay, black, or a teacher. If you ask someone why they are a Republican, they’d typically mention values or principles, like being pro-life, believing in a strong national defense, or wanting limited government. The Republicans were the ideologically driven party, while the Democrats were the coalition-based party.That is how you got fire-breathing black ministers and butch lesbians like Rosie O’Donnell to vote for the same candidates. Because they all realized that the government is king and to get the access they need from the king, they had better set their principles aside and work together as a coalition.It is in precisely that manner the Trump empire is attempting to remake the Republican Party. Doesn’t matter much what people like pro-rainbow jihad Elise Stefanik believe about anything as long as they are willing to slobber for Trump, because there is really no agenda beyond the king himself.Kings like to leave a legacy. And since the Trump family is forevermore boxed out of the market when it comes to many of their business interests, because, you know, they’re almost Hitler and stuff, then politics will have to fill the gaping void.Trump is 78 years old, and even if none of his children ever want to run for office themselves, what he’s now establishing is the long-live-the-king endorsement that will be required from the family he leaves behind to rule his empire. His daughter-in-law runs the Republican National Committee now, for crying out loud! The party is being franchised and remade in Trump’s image. The Trumps are poised to become the GOP’s Kennedys.It’s definitely not just about this election. Heck, it wasn’t long ago I thought this election was about putting Trump in jail, but here we are. MAGA thinks it has 2024 in the bag, and MAGA is probably right (at least let’s hope it is).And if it is, long live the king.But if MAGA is tragically wrong and unable to evict the dementia patient and his demonic horde from the White House, then the excommunications will begin on November 6 and continue until morale improves.

Glenn Beck’s radio broadcast on Wednesday morning had some heartfelt and thoughtful discussion of the most controversial aspect (for Republicans) of Donald Trump’s recently released platform: abortion.It got me thinking about that issue again, not that I had ever really ignored it. You can’t. To say that the abortion quandary goes to the heart of our values is both a cliché and an understatement. Its paramount importance is unquestionably true.Trump’s policy makes sense for the world at large in these times. Any other approach would likely do more harm to the cause than good by giving its enemies a club.The discussion arose that morning because reports indicated Trump has rejected the call for a federal abortion ban that appeared in previous GOP platforms, including his own in 2020. Instead, he would “let the states decide,” an approach that aligns with the Supreme Court’s decision of overturning Roe v. Wade, for which he has taken justifiable credit.I am one of those who has become increasingly pro-life over the years for reasons that are both moral (“Some things that you’re liable to read in the Bible are necessarily so”) and scientific. A life with unique DNA obviously begins at conception (when else?), and, due to ongoing research, the amount of time that unique human being takes to be sentient in the womb, to experience pain and who knows what else, is shorter and shorter — eventually, it seems, a matter of weeks.And yet, I must put an asterisk against my name regarding abortion.As with an incalculable number of others, male and female, I have never, to my knowledge, had to face the question of an abortion in my own life. Although I know several who have, I have not been involved as the sometimes de trop (to 1960s-era feminists and some contemporaries as well) male sperm donor.Everything I think about abortion is, to some degree, theoretical, as are, I submit, the opinions of those millions of others who have not had to deal with the experience directly.Some of my theoretical thoughts, however, make me shudder.For example, what if a daughter of mine had been brutally raped by one or more of the October 7 Hamas terrorist psychopaths and became pregnant? How would I feel about her going to term and having the baby? Much more importantly, how could I even begin to counsel her against abortion if she naturally abhorred having progeny from such a monster with all that that might entail?Yes, I’m aware that is a rather dramatic example, but dramatic as it is, it is plausible — right now.If you are one of those who favor that overall abortion ban, I absolutely respect you on a moral basis. We are all children of God.But I must ask if you have ever faced anything remotely like that example? Are you sure what you would do if you had to?I must admit, I am not sure at all.Arguments about the possibility of nurture overriding nature, whether the next Mother Teresa or someone curing cancer could arise from such a “union” seem puerile and, to me at least, more than a little bit hypocritical in this and similar instances.And if you think my example is too specialized, I would remind you that, barring the ideology, it is not too distant from a rape occurring today anywhere in our country, in an urban alleyway or a distant field.Further, there’s that life-of-the-mother question. It’s a dicey one, since confidence in our medical community to make the correct and just decision has unfortunately dwindled since COVID. (Maybe we took too much for granted.)Nevertheless, it’s an epochal choice that, when confronted, has results that, putting it mildly, may not always conform to our hopes. In fact, it can be a ticket to disaster for all concerned, no matter what side of the ledger we are on, pro-life or that weird construction, pro-choice.It’s almost impossible, at least for me, to know how I would react if confronted by the dilemma. God-willing, I won’t be.So, I have an asterisk next to my pro-life name. I would ask others in my position of fortunate ignorance to think about themselves in that regard.I would add two things.First, I wouldn’t be surprised if Donald Trump’s thinking was like mine. Although electoral politics always plays a role — he’s a politician, in case you haven’t noticed — his policy makes sense for the world at large in these times. Any other approach would likely do more harm to the cause than good by giving its enemies a club, specious as that weapon would be.Second, I have always suspected that the real battle over abortion should not take place in the realm of government. I am now more convinced of that than ever. In that sense, I am a (definitely small l) libertarian. Whether to abort is an issue of the heart and the soul, of the individual’s faith or lack thereof, not of legislation that in the end does little more than paper over the real feelings of people on this monumental question.Editor’s note: Prize-winning novelist and Oscar-nominated screenwriter Roger L. Simon will be starting the American Refugees Substack this August with his wife, screenwriter (“Dick”) and journalist, Sheryl Longin.

Calls for government regulators to intervene in the emerging market are misguided.

The empathizer-in-chief and savior of democracy has become, in a matter of about two weeks, a clueless and selfish threat to all that Democrats hold dear.

Ensuring that injured parties can obtain relief from meritless federal agency rules, regardless of how long ago the rules were issued, is a crucial victory.

What lessons can we draw from his 1987 exit from the presidential race?